|
October
3, 2001
Ariel
Dorfman:
America
the Wounded
Lennie
Brenner
Dr.
Watson in Afghanistan
Steve
Perry:
Ashcroft's
Scare Tactics
October
2, 2001
Patrick
Cockburn:
Inside
an Afghan Hospital
Richard
Manning:
A
Vietnam Vet on Patriotism
St. Clair/Cockburn:
Tarnished
Star,
Tom Ridge in Vietnam
October
1, 2001
Noam
Chomsky:
Memo
to Hitchens
Hizam
Bitar:
Refuting
Michael Kinsley
David Grenier:
The
Good, The Bad,
and the Ugly
Douglas
Valentine:
Homeland
Insecurity
Carl
Estabrook:
Stop Bush's Killing
Mahajan/Jensen:
Food,
Fear and War
Patrick
Cockburn:
Ready
to Strike
Cockburn/St.
Clair:
Things
Could Be Worse
Terry
Allen:
Early
Profit-taking and 9/11
September
29, 2001
Steve Perry:
The
Pentagon's Blueprint
Patrick
Cockburn:
When
Will the Missiles Fall?
September
28, 2001
Edward Said:
Backlash
and Backtrack
John Troyer:
When
Language Fails
Patrick
Cockburn:
In
Afghanistan, Waiting for the Real War to Start
Steve Breyman:
War,
Oil and Renewables
Resources:
100s of Links
About 9/11
CounterPunch:
Complete
Coverage of 9/11 and Its Aftermath
Five
Days That
Shook The World:
Seattle and Beyond
By
Alexander Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
Photos by Allan Sekula
(Click Here to Order from CounterPunch
Online at 20% Off Amazon.com's price!)
INSIDE
EXCLUSIVE
TO
COUNTERPUNCH
SUBSCRIBERS
Published on JULY 12
RAND's BLUEPRINT FOR
THE COLOMBIAN WAR
PRISONERS BATTLE
CALIFORNIA'S PRISON
SHU TORTURE
REMEMBERING SHAHAK
MURDER IN NAVAJOLAND
Published on JULY 1
BLACKS, LABOR AND
SOUTHERN POLITICS:
THE CASE OF THE
CHARLESTON FIVE
SO INIMITABLE:
THE LATE GREAT
JOHN LEE HOOKER
FARMINGTON, NM,
RACIST HELLHOLE
ARSENIC: THE GOOD NEWS
BONO AND HESTON
GALE NORTON'S
SECRET PAST
Search
CounterPunch
Read Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
A Pocket Guide to
Environmental Bad Guys
by James
Ridgeway
and Jeffrey St. Clair
The
Phoenix Program
by Douglas
Valentine
Al
Gore:
A User's Manual
by Cockburn
and St. Clair
Buy
This Explosive
New Book at an
Amazing Discount!
Reviews of Gore:
a User's Manual
New Stories:
|
October
3, 2001
Tough
Talk Won't Solve Terrorism Problems
By Rahul Mahajan and Robert
Jensen
Although tough talk from the president
may seem reassuring, the Bush administration's confrontational
posture is likely to exacerbate the threat of terrorist attacks.
The diplomatic ultimatum --
"either you are with us or you are with the terrorists"
-- is alienating existing and potential allies, and feeding
into resentment of American unilateralism. Since the bombing
of Iraq in 1998 and the Kosovo war, Europeans have complained
about the United States' cowboy diplomacy -- with the French
inventing the term "hyperpower" to describe America's
disquieting role in the world. In the Middle East, resentment
of U.S. policy has grown steadily since the Gulf War.
Despite the Defense Department's
dumping of the name "Infinite Justice" and Bush's
apology for use of the term "crusade," there is an
air of Christian fundamentalism in the enterprise. This makes
life even harder for governments in the Islamic world -- already
caught in a difficult position between increasingly militant
populations with substantive grievances against U.S. policy
and the U.S. steamroller on the other.
Bush's declaration that we
will target not only bin Laden's terrorist network but all terrorist
organizations of "global reach," their "support
networks," the Taliban -- and all others who don't submit
to U.S. demands -- is already creating new enemies. If large-scale
military operations start and civilians are killed, those enemies
will multiply tenfold.
Meanwhile there is talk about
"freeing" the CIA to do more "human intelligence"
work, which seems to forget that Osama bin Laden and other Afghan
extremists are products of CIA operations in Afghanistan in the
1980s to thwart the Soviet occupation there.
Despite all the talk about
a new war for the 21st century, these tactics sound distressingly
familiar.
What's one definition of insanity?
Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different
results.
There is another path, which
requires asking what we really mean by "national security."
Do we choose the meaning it has had for 56 years -- essentially
domination and protection of the U.S. right to have its finger
in every pie? Or do we mean the physical safety of the American
people in their own country?
A poll asking Americans to
choose between extending U.S. power or providing for the safety
of Americans likely would find an overwhelming majority choosing
the latter.
Once that decision is made,
our choices seem clearer.
It is natural to hate foreign
domination, and the people of the Islamic world perceive that
they are dominated by the United States. For the overwhelming
majority of them, that hatred of domination does not translate
into hatred of the United States, much less of ordinary Americans.
But that hatred of domination
is what provides terrorist networks like bin Laden's their cover.
An example from Iraq is instructive. In 1988 at the end of its
long, bloody war with Iran, Saddam Hussein was hated by most
of the population. But 11 years of economic sanctions have dramatically
increased support for Hussein, now perceived as standing up
to the United States.
Similarly, any response --
whether massive bombing or peremptory demands to turn over people
without evidence of guilt -- that is based on U.S. domination
and the threat of force will give bin Laden and others like him
support they otherwise could never have dreamed of.
Instead, we must say to other
countries, "We will work with you to find out who is guilty.
We will reconsider controversial policies of ours and submit
them to the judgment of international bodies. BUT you must help
us to find these people who want to kill American civilians."
In Afghanistan nothing could
shake the power of bin Laden or the Taliban more than an dramatically
expanded -- and non-politicized -- offer to feed the people
and help them rebuild their war-torn country. UN sanctions on
Afghanistan have strengthened the Taliban, as they control the
meager international relief available. Likewise in Iraq, economic
sanctions have harmed ordinary people and reinforced the political
control of Hussein's regime.
Unfortunately, the United States
is pressing for food distribution to be carried out ''in a manner
that does not allow this food to fall into the hands of the
Taliban,'' according to Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of
state. The Taliban elites will not go hungry; it will be ordinary
people who suffer.
The "war on terrorism"
the Bush administration plans to wage will increase the chances
of reprisal attacks against us. A criminal investigation, with
genuine international cooperation, would dramatically decrease
the threat, especially if accompanied by a change in overall
U.S. foreign policy.
President Bush and his advisers
know this. It is time to ask why they are not serving our primary
national interest -- our safety. CP
Rahul Mahajan serves on the National Board of Peace
Action. Robert Jensen is a professor of journalism at
the University of Texas. Both are members of the Nowar
Collective. They can be reached at rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu
or rahul@tao.ca
|