Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security (37 page)

28.
“The Petition of Right,” in Samuel Gardiner, ed.,
The Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revolution, 1625–1660
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906), pp. 67, 69.

29.
The Humble Petition and Advice of Both Houses of Parliament With XIX Propositions and the Conclusion Sent Unto His Majestie, the Second of June, 1642
(London: Hunscott and Wright, 1642).

30.
Charles I,
His Majesties Answer to the XIX Propositions of Both Houses of Parliament
(London: Robert Barker, 1642).

31.
Geoffrey Robertson,
The Tyrannicide Brief
(New York: Pantheon, 2005), p. 68.

32.
“That by the authority of the divine book it is lawful and glorious to kill public tyrants . . .” John of Salisbury,
Policraticus,
trans. Cary J. Nederman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), bk. 8, chap. 20, pp. 206–10.

33.
“Openness was part of the Anglo-Saxon legal inheritance: a trial . . . was akin to a rather ill-conducted public meeting, involving members of the local community as witnesses, jurors and spectators. . . .The open justice rule had not been applied to treason trials of other alleged royal miscreants, like Anne Boleyn and Mary Queen of Scots, which were for that reason alone legally questionable.” Robertson,
Tyrannicide Brief,
p. 132.

34.
Ibid., p. 133.

35.
Jonas d’Orléans,
Le métier de roi (“De institutione regia” ),
ed. and trans. (into French) Alain Dubreucq (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1995), p. 210

36.
William of Pagula,
The Mirror of Edward III,
in
Political Thought in Early Fourteenth-Century England: Treatises by Walter of Milemete, William of Pagula, and William of Ockham,
ed. and trans. Cary Nederman (Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2002), p. 82. William continued: “For in this way do many from your household behave, seizing the goods of others against their will, and knowing that their servants have committed these sorts of extortions and robberies throughout the land, nor do they apply any remedy. Wherefore, one who does this is guilty, when he is able to correct the situation and neglects to amend it.” (p. 76). And: “For one who permits anything to take place that he is able to impede, even though he has not done it himself, has virtually done the act himself if he allows it” (p. 94).

37.
“The Charge Against the King” in Gardiner,
Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revolution,
p. 373; italics mine.

38.
John Cooke,
King Charls his Case
(London: Peter Cole, 1649), p. 13; italics mine.

39.
Ibid., p. 14.

40.
Ibid., p. 11.

41.
Including the testimony of royalist soldiers who had witnessed Charles taking command of troops and ordering the plunder of civilian properties, and captured letters he
sent abroad to obtain foreign military support for his cause. Robertson,
Tyrannicide Brief
, pp. 173–74.

42.
Ibid., p. 164.

43.
John Cooke,
Monarchy, No Creature of God’s Making
(Waterford: Peter de Pienne, 1651). He plunged into an ongoing debate about the meaning of a story in the first book of Samuel, in which the elders of Israel ask Samuel for a king. Samuel warns then in lurid detail. “He will take one tenth of your flocks and you shall be his slaves.” And he predicts: “In that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves; but the Lord will not answer you in that day.” For King Charles’s father James I, that last clause proved that it would never be lawful afterward to revolt against a king, for the Israelites “renounce[ed] forever all privileges.” Cooke argued the reverse, that the passage proves that if a nation accepts the rule of a king, “God is angry with them for giving away that liberty which he would have them keep.” It was a scriptural debate that would continue to preoccupy political thinkers for decades, and is the reference for the “inalienable rights” clause of the Declaration of Independence—rights that the Israelites or anyone else could never cede, and certainly not in perpetuity, even if they wanted to.

44.
John Milton, “The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates,” in Martin Dzelzainis, ed.,
Milton: Political Writings
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991) pp. 8–13.

45.
John Locke, “The Second Treatise of Government,” in Ian Shapiro, ed.,
Two Treatises of Government and a Letter Concerning Toleration
(New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2003), pp. 102–5, 138, 141, 142, 164.

46.
Robertson,
Tyrannicide Brief
, pp. 68–69.

47.
James Madison, “James Madison to George Washington (April 16 1787),” in Ralph Ketcham, ed.,
The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates
(New York: Mentor, 1986), p. 34.

48.
“‘Centinal,’ Number 1 (October 5, 1787),” ibid., p. 227.

49.
Counterterrorism Blog, “Transcript of the Latest Bin Laden Video,”
Counterterrorism Blog,
September 7, 2007, http://bit.ly/1iDRHDK.

50.
Locke, “Second Treatise,” pp. 108–9.

Chapter Thirteen: Violent Extremists

1.
Diarmaid MacCulloch,
The Reformation
(New York: Penguin, 2004), pp. 121–23; Martin Brecht,
Martin Luther, His Road to Reformation,
trans. James Schaaf (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1985), pp. 176–82; and Richard Marius,
Martin Luther: The Christian Between God and Death
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 128–39.

2.
Martin Luther, “Letter to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation,” trans. Charles Jacobs and James Atkinson, in
Three Treatises
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), p. 26.

3.
Ibid., p. 41.

4.
Ibid., pp. 27–28.

5.
Ibid., pp. 35, 48–49, 36–37.

6.
Ibid., p. 75.

7.
“The Augustinian disciples of Luther denied that the pope was de jure divino [by divine
law] head of the church and asserted that Peter’s primacy among the apostles, and hence that of his successors, was based solo jure humano [only on human law]: consequently, the pope had no authority to compel Christians to obey man-made ordinances on pain of mortal sin.” Alastair Duke,
Reformation and Revolt in the Low Countries
(London: Hambledon and London, 2003), pp. 41, 46.

8.
John of Salisbury,
Policraticus,
trans. Cary J. Nederman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), bk. 6, chap. 24, p. 133.

9.
“Reformatio Sigismundi,” in Gerald Strauss, ed. and trans.,
Manifestations of Discontent in Germany on the Eve of the Reformation
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971), p. 6.

10.
“When corruption overtakes the head, it must spread to all the other members. Once the pope had allowed cardinals to hold plural benefices, bishops followed suit, and after that the monasteries, and following them everyone else in the church.” Ibid., p. 10.

11.
Ibid., p. 9.

12.
“If an order sees that one of its members is a cardinal, it plagues him with requests for favors, so the cardinal bends the pope’s ear day and night, offering gold and silver in return for privileges.” Ibid.

13.
Ibid., pp. 12, 14.

14.
The Dutch were particularly incensed at such extortionate mendicants. See Duke,
Reformation and Revolt in the Low Countries
, pp. 35, 61.

15.
“Statement of Grievance Presented to the Diet of Worms in 1521,” in Strauss,
Manifestations of Discontent
, p. 52. I have condensed and paraphrased the items.

16.
“Lettre de Maximilien Vilain de Gand, baron de Rassenghien, gouverneur de Lille-Douai-Orchies, à Marguerite de Parme (30 Juin 1566),” in Solange Deyon and Alain Lottin,
Les “Casseurs” de l’Été 1566
(Paris: Hachette, 1981), p. 215. “Lettre du Conseil de Flandre aux Magistrats d’Ypres,” in Diegerick,
Archives d’Ypres, Documents du XVIe siècle
, vol. 3,
Documents concernant les troubles religieux
(Bruges: Aime de Zuttere, 1876), p. 3:92.

17.
“The description of the events which happened in the matter of religion in the Netherlands,” in E. H. Kossman and A. F. Mellink, eds.,
Texts Concerning the Revolt of the Netherlands
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974), p. 67.

18.
“Deuxieme requête présentée à la régente par les nobles confédères,” in Diegerick,
Archives d’Ypres
, p. 101.

19.
“Lettre des Magistrats d’Ypres à leurs députés a Bruxelles,” ibid., p. 120.

20.
“Acte de la régente,” ibid., p. 94.

21.
“Lettre de Maximilien Vilain de Gand, baron de Rassenghien, gouverneur de Lille-Douai-Orchies a Marguerite de Parme, 16 August 1566,” ibid., p. 217.

22.
“Lettre de Jean de Morbecque, gouverneur d’Aire, a Marguerite de Parme, 18 August, 1566,” ibid., p. 218.

23.
“A heavy blow to the more than century-long quest by the Valois and Habsburg Burgundian princes to consecrate their authority through managing the sacred.” Peter Arnade,
Beggars, Iconoclasts, and Civic Patriots: The Political Culture of the Dutch Revolt
(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2008), pp. 93, 171. According to Arnade, this linkage to royal authority was made explicit by the choice of targets (p. 103).

24.
Deyon and Lottin,
Les “casseurs” de l’été 1566
, p. 118.

25.
Quoted in Arnade,
Beggars, Iconoclasts,
p. 99.

26.
Arnade,
Beggars, Iconoclasts,
p. 113. See also Deyon and Lottin,
Les “casseurs” de l’été 1566
, pp. 200–201.

27.
“Mali Fighters Destroy More Timbuktu Tombs,”
Al Jazeera,
December 23, 2012, http://aje.me/1gbLeQY.

28.
Human Rights Watch,
Mali: War Crimes by Northern Rebels
(April 30, 2012), http://bit.ly/ OCsM8l.

29.
Luke Harding, “Timbuktu Mayor: Mali Rebels Torched Library of Historic Manuscripts,”
Guardian
, January 28, 2013, http://bit.ly/1emwo7W. The UNESCO accounting of the damage is in
State of Conservation: Timbuktu
(UNESCO, 2013), http://bit.ly/1pcmZSi, and in “Damage to Timbuktu’s Cultural Heritage Worse than First Estimated, Reports UNESCO Mission,” UNESCO Media Services, http://bit.ly/PMw61S.

30.
The Salem witch trials are a notable American example.

31.
James VI and I, “Basilicon Doron,” in
King James VI and I: Political Writings,
ed. Johann Sommerville (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 5, 6. The Arabic word for the practice is
takfir
, meaning designating someone a
kafir
or “unbeliever.” The practice was outlawed in Tunisia’s 2014 constitution.

32.
“Bin Laden Addresses the American People on the Causes and Outcome of the 9/11 attacks,” Al Jazeera, November 1, 2004, http://aje.me/1gR13HU.

33.
Ibid. Bin Laden suggested that Bush copied those rulers by having his son installed as a governor and committing electoral fraud.

34.
“Grand Salaam! Eurofighter Flies Off With Saudi Contract,”
Defense Industry Daily,
August 8, 2013, http://bit.ly/1l4AjLa.

35.
“Al-Sahab Video Discusses Economic Crisis, Arab ‘Corruption,’ Torture, Part 1,”
Al-Fajr Media Center
, September 23, 2009, http://bit.ly/1nhCjR5.

36.
Discussion of the Reformation in a Muslim context is hardly new. See, for example, Michaelle Browers and Charles Kurzman, eds.,
An Islamic Reformation?
(Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2004). Often, however, the notion of “Reformation” is understood broadly as “reform” or as almost synonymous with the Enlightenment and its expansion of scientific inquiry, tolerance, and secularism—not the fundamentalist extremism of the Reformation’s first years. One article in Browers’s and Kurzman’s volume compares the Afghan Taliban with the early sixteenth-century Anabaptists of the German town of Münster but considers only this very narrow comparison, and only in a context of religious crisis (not economic injustice).

A significant body of literature, moreover, is devoted to explaining modern extremist, or violent political, Islam, in other terms than I am suggesting here. Much of it posits an almost intrinsic difference between Muslim and Western societies, due to fundamentally divergent cultures or models of civilization and of the role of religion in society. See, for example, Samuel Huntingdon,
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
(New York: Touchstone, 1996), and Bernard Lewis,
The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror
(New York: Random House, 2004.) A more nuanced analysis looks to the dislocation and assault on identity imposed by rapid twentieth-century modernization; Gilles Kepel,
The Trail of Jihad
(New York: Belknap Press, 2003). Olivier Roy is perhaps the leading scholar of political Islam to emphasize political grievances alongside sociological upheaval. See his
The Failure of Political Islam
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1998), and
Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Umma
(New York: Columbia University Press, 2004).

Chapter Fourteen: Remedies

1.
“Corruption and Nuclear Proliferation” in
Corruption, Global Security, and World Order
(Cambridge, Mass.: World Peace Foundation and American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2009), pp. 124–67

2.
Jean-François Bayart, Stephen Ellis, and Béatrice Hibou,
The Criminalization of the State in Africa
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999), p. 89. See also Jeffrey Gettleman, “Elephants Dying in Epic Frenzy as Ivory Fuels Wars and Profits,”
New York Times,
September 3, 2012.

3.
Bayart, Ellis, and Hibou,
Criminalization,
p. 100.