Editorial
- March/April 2004- Terror and Elections
The terrible
attack which killed nearly 190 people in Madrid this week is already
being exploited for political ends by politicians all over the
world, adding insult to injury. The outgoing Spanish government's
clumsy attempts to blame ETA in the hours following the explosion,
was a blatant and disgusting attempt to influence the outcome
of the elections. In fact, all the fingers are now pointing towards
Al-Qaeda. Blair and Bush were almost as quick as Aznar to seize
this tragic occasion to sell their spin about the "war on
terror", a campaign to scare people into relinquishing more
of their civil liberties, and which will inevitably lead to more
loss of civilian life, mostly in the Middle East.
In the name
of this "war against terror", the Spanish Prime Minister
José Maria Aznar led his reluctant people into a war against
Iraq, which they did not want. In doing so, he defied the 91%
of Spaniards who were opposed to an illegal invasion, which cost
the lives of thousands of Iraqis. The civilians who died in the
Madrid train blasts were not responsible for Aznar's destructive
foreign policy, and yet they may have paid the price in his stead.
|Indeed, one message at the scene of the explosions read "Aznar,
you made war and we were the casualties". The "war against
terror" cannot be won by feat of arms, and is a terrible
misnomer, since more people are killed in its name than those
killed by terrorist attacks against Western cities. Aznar's policies,
along with his fumbled attempts to blame ETA for the blasts, seem
to have angered the voters, who turned out en masse to deliver
electoral victory to the Socialists on Sunday.
Indeed, Musharaff's
dictatorship in Pakistan is being perpetuated in the name of the
"war against terror", despite revelations that Pakistan
has been involved in nuclear proliferation on a large scale. President
Putin of Russia believes the "war against terror" gives
him the right to authorise more horrendous violence against the
Chechen people, making terrorist retaliation more than likely.
Strangely, the international community prefers to scold Putin
for locking up the Russian kleptocrats who impoverished their
country and sold off its natural resources for personal profit
after the fall of the Soviet Union. Killing Chechens is fine for
them, as long as corrupt "businessmen" are allowed to
roam free. Unlike Aznar, Putin had nothing to fear from elections
on Sunday, when he was re-elected by a landlslide victory. As
for Presidents Bush and Blair, they would have us believe that
the "war against terror" justified plunging Iraq into
chaos, destruction and civil war, despite no evidence that this
country possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction nor of an Iraqi
connection with Al-Qaeda. However, the destruction of Iraq has
plunged the country into civil war and generated a justified wave
outrage against America and its allies in the Arab world. Such
outrage will have unpredictable consequences for the West, but
it is only a matter of time before some form of blowback takes
place.
The "war
against terror" is also a convenient excuse for ignoring
the true problems of the world. After the UK's chief scientific
advisor, Sir David King, warned that global warming was a more
serious threat than "international terrorism", the government
attempted to keep him silent. David King is not the only person
Blair's government is trying to gag. Claire Short is being threatened
with prosecution after revealing the UK officials routinely bugged
Kofi Annan's conversations. Hardly surprising on the part of British
secret services, but unacceptable nonetheless. Blair seems to
have his hands full trying to keep secrets from reaching the public,
as his government insists on not revealing the Attorney General's
justification for war in Iraq. It seems that Lord Goldsmith had
warned Blair that the war would be illegal, but had then been
forced to "revise" his position.
That other
catchphrase "Freedom and Democracy" suffered another
blow in Iraq, as the puppet interim government adopted a new Constitution
drafted under the watchful eye of the US. Although temporary in
theory, this "Constitution" imposed by foreign occupation
forces and unelected collaborators has no legal value. The resistance
movement in Iraq continues to grow in proportion with anger at
the perpetuation of the occupation. Oh…and still no sign of Weapons
of Mass Destruction in Iraq.
Meanwhile,
Chirac's government has decided to sacrifice Haïti in a bid
to improve Franco-American relations. Haïti has been devastated
by a rebellion of ex-death-squad thugs, giving France and America
an excuse to depose the only democratically elected president
in the small country's history. Aristide, like Chavez, had been
trying to implement a socialist programme, which was not to the
taste of the Worlds only superpower. France, which enjoys interfering
with its old colonies, decided to join in. Socialists in Greece
were ousted democratically in the March elections, and Karamanlis
of the conservative "New Democracy" party was elected
Prime Minister. However, the "choice" between conservatives
and "socialists" in Greece was much like the choice
between Republicans and Democrats in the US, or the choice between
drinking Pepsi or Coca Cola: the only difference is the colours
of the package.
Nearby in
Cyprus, desperate talks continue in order to negotiate a solution
to the island's partition so that the country joins the EU as
a united island. If the Greek- and Turkish-Cypriot leaders fail
to reach an accord by 22nd of March, Greece and Turkey will enter
the negotiations. However, Greek Cypriots are worried that the
Annan Plan proposed by the UN is in contradiction with the EU
aquis communautaire on such human rights issues such as freedom
of establishment and will perpetuate the division of the two communities
in a different form. US pressure for the signature of an accord
before EU accession has been immense, raising fears of a Kissinger-style
hidden agenda. If no solution is found before 1st of May, Cyprus
will still join the EU, but in legal terms, things will get complicated
for Turkey, because it will be occupying a piece of the EU (officially,
the entire island, represented by the government of the Republic
of Cyprus, will accede to the EU). Moreover, once Cyprus is inside
the EU, it will be in a position to severely diminish Turkey's
chances of accession. The USA has long wanted its steadfast ally,
Turkey, inside the EU, in order to have more influence within
the Union. This could explain the sudden impatience of the US
to see a solution before the 1st of May.
|