9/24/01

KUFM / KGPR

T. M. Power

We are immersed in the rhetoric of war. That is not surprising. Not since the War of 1812 has the continental United States been attacked. During that war, the British burned the Capitol and the White House, the same primary targets the terrorists who ultimately hit the Pentagon and crashed in Pennsylvania apparently had. The attacks were clearly devastating acts of war.

From the highest levels of government on down, we want to do something dramatic and soon. There is the very real danger, however, that our response to this dispersed and secretive enemy may actually make matters worse for us. Clearly we do not want to respond in ways that generate tens of thousands of additional fanatical suicide bombers or allow the fanatics to seize control of several more nations. The worst-case scenario involves our intervention in Afghanistan leading to Islamic fundamentalists gaining control of Pakistan and its nuclear weapons. Islamic fundamentalists have been gaining strength in countries stretching from the eastern Mediterranean across most of central Asia to the western Pacific, an area too vast and complex for us to ever imagine occupying or controlling. The Chinese, the British, the Japanese, and the Russians have all tried, at various times, and failed. So will we.

That does not mean that we should do nothing. It means we must be very careful and deliberate. Even though we are currently the most powerful nation on the planet both economically and militarily, it would be catastrophic to our own interests to act as if we can ignore the limitations of our power and the interests of the other peoples of the world. Such a unilateralist approach was the keystone of the new Bush Administration’s emerging foreign policy before the September 11^th attacks: We were the one and only big kid on the block, so why should we pay attention to or negotiate with anyone else? We should just use our economic and military might to pursue our own interests regardless of what others might think. There are tones of that in the ultimatums we are delivering to friends and foes alike in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. Our legitimate rage over the attacks and the desire for swift revenge pushes in the same direction.

But in war it is important to both know one’s enemy and to know one’s self, since the cause of the hostilities are likely to be tied up in the interaction between those two. I have lived my life surrounded by “terrorists” of various stripes. My father was a committed supporter of the Irish Republican Army, and he sought to teach his children to carry on the same fanatical commitment to a united Ireland at any cost. I spent the early 1960s working in the Deep South where secretive groups of whites used violence to block the extension of the rights of citizenship to blacks. I lost friends to that violence and did not escape it myself. Later in the sixties and early seventies, I watched other friends give up on this nation and slide into the fatal fantasy of becoming an underground guerilla movement. Through marriage, my family now includes Tamils from Sri Lanka who are active in the effort to protect their rights to their homeland. Of course, living in the nation’s heartland brings one in contact with our own homegrown fanatics. Montana certainly has its share. Even though we initially sought “Arab-like” individuals for the Oklahoma City bombing, it was all-American Timothy McVeigh who did the deed.

In almost none of the terrorist circumstances with which I have had personal experience has a massive violent response been effective at ending or controlling the terrorism. More often, such massive use of violence has simply strengthened the terrorist organizations, providing them with new grievances, thousands of new recruits, and a more sympathetic public to shelter and support them. Consider the impact of the federal governments violent assaults at Waco and Ruby Ridge in motivating Timothy McVeigh as we now contemplate using massive firepower against the civilians surrounding various terrorist training camps. Osama Bin Laden wants us to energize a holy war of Islam against the West by acting as brutally as he has. It would be tragic if we accommodated his wish.

Language matters. The tribal language that has increasingly been used in response to the terrorist attacks is the same language that in the past has led countless millions to their deaths. We are the innocent, righteous, and brave. They are the evil, cowardly infidels. Of course, the terrorists see it exactly the other way around and that energizes them too. Successfully carrying out an air war against Serbia without losing a single soldier and totally destroying the invading Iraqi army with almost no casualties of our own may have been smart warfare but it was not seen by the rest of the world as either heroic or brave. Killing people from afar where you are not in danger is rarely considered a demonstration of courage.

Terrorism is the response of the powerless who see themselves as cut out of any opportunity for a better life and, therefore, having nothing to lose. Those who passively or actively support them, sympathize with that deprivation. The most effective solution is to extend opportunity to them and give them a stake in the world we are trying to help create. That is what has been slowly transforming Iran as the population votes against the clerics for a more open society. That is what peacefully brought the Soviet Union down and turned Russia towards the West. That is why the whites in South Africa, and for that matter, in the United States, gave up their opposition to extending full citizenship to blacks. That is why despite substantial inequality in this country both rich and poor see themselves are partners in building a better world.

That is not to say that careful use of our military and economic power should not be part of an effective response to terrorism. They do have a vital role. They can keep a minority of zealots from dominating and exploiting entire populations, creating breathing room for the majority to pursue their broader dreams and aspirations. But if that military power is used broadly and clumsily, we will give Bin Laden what he has been working for all these years, not an army of thousands but an army of millions. We have to rein in the tribal impulse to strike back at all who are strange and different and embrace instead the common aspirations of almost all of the earth’s population. That is what will end the terrorism and bring us back the peace and security we once took for granted.