Intelligent Management in Counterinsurgency Strategy

2022.03.05 - 01:27
Facebook Share
Print

 Imam Ali`s intelligent management is based on rigid moral principles and flexibility in tolerance with people. Imam Ali`s rigid moral principles consist of management elements such as justice, equality, honesty, etc. Meanwhile, his flexibility in tolerance with people includes sacrifice, forgiveness, mercy, etc. reflected in his political behavior. Imam Ali`s intelligent power management direct soft and hard power elements toward social justice so that the nature of hard and soft power reflect universal common values and humanitarian policy. Such policies are valuable concerning the principles of good faith, non-use of force, non aggression, self-determination right, self-defense, and the prohibition of war crimes. Imam Ali`s strategic management against rebels is reflected in the following verse:
"Whoever kills a person-unless it is for murder or corruption on earth-it is as if he killed the whole of mankind" (Al-Mai`dah: 32).
The agenda of Imam Ali`s intelligent power management is the social justice against both supporters and enemies. Oppositional leadership in the formulation of Imam Ali`s management is not the reason for the denial of justice. Power`s prestige and legitimacy are the ability to promote the value functions. Prescribing democracy does not match with force and dictatorship; defend human rights, human slaughter, and the spread of freedom with security repression. Nye states that:
2003 Iraq war provided an interesting example of the two power`s confrontation. Some of the war incentives were deterrent effect on hard power. Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense of America) stated in one of his reports: once I began working on this position, I believed that people consider the U.S. a paper tiger around the world: A weak monster that does not have the ability to strike. Therefore, I decided to restore this loss. In addition to victory in this war, Iraq war would block the future support of other governments to terrorists. They were the hard reasons to enter the war. Other incentives, however, depended on "soft power". Neoconservatives believed that US power can be used to send democracy to Iraq or change the Middle East policies. If is successfully done, was would automatically be legitimate. As William Kristol and Lawrence Kaplan stated there is no problem for a superior and dominant power to be in the service of higher principles and ideals (Nye, 2010: 72-73).
That the government and the dominant power are in the service of the true principles and high ideals is not a problem. The problem, however, begins when the true principles and high ideals are in the service of dominant power. Americas political output functions not only are capable of adapting with the true principles and high ideals, but also form a separate range of profit-based principles and monopoly ideals. Framework of liberalism is not naturally valuable. The main function if soft power in western discourse through promotion of the values formed in imaging. Such images cover the value gap of objective facts. This determines the special work of priority regulation in management of west intelligent power. Nye states that:
At the strategic level, the counterinsurgency character gives great importance to trade-off between the military power necessary to clear an area, and damage to civilian force that their hearts and minds must be won. In some cases, trade-offs are inevitable .Pakistan drone strikes against al-Qaeda fighters, for instance, are one of the few tools that is available in North Pakistan. Such attacks, however, undermine Americas soft power in the public eye of Pakistan (Nye, 2011: 335-336).
Nye`s intelligent strategy believes inaggression and exploitation at the same time. However, he believes that appropriate direction of this topic toward civilian and military categories is inevitable. The cost of American democracy and human rights is killing the innocent and oppressed victims as a result of false legitimacy and credibility of a hegemonic power politics. Imam Ali`s intelligent management incounterinsurgency strategy is also based on social justice. Battle of Nahrawan is Imam Ali`s best documented example of counterinsurgency management as follow:
After the unsatisfactory conclusion to the Battle of Siffin, Ali ibn Abi Talib returned with his army back to Kufa. Kharijites camped at a village named Harura. They began saying that all Muslims were equal and no one could rule over another, denouncing both Ali ibn Abi Talib and Muawiyah while proclaiming that their belief was in "La Hukma illa Lillah", meaning, "No Rulership except by Allah alone."Then Imam Ali himself went to the Kharijite encampment and tried to explain to them that they were misunderstanding the words "La Hukma illa Lillah", and that in accepting the Arbitration (peace talks) at Siffin, he had not gone against the teachings of the Quran.He pointed out that they themselves laid down their arms and forced him to call back Malik al-Ashtar, who was at the point of securing victory. He reminded them that they had pressed for the Arbitration and had forced him to appoint Abu Musa al-Ashari as his (and thus their) representative, after having rejected Alis nominees, ibn Abbas and Malik al-Ashtar. He told them that he found their present behavior very strange, considering their involvement in the army revolt at Siffin. To this they admitted that they had sinned but now they had repented for it and he should do the same.Ali replied that he was a true believer and did not have to repent because he had not committed any sin; more discussion proved fruitless, and he dispersed the Kharijite representatives.
The Kharijites refused to accept the words of Ali and awaited the decision of Amr ibn al-As and Abu Musa al-Ashari. When they learnt of the decision they decided to revolt, setting up their headquarters at Nahrawan, twelve miles from Baghdad. A group of sympathizers from Basra came to join the rebels. (Ibne Abi Al-Hadid, 1996, V. 1: 412-413, 1999, V. 2: 310-311) Kharijites are the most important extremist group against Imam Ali. They used to spread rumors, were publicly insulting Imam Ali, interrupt the Imam Ali`s congregational prayers, and disturbed Imam Ali`s speeches .Kharijites expressed their hatred in any way and held secret and public series of meetings to cope with Imam Ali. Despite such insulting and sometimes threatening and dangerous practices, Imam Ali never took any violent and even legal reaction to arrest and deal with them. Imam Ali also used to pay their contribution from the national treasury, guided them, and called for rational discussion. Then, they left Kufa to surrounding areas and started killing people and unrest. Imam Ali sent them a message and advised them to stop such activities. Then, he himself went and talked to them. Some realized their false activities, however, the rest insisted on their beliefs. Battle of Nahrawan then occurred (Ali Khani, 2001: 53).

Facebook Share
Print Back to Top
Add Comment
* Type the result 9 + 10