It seems to be obligatory to post up something about Tuesday’s appalling events. I try to apply a utilitarian approach to problems, however emotive they may be. As a result, I am apprehensive when I hear talk about a “war” on terrorism and particularly early press speculation about a possible invasion of Afghanistan (or possibly a punitive expedition?). Paul Wolfowitz, deputy Pentagon chief, is quoted as saying the US would “end states which sponsor terrorism.” The terrorist attacks themselves were bad enough, but there is a danger that:
1) they may encourage further bigotry among Americans against Muslims and/or arabs, most of whom are not at all sympathetic to the aims of the terrorists. In the Telegraph here in the UK Daniel Pipes suggests 10-15% of Muslims are “Islamists” (his term for militants) and says we must worry about Islamist “sleepers” (or in other words any Muslim even if they *seem* peaceable).
2) they may cause huge disruption to people’s lives in a futile attempt to make the world “safe”. I don’t think it is actually possible to secure the world against determined terrorists without an unacceptable level of inconvenience and paranoia. John Keegan, Defence Editor of the Telegraph has already suggested that ISPs should be required to forbid the transmission of encrypted messages (!) and uncompliant providers on foreign territory should expect their buildings to be destroyed by cruise missiles (!!!)
3) they may cause the US to lash out blindly against people they see as enemies – if they attack Afghanistan or other nations which house terrorists they will likely cause large civilian casualties and huge resentment in the Muslim world, breeding many more terrorists to take their place.
4) they may set back the middle east peace process for years to come. Simplifying grossly, Israel is the intransigent party these days and Bush was already closely aligned with Israel. Now there is a danger that some Palestinians’ anger at the US for historical reasons will be exploited by opponents of their cause to make a just settlement look like surrender to terrorism.
If the terrorists and their leaders can be found and killed or captured, of course I would like to see that happen (and I wouldn’t be too fussy about the methods used as long as they weren’t indiscriminate like cruise missiles) but I think it would be both wrong and dangerous to make this into a larger war or crusade. The terrorists don’t represent anyone but themselves – if we launch a jihad against a whole culture then they will have achieved their goal.
Frankly, I believe that even this lacklustre President would not be foolish enough to ignite such a conflagration (and if he were, I doubt his advisors would let him) but I still worry that the inflammatory suggestions like the ones we are starting to see in the press are deeply un-helpful.
To comment on this or other aspects of the attack on America, visit my discussion forum.
