British Prime Minister Tony Blair and President
George W. Bush went into their standard routine after the London bombings. This
was an attack against civilization and all civilized nations, they said.
That's bosh and hokum, and it does a disservice to the people. The first step
always in solving any problem is to define the problem correctly. There are no
terrorists anywhere in the world whose goal is the destruction of civilization,
Western or otherwise.
The terrorist attacks against the U.S., Great Britain and Spain are motivated
exclusively by Western policies toward the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and
the presence of Western military forces in Islamic countries. Al-Qaeda, the
ideological source of these attacks, has always been crystal-clear and specific
about its reasons for declaring war against the United States.
You can't win a war unless you know who your enemy is, know why he is your
enemy and know what his objectives are. Only then can you properly direct your
military and political forces to combat him successfully.
Unfortunately, very early on, President Bush decided to create a mythical
enemy of vague and ambiguous proportions and irrational motives. This was done
to give carte blanche to the government to pursue policies that really had nothing
to do with fighting al-Qaeda e.g., invading Iraq, putting North Korea
and Iran in the "axis of evil" and including groups on the enemies
list that were in fact not our enemies.
The confusion this causes was illustrated by television coverage of the London
attacks. Several commentators lumped together the terrorist attacks against public
transport in Moscow, Madrid and London. However, the Moscow attack had nothing
to do with the attacks in Madrid and London, or with us. Moscow is fighting Chechen
rebels who want independence for Chechnya. Chechen attacks against Russia, like
Palestinian attacks against Israel, are not directed at us. They are motivated
by specific political objectives. Chechens and Palestinians have no desire to
destroy civilization; they simply wish to take their place in the family of nations
as independent countries.
You can't have a war against terrorism because, as many people have pointed out,
terrorism is a tactic employed by people who have no real military power. It is
not an entity. There is no worldwide terrorist organization.
Terrorist tactics work because we live in a wired world. Ten or 12 people can
set off a few bombs in London, and the world turns its electronic eyes on the
story and chats, discusses and shows video clips until some other event distracts
it. The media attention and the inflated rhetoric of politicians magnify the terrorist
act far beyond its actual import.
These attacks pinpricks, really, in terms of any damage they do to national
power cannot be completely stopped. A few malcontents inspired by someone's
rhetoric can get together and set off a bomb or two or shoot some people. Terrorists
should be considered criminals, and their acts as ordinary crimes. Physically
dealing with terrorists is properly ordinary police work. There is no war involved.
What the United States should be doing, instead of invading and occupying
countries, is re-examining its foreign policy vis-à-vis the Islamic world.
There is no natural conflict between the West and Islam. The followers and true
believers of Osama bin Laden are a tiny minority. The best way to cut the ground
out from under him is to develop and pursue policies that treat all of the Islamic
countries with fairness and respect.
We don't do that at the present time. Because of the power of the Israeli lobby
to skew our policy to benefit Israel, our Middle East policies are riddled with
double and triple standards and reek of hypocrisy. Because of that, we are the
best recruiter Osama bin Laden has.
But in the meantime, remember that terrorist attacks are primarily media events.
You still have more to fear from the flu or accidents than you do from terrorists.