Coming
Soon!
From Common Courage Press
Recent
Stories
May
29, 2003
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Jason
Leopold
Despite Thin Intelligence Reports,
US Plans Overthrow of Iran Regime
Ron
Jacobs
Popular Uprising, Inc.
Michelle
Ciaccorra
Bush's Nuclear Policy: Do As I Say, Not As I Do
Yves Engler
The Economics of Health Care in
America: Pay More to Die Sooner
Kimberly
Blaker
Vouchers for Jesus
Harry
Browne
Stakeknife: Britain's Army Spy at
the Top of the IRA
Stew
Albert
Cops of the World
Steve Perry
Greens 04: In or Out?
May
28, 2003
David
Vest
DubyaCo.: It's Not So Funny Any More
Dave
Lindorff
My Grandfather's Medal
John
Stanton
America's Dying: Arts and Philosophy Hold the Key
Bernard
Weiner
A PNAC Primer
Robert
Jensen
Texas Dems Set a Standard for the Rest of the Party
Ahmad Faruqui
The Oil Business of Regime Change:
the CIA and Iran
Hammond
Guthrie
Disarming Conundrums
Steve Perry
What If There's No Such Thing as Al-Qaeda?
May
27, 2003
Kurt
Nimmo
Condoleezza Rice: Huckstress for Israeli
Myths
Anthony
Gancarski
Hillary: a Dem the NeoCons Could Love?
Patrick
Cockburn
Terror, Bush and Joseph Conrad
John Chuckman
an Interpretation of Bush's Character
Kathleen
Christison
What Sharon Wants, Sharon Gets
Jeffrey
Blankfort
AIPAC Hijacks the Roadmap
Steve
Perry
Trouble in the Hinterlands
Hot Stories
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
Elaine
Cassel
Civil Liberties
Watch
Michel
Guerrin
Embedded Photographer Says: "I
Saw Marines Kill Civilians"
Uzma
Aslam Khan
The Unbearably Grim Aftermath of War:
What America Says Does Not Go
Paul de Rooij
Arrogant
Propaganda
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
May
31, 2003
Trivializing Terrorism
The Pay-off
to Spain
by JOANNE MARINER
Call it a politically convenient coincidence of
timing. Or else be blunt, connect the dots, and call it a political
favor. In the wake of Spain's support for the war in Iraq, and
with Spanish elections upcoming, the State Department recently
announced the addition of three Basque nationalist groups to
an official U.S. list of terrorist groups subject to financial
sanctions.
Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar
welcomed the designation and implied that it was linked to Spain's
backing of the U.S. war plan. Addressing the question of whether
Spain has benefited from its relationship with the United States,
Aznar stated that the naming of the three groups had given a
needed boost to Spain's fight against terrorism.
"What are the fruits of our relationship
with the United States?" Aznar asked rhetorically. "This
is one of those fruits."
Prime Minister Aznar no doubt believes
that the reward was well-earned, given his willingness to run
significant political risks in backing the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Despite strong opposition to the Iraq war from the Spanish public,
Aznar was among the most steadfast supporters of the U.S. plan.
Taking advantage of Spain's membership
in the U.N. Security Council, the Aznar government assisted the
United States in pressing for a U.N. resolution in support of
the Iraq war, before the effort to obtain a resolution was abandoned.
More recently, Spain cosponsored a resolution, together with
the U.S. and the U.K., which would lend U.N. sanction to the
U.S. and British occupation of Iraq. Spain is also planning to
send a contingent of 1,500 troops to Iraq to assist in the occupation,
putting it among only nine countries that have agreed to contribute
military forces to the effort.
It could be that none of these developments
influenced the U.S. government's decision to name the three Basque
groups to the terrorism list. But one would have to be blind,
as well as willfully obtuse, not to notice the political factors
surrounding last week's decision. And when the Spanish case is
considered in light of past terrorism designations, whose timing
has, in several instances, been equally fortuitous, then the
political manipulation of the designation process seems all the
more probable.
Naming Terrorist Groups
What does it mean for a group to be placed
on a U.S. terrorism list? To begin with, it depends on which
list. The U.S. now has several official lists of terrorists and
terrorist groups, each of which has somewhat different implications.
In general, inclusion on a list may entail immigration sanctions,
may result in financial sanctions such as the freezing of assets,
or may mean that persons who fund such groups are subject to
criminal prosecution.
The two most important lists cover the
categories of "Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations,"
or FTOs, and "Specially Designated Global Terrorists,"
or SDGTs.
The FTO list, which currently includes
Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and thirty-four other groups, is the shorter
of the two. FTOs are foreign organizations that the Secretary
of State finds engage in terrorist activity and whose terrorist
activity threatens the security of U.S. nationals or the national
security of the United States. The definition of terrorist activity,
as defined in the relevant laws, is extremely broad.
The penalties for inclusion on the FTO
list are serious. U.S. banks must freeze the funds of groups
on the list; U.S. residents are barred from providing them with
funds, and members of such groups are barred from traveling to
the United States.
The SDGT list is similar, but much more
extensive, and was created by executive order in the immediate
wake of September 11. Again, using an extremely broad definition
of terrorism, it blocks the assets of designated terrorists and
terrorist organizations, and bars people from conducting financial
transactions with, or giving charitable donations to such individuals
or groups. All FTOs are also included on the SDGT list.
Neither of the two lists has more than
negligible due process safeguards, which leaves them extremely
vulnerable to political misuse.
Making Friends by
Naming Enemies
Now consider a few of the most recent
terrorist group designations, made as additions to the SDGT list.
In late August 2002, during a visit to
Beijing, Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage announced
the terrorist designation of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement,
a little-known group of Muslim separatists active in western
China. "The listing was a sop to the Chinese," asserted
an expert on Chinese Muslims interviewed by The New York Times.
The Times, which noted that the United
States was anxiously seeking to neutralize Chinese opposition
to a possible attack on Iraq, said that the State Department
had supplied little hard evidence to support the designation.
It also cited several unnamed diplomats from allied nations who
agreed that the U.S. decision was apparently based on unproven
Chinese assertions. As expected, the Chinese government lauded
the designation decision.
The timing of another recent terrorist
group designation is equally suspect. Russia has long been pressing
the United States to name several Chechen rebel groups as terrorist.
The U.S., favoring a political solution to the conflict in Chechnya,
has long resisted these requests.
In late February 2003, however, as a
heated debate over war in Iraq was raging at the U.N. Security
Council, the Secretary of State designated three rebel groups
in Chechnya as terrorist groups linked to Al Qaeda. The designations
were widely viewed as a concession to Moscow at a time when Russian
acquiescence to the Iraq war was one of Washington's top priorities.
Zaindi Choltayev, a Chechen political
scientist, decried the likely impact of the designation decision
on the conflict in Chechnya. He noted that the decision "bolsters
the Kremlin's refusal to negotiate." As he explained, "The
announcement lends international credibility to Moscow's claim
that the war in Chechnya is part of the global war on terrorism,
and one doesn't negotiate with terrorists."
And now, most recently, the designation
of three Basque nationalist groups: Batasuna, Euskal Herritarrok
and Herri Batasuna. The Spanish government outlawed the groups
last year, alleging that they were linked to the Basque terrorist
organization ETA.
But Prime Minister Aznar, who advocates
a tough, no-negotiations approach to terrorist groups, needs
political help. Spanish public opinion polls show that Aznar
has paid a high price for his public backing of the U.S. invasion
of Iraq, with 78 percent of those surveyed in April by the newspaper
El Mundo continuing to believe that the war was unjustified.
With the recent designation, Aznar received a concrete reward
for Spain's show of support.
Even White House spokesman Ari Fleischer,
discussing the May 7 meeting between Aznar and President Bush,
suggested a possible connection between the war and the designation
decision. The way he put it was this: "I think the State
Department may have something to say today in regard to designation
of terrorist organizations in Spain. The United States and Spain
have a very strong relationship and the president is very grateful
to Spain for the leadership they took in helping to free the
world from the threat of the Iraqi regime."
Politicized Choices
It may be that all of the groups discussed
above are linked to terrible crimes. But there is no dearth of
violent groups in the world that the United States has not decided
to name as its terrorist enemies.
Allowing political influences to taint
terrorist designations trivializes the terrorist threat. The
decision to name a group to any of the U.S. terrorism lists should
be based on strict and objective criteria, not awarded as a diplomatic
favor.
Joanne Mariner
is a human rights attorney and regular CounterPunch contributer.
An earlier version of this piece appeared in FindLaw's
Writ. She can be reached at: mariner@counterpunch.org.
Today's
Features
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Jason
Leopold
Despite Thin Intelligence Reports,
US Plans Overthrow of Iran Regime
Ron
Jacobs
Popular Uprising, Inc.
Michelle
Ciaccorra
Bush's Nuclear Policy: Do As I Say, Not As I Do
Yves Engler
The Economics of Health Care in
America: Pay More to Die Sooner
Kimberly
Blaker
Vouchers for Jesus
Harry
Browne
Stakeknife: Britain's Army Spy at
the Top of the IRA
Stew
Albert
Cops of the World
Steve Perry
Greens 04: In or Out?
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|