Understanding these stakes is just the first step toward developing an effective policy. When I was Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, we elaborated a policy approach toward Islam which became the official position on this subject in both the Bush and Clinton Administrations. The major points of that initial approach were as follows:

• The United States Government does not view Islam as the next "ism" confronting the West or threatening world peace. That is a simplistic response to a complex reality. Further, such a perception plays into the hands of the extremists. (It should be noted that Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani, on the sixteenth anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in Iran this year, claimed that "the West and particularly the United States wants to confront Islamic fundamentalism the same way they challenged Communism. It is a mistaken comparison and a policy that will only strengthen the movement." Further, at an international Islamic conference in Khartoum, Sudan, in March, 1995, one theme emerged: The current revival of Islam as a political force has caused the West, the United States specifically, to treat Muslims as enemies in a new cold war.)
• The Cold War is not being replaced with a new competition between Islam and the West. The Crusades have been over for a long time.
• Americans recognize Islam as one of the world's great faiths. It is practiced on every continent. It counts among its adherents millions of citizens of the United States. As Westerners, we acknowledge Islam as a historic civilizing force among the many that have influenced and enriched our culture.
• Throughout the Middle East and North Africa, we see groups or movements seeking to reform their societies in keeping with Islamic ideals. There is considerable diversity in how these ideals are expressed. Of the nearly one billion Muslims in the world, more than half live outside the Arab world and differ linguistically, ethnically, racially and culturally. There are large Muslim populations in South and Southeast Asia, China, and Africa. The Muslim world is also diversified by its two major sects-Sunnis and Shiites, as well as the various cultures in which it lives.
• We detect no monolithic bloc or international effort behind Islamic groups and movements, but we are seriously concerned over Iran's exploitation of extremist groups throughout the region and over Sudan's role in supporting such groups in North Africa. Increasing coordination between such regimes and extremist groups and their resort to terrorism demands our vigilance. In the last analysis, however, it is social injustice - the lack of economic, social, educational, and political opportunity - that provides the extremists a constituency.
• Those governments which seek to broaden political participation in the region will find us supportive. At the same time, we suspect those who would use the democratic process to come to power, only to destroy that very process in order to retain power and political dominance. We believe in the principle of one person, one vote. However, we do not support one person, one vote, one time.
• We differ with those who, whatever their religion, practice terrorism, resort to violence, reject the peaceful resolution of conflicts, oppress minorities, preach intolerance, disdain political pluralism, or who violate internationally accepted standards regarding human rights.
• It is for just these reasons that we have such basic differences with the secular governments in Iraq and Libya. Simply stated, religion does not determine, positively or negatively, the nature of our relations with other countries. Our quarrel is with extremism per se, and the violence, denial, intolerance, intimidation, coercion, and terror which accompany it.