The Orlando Shooting: Is There A Political Solution?

I did not post earlier regarding the tragedy in Orlando because I felt it would be disrespectful to the victims and I wanted to have all the facts. I am keeping all victims and their families in my mind at this time, and while there is heightened political rhetoric everywhere, I believe politics can and will provide a solution to this awful situation. It is crucial to not become fire-breathing serpents when terrorists desperately want us to embrace our violent urges. This post assumes the reader has a basic knowledge of what transpired in Orlando on June 12, 2016. My solution is as follows. I contend we must remember the victims instead of the perpetrator and assertively protect our LGBT Americans. By utilizing the term “Radical Jihadism” we can please both the Right and the Left while avoiding anti-Muslim hysteria. Domestically, we must give law enforcement additional authority and have a conversation about gun control. In foreign affairs, we need to have an aggressive strategy to take out ISIS and other terrorist groups while avoiding the mistakes of the Bush administration. Finally, opposing sides of the political spectrum must listen to each to other and have a true discussion, like Bill O’Reilly and Stephen Colbert demonstrated this week.
 
First and foremost, we have to remember the victims instead of the shooter. I applaud this week’s cover for TIME magazine, which only features the names of the victims. The shooter had indicated to others he wanted to become a “martyr” and we must not give him what he wants. The perpetrator should not dominate the news while the victims go forgotten. For this reason, I only mention the shooter by name twice. It is incumbent on political leadership to do everything they can so the victims are never forgotten and the shooter is not feared, idolized or the center of attention. Possible actions include sponsoring legislation under the victims’ names, building a memorial fund for the victims, constantly telling stories of the victims’ lives, or similar things. Our leaders must redirect our focus from the perpetrator to the victims, which is difficult in this social media age.

Due to the bigoted nature of the attack, we need to support and protect our LGBT community. The Orlando shooting was a blatant act of bigotry and hatred towards a particular group. The journey for LGBT equality has not been easy and this shooting understandably worries LGBT Americans. We must demonstrate solidarity and support without judgment. Politicians and ordinary citizens must be inclusive and vigilant; the shooting demonstrates how vulnerable minorities can be in the United States. There should be discussions everywhere and America must listen to the LGBT community.
 
Secondly, I propose widespread usage of the term “radical jihadism.” Those on the Right believe we should refer to terrorism as “Radical Islamic terrorism” or some other variation. I think the Left is correct with their observation that such a term lumps regular Muslims and terrorists together. At the same time, the Left is too vague with their rhetoric. An “act of terror” is not enough. If most Muslims argue these terrorists do not represent them, why not omit Islam but keep the word jihad in the terminology? Terrorists are obsessed with jihad above all else, so I contend “radical jihadists” is an accurate descriptor which can please both parties. Additionally, referring to the terrorists as “radical jihadists” reinforces the idea Islam must boldly declare what jihad actually is.
 
By using “radical jihadism” I hope our country avoids anti-Muslim hysteria. The Right’s heightened rhetoric, especially Trump’s proposed Muslim ban, often leads to anti-Muslim sentiment. The Left is better at inclusion. According to multiple sources, 200 Muslims had a vigil to denounce the violence and pray for the victims after the shooting. This was either not mentioned or barely referenced in many right-wing responses to the disaster. The Right’s rhetoric can increase misdirected hostility toward innocent Muslims who had no part in the violence. Perhaps Islam truly calls for bloodshed, but most Muslims are not violent. Since the shooting, there have been many negative generalizations of Islam. You don’t have to like or follow Islam. Nevertheless, it is harmful to act as if every single Muslim wants to kill Westerners. There is a battle for the soul of Islam, and it arguably needs a reformation like Ayaan Hirsi Ali illustrates in this essay, but to mindlessly condemn the entire religion of 1.6 billion people does us nor moderate Muslims any favors.
 
Next, we need to do several things domestically. We need to give law enforcement sufficient latitude to pursue leads regarding radical jihadists. The FBI had questioned Omar Mateen twice before the shooting but could not arrest him because he had not committed a crime. A great article from the Intercept quickly summarizes the problems with the FBI’s current approach. The bureaucracy requires reform so leads can be tracked more efficiently and effectively. There is reason to watch individuals if they are on jihadist websites for reasons other than investigative journalism or academic research. Secondly, we should have a nation-wide discussion regarding gun control. While I agree more with the Right on terrorism, I understand violent people cannot act upon their deranged fantasies if they don’t have access to a weapon. We should debate what weapons should be able for purchase, background checks and the tracking of guns and gun purchases, to name a few things. There is not a quick solution and there should be deliberations within all levels of government once passions have cooled.
 
Internationally, we need to revamp our counter-terrorism strategy. First, we need to have a plan to destroy ISIS and similar terrorist groups. Mateen pledged allegiance to ISIS. Obviously, if ISIS and its ilk are not around, people cannot turn to them for “inspiration.” However, we must learn from the past and have a plan once combat hostilities have concluded. The Iraqi invasion to topple Saddam Hussein was planned very well, but the Bush administration struggled in the aftermath. We need to work with regional actors, build an international coalition as we did in the First Gulf War and quickly hand over governance to local authorities once the combat has finished. To this end, America and other NATO allies should consider creating a Kurdish state in the Middle East, along with partitioning Iraq into Sunni and Shia zones like then-Senator Joe Biden proposed in 2007. Saddam Hussein and his Sunni government oppressed Shia Muslims. Nouri al-Maliki’s government then mistreated the Sunnis. Thus, the conditions were ripe for Sunni ISIS to rise to power. A partitioned Iraq would ensure Sunnis and Shias have representatives of the same sect. Since the recent history of Sunnis and Shias has been quite contentious, separate political units would drastically lower mistreatment and consequently, the desire to avenge grievances and the appeal of terrorism. Finally, the Obama administration’s record with drones is suspect. The administration has killed many terrorists with drones but since the process is so secretive, it is unknown how many innocent civilians were killed. A more transparent process means less blameless victims which lowers terrorism’s appeal.
 
Finally, none of these things will matter if Americans do not listen to one another. All political ideologies should come together, listen, and hammer out a solution. A great example of this is the dialogue between Bill O’Reilly and Stephen Colbert on the latter’s show (part 1+part 2) earlier this week. These two figures are very far apart politically, but they actually had a respectful and productive conversation. They did not scream, launch personal attacks or ignore opposing viewpoints. They talked and then listened in a civil manner without compromising their principles. Terrorists and others who wish harm on America want division and strife. Great things come out of respectful dialogues.
 
In sum, commemorate the victims and avoid glorifying the shooter. Protect the LGBT community without judgment. Use the term “Radical Jihadism” when referring to Islamic terrorism. Avoid anti-Muslim hysteria. Consider certain aspects of gun-control legislation. Revamp the counter-terrorism strategy both domestically and abroad. Finally, have a productive, detailed dialogue with all legitimate perspectives like O’Reilly and Colbert. After the tragedy in Orlando, politics can be the avenue to a desirable future, not the path to exclusion and further pain.
 
Thank you so much for reading. Please like, share or comment if you would be so kind.