Soft power frames the war on terror as an ideological struggle within Islam itself.

Evidence

Political language—as Orwell spelled out and Edward Said incisively oriented in relation to war, terror, and Islam—is a tool exacted by power. Selectively and strategically. The old auteurs of Orientalism crafted new concepts and phrases that scorched the earth for the crusades to follow, while their ideological offspring disavowed the word ā€œIslamophobiaā€ while disseminating its most damaging stereotypes to new audiences across the political spectrum. — Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades_ Islamophobia and the…, 321 (#responds-to, via linked claim)

The clash of civilizations explanation reduced the conflict between radical Muslim terrorism and the West to something inherent within Islam (and thus something that can only be fixed within Islam). On this understanding, the irrational anger and hatred of Muslims toward the West leads some Muslims to use the teachings of Islam to justify their terrorist activities against innocent people. Neither the Bush administration nor the larger political establishment devoted much effort to reflecting critically on the history of Western involvement in the Muslim world, nor did they seriously consider whether the particular economic and political grievances toward the West articulated by many Muslims, not just the small minority of terrorists, might require a significant rethinking of foreign policy to minimize the chance of future attacks. — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 266 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Counterterrorism is framed as an internal ideological struggle over Muslim mainstream; Political language about Islam and terror is crafted by power to enable conflict. — Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades_ Islamophobia and the…, 321; Clash of civilizations framing located terrorism’s cause within Islam itself — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 266 (+4 more)

Broader Connections