War can't stop terrorism

September 12, 2001
Issue 

BY NORM DIXON

In the aftermath of the horrific obliteration of New York City's landmark World Trade Center towers by terrorists on September 11, the US government is rapidly preparing the ground for a massive military attack — most probably against Afghanistan.

Exploiting the US people's understandable shock and outrage at the colossal death toll, politicians, "experts" and the mass media are cynically whipping up a lynch mob frenzy against the people of the Middle East, and Muslims in general, to justify war.

"SIMPLY KILL THESE BASTARDS!", screamed Rupert Murdoch's New York Post on the morning of September 12. Feeling no compulsion to wait for those responsible for the mass murder to be identified before advocating indiscriminate acts of terror in revenge, the Post demanded that Kabul be bombed and that the US government be allowed to assassinate individual enemies.

While the "respectable" news outlets may not have delivered the same fundamentalist "eye-for-an-eye" rantings as Murdoch's mass circulation tabloids, their message was in essence the same: all Arabs and Muslims are to blame.

A procession of former US government secretaries, former generals and sundry experts were rotated through the major US networks' panels on September 11-13 calling for massive military "retaliation" against states accused by Washington of being "sponsors of terrorism". These include Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Libya and Iran.

Even the Cold Warrior novelist Tom Clancy was given space to argue for beefing up the military and CIA.

Typical of these "experts" was former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger, speaking on CNN. While advocating the use of immediate military force, he was asked who he thought was responsible for the attacks. "I do not have a clue", he replied, before repeating the call for military action.

CNN repeatedly screened footage of "thousands" in Palestine "celebrating" the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. No more than a few dozen people were shown participating, while bemused bystanders looked on.

More meaningful footage was not given the same prominence or repetition, such as Palestinian President Yasser Arafat's immediate condemnation of the attacks, his gesture of donating blood to the victims or an interview with Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi in which she pointed out that the Palestinian people were appalled by the carnage.

US politicians are also fuelling war hysteria. "I say, bomb the hell out of them", stated Democrat Senator Zell Miller on September 12. "If there's collateral damage, so be it. They certainly found our civilians to be expendable."

"There is no such thing as a measured response to this horrific attack", Democrat representative Shelly Berkley said the same day. "This act will be avenged."

Republican senator Orrin Hatch added, "Terrorism is worth a declaration of war, if that's what the Congress so chooses to do. That would give the president and the armed forces complete power to do what is necessary to win the war."

Blank cheque for war

US Secretary of State Colin Powell on September 11 announced that Washington "was building a strong coalition to go after these perpetrators, but more broadly, to go after terrorism wherever we find it in the world".

US President George W. Bush addressed the nation on the night of the attacks and declared them "acts of war".

"We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbour them", he warned.

The Bush administration moved rapidly to secure a blank cheque to wage war against any country in the world. The UN Security Council on September 12 endorsed the US view that those "aiding, supporting or harbouring the perpetrators, organisers and sponsors of these acts will be held accountable".

On September 12, the US-dominated North Atlantic Treaty Organisation for the first time in its history invoked the provision that defines an attack on one NATO member as an attack on the entire 19-country military alliance.

In a statement, NATO said: "In the event of attacks ... each ally will assist [the US] by taking such action as it deems necessary. Accordingly, the United States' NATO allies stand ready to provide the assistance that may be required as a consequence of these acts of barbarism."

Also on September 13, a special meeting of the European Union's foreign ministers declared: "There will be no safe haven for terrorists and their sponsors. The EU will work closely with the US and all partners to combat international terrorism."

The Australian government on September 14 invoked the provisions of the ANZUS military alliance that would allow the Australian armed forces to join any US-led war.

In the early hours of September 14, White House officials met with leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties in Congress to agree on the final details of a massive US$40 billion package to "counter, investigate or prosecute domestic or international terrorism" and to reconstruct New York City and the Pentagon. This was $20 billion more than President Bush requested. The bill was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress within 24 hours.

Congress is also due to pass a resolution that will authorise Bush to use "necessary and appropriate force" against those it deems responsible for the terrorist attacks.

The measure has a startling resemblance to the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin resolution that authorised the US president "to take all necessary measures" to "protect" US forces in Indochina. With that resolution, successive US presidents escalated the Vietnam War until more than 500,000 US troops were deployed.

Members of both houses of Congress on September 12, after meeting with US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, had already passed a resolution in support of the president's determination to "punish the perpetrators of these attacks, as well as their sponsors".

The US government is hardly being subtle about its intention to use massive military force — the only question is when, where and against whom.

Rumsfeld told US troops on September 12, in a videotaped message, that "in the days ahead" they will "face powerful and terrible enemies, enemies we intend to vanquish ... The task ... will fall to you." At a press conference, he said the US response must be "sustained and broadly based".

Bush on September 13 grandly proclaimed: "We have just seen the first war of the 21st century. Now that war has been declared on us, we will lead the world to victory."

Deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz went further: "It's not just simply a matter of capturing people and holding them accountable but [of] removing the sanctuaries, removing the support systems [and] ending states who sponsor terrorists."

Two US aircraft carriers — each with 75 warplanes — and their battle groups are presently in the Persian Gulf. The USS Enterprise, which was due to leave the area, has been ordered to stay on. The battle groups include cruisers and submarines capable of launching long-range cruise missiles.

It has also been reported that the US is bolstering its presence at a Turkish air base near the Iraq border.

Afghanistan

Afghanistan is the most likely immediate target for US military action.

The mass media within hours of the attack had settled on Afghanistan-based, Saudi Arabia-born Islamic fundamentalist Osama bin Laden as the "prime suspect", without presenting any evidence.

Within a day of the outrages, government officials too were saying that bin Laden was "linked" to the perpetrators, or controlled the only organisation able to carry out such a well-planned and sophisticated operation — also without producing any proof.

On September 13, Powell told a press conference that the US "was looking at those terrorist organisations who have the kind of capacity that would have been necessary to conduct the kind of attack that we saw". He confirmed that he believed bin Laden's organisation had that capacity.

Powell warned that once the US was satisfied it knew who was behind the terrorist attack, "We will go after that network and those who have harboured, supported and aided that network, to rip that network up".

That statement was clearly directed at the ruling Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

Straight after the press conference, Powell phoned Pakistan's President Pervaiz Musharraf to seek a "specific list of things we think would be useful for them to work with us on".

Washington reportedly demanded that Pakistan, which has close political and intelligence ties with the Taliban, pressure Afghanistan to share what it knows about bin Laden's whereabouts and allow the US to use Pakistan's airspace in the event of an attack.

Musharraf pledged Pakistan's "unstinting cooperation in the fight against terrorism".

A sarcastic President Bush told reporters later: "Now, we'll just find out what that means, won't we. We will give the Pakistani government a chance to cooperate and participate as we hunt down these people who committed this unbelievable, despicable act."

Reading the signals, the United Nations and international aid organisations have begun to withdraw their staff from Afghanistan.

According to the September 13 British Guardian, NATO is drawing up a plan for "a possible massive attack" on Afghanistan if evidence emerges that bin Laden and his "network" were behind the attacks on New York and Washington. The Taliban would be ordered to surrender bin Laden or "face the consequences".

However, the newspaper reported that while the CIA, Britain's MI6 and the French, German, Russian and Israeli intelligence services were unanimous "in pointing the finger of suspicion at supporters of Osama bin Laden", they all conceded they did not have proof.

The Guardian said that the attack would involve tens of thousands of ground troops. Such a force would take weeks to assemble. However, it would probably be preceded by an initial cruise missile barrage.

The US ruling class has cynically taken advantage of the horror experienced by the US people and manipulated the anger that the terrorist attacks have provoked to place the country on a permanent war footing against the peoples of the Middle East.

Iraq may also be in line for further military attacks. On September 13, an unnamed US official told Associated Press that Iraq's role in "helping the terror network" is also being examined.

Powell refused to answer journalists' questions about a link between Iraq and bin Laden but described Iraqi President Saddam Hussein as "one of the leading terrorists on the face of the Earth".

Bin Laden

Osama bin Laden is without doubt a dangerous character. He may well be responsible for the many terrorist crimes he has been accused of by the US.

According to the Washington Post on September 13, bin Laden's "presumed links" to terrorist acts include the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center that left six dead, the 1994 bombing of a Philippine airliner that killed one person, the 1995 assassination attempt on Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak during a visit to Ethiopia, the 1996 attack that killed 19 US soldiers at a housing complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 235 and injured 5500 and the bomb attack on the USS Cole in harbour of the Yemini port of Aden that killed 17 US sailors.

But despite its enormous resources, Washington has been unable to present conclusive evidence of his involvement in any of them.

This explains why newspapers and government officials routinely refer to bin Laden as being "linked to" acts of terrorism and talk of evidence "that points to" the involvement of his Al Qaeda organisation.

And as respected journalist Robert Fisk commented in the September 13 British Independent, "If Mr bin Laden was really guilty of all the things he has been blamed for, he would need an army of 10,000". The US government estimates that Al Qaeda may have somewhere between several hundred and several thousand members, based mainly in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Bin Laden is no doubt capable of some of the things he has been accused of. After all, he was taught by some of the most adept practitioners of terror tactics in the world — the CIA.

Between 1979 and 1992, the US, in league with Pakistan's secret service, funded the fundamentalist Afghan mujaheddin to the tune of more than US$6 billion.

Washington even turned a blind eye to their massive opium trade. Huge amounts of opium left Afghanistan in the same trucks and aircraft that delivered sophisticated CIA-supplied anti-aircraft missiles and tonnes of other weaponry.

Osama bin Laden then was a key US ally.

When the ultra-reactionary Taliban — backed and funded by US allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia — emerged in 1994, Washington gave it tacit approval because of its anti-Iranian stance. Bin Laden remains closely allied to the Taliban, and since 1996 has been sheltered by it.

In the hypocritical world of the US ruling class, the bin Laden of the past was a "freedom fighter" when he fought against a progressive government and was dedicated to the imposition of a medieval theocracy. He became a "terrorist" only when he mobilised his religious zealots against what he saw as the US occupation of Saudi Arabia.

Proof

The US government has in the past shown that it does not require an onerous "burden of proof" before it launches military action in the name of fighting "terrorism".

On August 20, 1998, without warning, at least six cruise missiles slammed into a factory in the heavily populated northern suburbs of Khartoum, Sudan's capital, reducing it to rubble.

After the raid, US President Bill Clinton said the missile strikes against Sudan, as well as simultaneous raids on Afghanistan, were directed at Osama bin Laden. Clinton claimed the US had "convincing evidence" that bin Laden and his followers played a "key role" in the terrible bombings of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7. Clinton added the US had "compelling information" that bin Laden was planning more attacks.

Clinton and other US officials refused to reveal details of this "convincing evidence" and "compelling information". The factory in Sudan, claimed Clinton, was "chemical weapons-related" and linked to bin Laden.

Then US defence secretary William Cohen declared that bin Laden "contributed [financially] to this particular facility, we know that he has an interest in acquiring chemical weapons, we know that this facility produces the precursor chemicals which would allow the production of VX nerve agents — that was enough of a connection for us."

However, the truth was that the Al-Shifa factory was Sudan's main producer of medicine and veterinary drugs, supplying up to 60% of the impoverished country's needs, as well as exporting much-needed medicines to the rest of Africa and the Middle East.

In May 1999, the US quietly admitted that its attack on Al-Shifa was a mistake and that there was no link between the factory and bin Laden. As the British Independent reported, "The embarrassing reversal means that the US has virtually no evidence to support its claim that the missile attack was a strike against terrorism".

Lack of credible evidence also did not deter the US launching terrorist attacks on April 15, 1986, when US warplanes bombed the Libyan cities of Tripoli and Benghazi, killing 100 people, including Libyan President Muammar Qadhafi's adopted daughter.

The raid was supposedly in retaliation for the bombing of a German disco, in which a US soldier was killed. The US offered no proof, and the theory that Libya was behind the bombing has since been discredited.

These attacks in fact had little to do with fighting "terrorism", and everything to do with strengthening Washington's military, economic and political hegemony over the strategic, oil-rich Middle East. US policy in the region was, and is, that no country in the region will be allowed to determine its own course without US permission.

They were warnings, as was the 1991 Gulf War and the air war that has continued over Iraq ever since, that no challenge to US dominance will be tolerated, and neither will threats to Washington's closest allies, Israel, Egypt and the dictatorial sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf.

The new oil fields of central Asian republics, not far from Afghanistan, are now a factor in the equation.

Hoax

The devastatingly successful attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have revealed the monumental hoax that has been perpetrated against the US people since the end of the Cold War. Trillions of dollars have been spent on strengthening the US military machine in the name of defending the US people from "terrorism" and so-called "rogue states".

Those incomprehensible amounts were never meant to protect the lives of ordinary Americans, but the profits and investments of the tiny ruling corporate elite of the United States. The US military machine is designed to keep the vast majority of the world's poor in line while they are exploited mercilessly for the benefit of a tiny handful.

All the talk of defence from "terrorist" threats is merely a con to win public support for greater military spending.

The other great hoax perpetrated against the US people — one that will gain even greater credence in the wake of the September 11 criminal outrages — is that massive military power can contain "terrorism".

Terrorism will never be eliminated until the world is freed of the massive inequality that marks the division between the rich, industrialised West and the poor Third World. Terrorism will continue as long as the imperialist powers, led by the US, continue to deny oppressed peoples their rights to self-determination, democracy and a decent standard of living.

Massive US-led wars against Third World countries — which have now become more politically feasible because US working people's aversion to war casualties may have evaporated as a result of the terrorists' callous actions — will only create the conditions that will provide thousands more recruits for false messiahs like Osama bin Laden.

The world has entered a dangerous time. The use of the carte blanche to wage war will not be restricted to the Middle East but will also be used against the people of Asia, Latin America and Africa if they dare to challenge imperialism.

War plans are almost certainly being drawn up in what remains of the Pentagon to deal a death blow to the rebel movement in Colombia and to overthrow the revolutionary government of Cuba.

Within the imperialist countries, activists critical of the capitalist system will not escape unscathed. Civil liberties will be curtailed and state repression increased.

Socialists will be called upon to resist this and build a mass antiwar movement that can stand in the way of the rampaging US war machine.

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.