Progressive Views
of the Attack on America
News and Analysis (page
2)
Nick Megoran, "Conduct
of Afghan Campaign Undermines US Argument for Open Society Development in
Central Asia." Eurasia Net
Mark N. Katz , "Saudi
Economic Woes Could Have Implications for Anti-Terrorism Campaign"
Eurasia Insight Dec. 18
Mark N. Katz "Bin
Laden's Message Deepens Political Dilemma Faced by Saudi Royal Family"
Eurasia Insight Dec 19
The Saudi monarchy has tried to
convince the public in the Kingdom, and the larger Muslim world, that Riyadh
can simultaneously be a US ally and the preeminent defender of Islam. Both
before September 11 and especially after it, Osama bin Laden has forcefully
argued that any Muslim government allied to the United States is, by
definition, an enemy of Islam. Bin Laden's message is resonating broadly in
Saudi Arabia, a country struggling to reverse steady economic decline. The
threat of domestic instability poses a significant danger to the ultimate
success of the US-led anti-terrorism campaign.
Douglas Frantz, "Pakistan
Ended Aid to Taliban Only Hesitantly" New York Times December
8, 2001
"Karimov
Moves To Bolster Authoritarian Rule in Uzbekistan"
Eurasia Net Dec. 7
On December
6, a day before United States Secretary of State Colin Powell was due to
arrive in Uzbekistan's capital city of Tashkent, the Central Asian nation's
parliament endorsed a proposal to make Islam Karimov president for life. The
move offers confirmation that Karimov is taking advantage of Tashkent's key
position in the anti-terrorism campaign being waged against Afghanistan to
reinforce Uzbekistan's authoritarian system.
Duncan Cambell, "Bush
Nominee Linked to Terrorism," Guardian Nov. 28
Senate Foreign Relations Committee sends nomination of Otto Reich, linked to
anti-Cuban terrorism back to Bush.
"Pakistanis
Said to Again Evacuate Allies of Taliban" New York Times Nov. 24
Ruth Ingram,
"Burying Seeds for Violence Xinjiang" The Analyst Central
Asia Caucasus Institute
Margaret Dowd, "Cleopatra
and Osama" New York Times Nov. 18
[Laura Bush's radio
address rings hollow. Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries practice
repression.]
Simon Tisdall, "Unhealthy
Reliance on the Alliance" Guardian Nov. 8
"Who's
Who in the Northern Alliance" Guardian
Human Rights Watch, "Opportunism
in the Face of Tragedy: Repression in the Name of Anti-Terrorism"
Colin Powell recently noted that "we have
much to learn" from the Egypt's anti-terrorist tactics, despite the fact
that such tactics have been used against non-violent critics as well and
include emergency rule, detention without trial and trials before military
courts. Egypt is "really ahead of us on this issue," Powell said.
V. Sudarshan, "Rule
by Proxy" Outlook India
Two
independent reports document in detail Pakistan's role in nurturing the Taliban
"Uzbekistan's
Human Rights Problem" The Nation
Dilip Hiro "Bush's
Uzbek Bargain" The Nation
The
Uzbek government has barely changed from Soviet times.
Seymour Hersch, "King's Ransom": How
Vulnerable are the Saudi Royals" The New Yorker
Musharraf
Calls for a Political Strategy
Vernon Loeb and Thomas Ricks,
"Pressure
To Curtail War Grows Pakistani Leader Urges Pause for Ramadan" Washington Post
James Risen and Tim Weiner, "New
Allies Help C.I.A. in Its Fight Against Terror" New York Times
US
Tempers Voice on Women's Right to Avoid Alienating Moslem Allies" New
York Times
"Pakistani
Intelligence Had Links to Al Queda" New York Times
Ian Urbina, "US
Bows to Turkey" The Nation
Robert Fisk "Our
Friends Are Killers, Crooks, and Torturers" The Observer
Frank del Olmo,"Negroponte is
the Wrong Messenger" Los Angeles Times
William Pfaff, "A
Strange Alliance with Saudi and Pakistani Foes of Modernity"
International Herald Tribune Oct 1
Rout
of the Taliban" Observer Nov.18 [positive view of US strategy
and tactics, best read in conjunction with Arkin's columns immediately below.]
William Arkin "Bad
News In the Good News" Washington Post Nov. 12
William Arkin "Osama
Has Left the Building" Washington Post Nov. 18
US
Shifts Gears After a Week of Setbacks" Los Angeles Times
William Arkin, "Lost
Euphoria" Washington Post October 28
William Arkin, "Civilian
Casualities and the Air War" Washington Post Oct. 21
David Corn "Losing
the PR Prattle"
throughout
much of the world, America has no credit to draw upon, and, beyond that,
Bush has so bungled the meta-framework of this war that PR efforts may be
useless at this point. When you’re the only superpower left standing,
large portions of the rest of the world may feel resentment and not possess
a charitable attitude toward you. But the United States’s decision to
share only a meager slice of its tremendous wealth with other nations, its
my-way-of-the-highway approach to certain international matters, its
rapacious consumption of a disproportionate amount of global resources (see
SUVs), its occasional heavy-handed interventions on behalf of
less-than-exemplary regimes -- all of this has left it little good will in
the bank of international sentiment.
B. Raman "Bombed
Out Credibility" OutlookIndia.com
Lucid thinking and analysis seem to be the
other casualities.
Britons
Support for War Grows" Guardian
The number of people
who support the deployment of British troops in Afghanistan has risen to
almost 60 per cent. The news will come as a huge relief to Downing Street
strategists after a week which saw a 'war wobble' among the general public.
But, disappointingly for the Whitehall media machine, 62 per cent now say
they do not trust the Government to tell the truth about the progress of the
bombing campaign against Osama bin Laden and the Taliban.
Thom Shanker and Dexter Filkins, "US
Commander, Saying Rebels Need Help, Hints More Troops" NY Times
Nov. 9
Even
as he rejected criticism of the current war plan's heavy reliance on
militias backed by the United States to oust the Taliban regime, the
commander, Gen. Tommy R. Franks of the Army, said he could not be certain
that those militias would prevail without the help of significant numbers of
foreign troops, including Americans
Michael R. Gordon, "A
Month in a Difficult Battlefield: Assessing U.S. Strategy" New
York Times
"Poll
Reveals American Fear of Casualties" The Guardian
"Splits
Open in US-UK Alliance" The Guardian
Lawrence Freedman "The
Americans have left it too late to send in ground troops before winter"
"War
Support Ebbs Worldwide" Washington Post Nov. 6
Support
Deepens for Taliban, Refugees Report" Washington Post Nov 6
Opposition
Leaders Ready to Quit War" The Guardian Nov. 9
Key Afghan opposition
commanders are on the verge of abandoning the fight against the Taliban
because their confidence in US military strategy has collapsed.
Insurgents are no
longer willing to infiltrate eastern Taliban-controlled Afghanistan because
they believe American blunders are destroying the opportunity to spread
revolt against the Islamist regime.
"Strikes
During Ramadan Would Be Unwise Says KU Professor"
"Holding
City Could Open a Route for Arms and Aid" Washington Post Nov.
10
Human Rights Watch, "US
Should Stop Use of Cluster Bombs"
William Pfaf "The
War on Terror Turns Into a War on Afghanistan"
Taliban
Foes Say Bombing is Poorly Aimed and Futile" New York Times
Molly Moore and Kamran Khan
"Big
Ground Force Seen as Necessary to Defeat Taliban" Washington
Post Nov. 2
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. "Are
We Trapped in Another Vietnam?" Independent
Anne McElvoy "Doves
Are Wrong" Independent
"Those
who oppose the attack on Afghanistan have no other strategy to offer."
John Mearsheimer "Guns
Won't Win the Afghan War" New York Times
Neither
the current bombing campaign nor the deployment of American ground forces to
Afghanistan offers good military options for dealing with the Taliban and Al
Qaeda. A better approach would emphasize ground-level diplomacy, with open
wallets, among Pashtun leaders in central and southern Afghanistan, the
fullest use of Pakistani intelligence and influence, and selective military
actions. The moment for dramatic demonstration of American military power
has passed. Our resolve must now
US
Shifts Gears After a Week of Setbacks" Los Angeles Times
William Arkin, "Lost
Euphoria" Washington Post October 28
William Arkin, "Civilian
Casualities and the Air War" Washington Post Oct. 21
William Kristol, "The
Wrong Strategy" Washington Post Oct 30
Right-wing
ideologue calls for a ground war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Charles Kruathammer. "More
Might Needed" Washington Post October 30
Another
right-wing ideologue calls for a ground war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Majority
[of Britains}Want a Bomibing Halt" Guardian October 30
John Pilger, "The
War is a Fraud" London Mirror.
"Honesty
is the Best Policy" Guardian
Exiled
Afghans Call for Assembly, Bombing Halt" Reuters Oct.25
Pentagon
Says Taliban Ready for Long War" Washington Post
"Afghan
Factions Far Apart on a Government" Washington Post
Thousands
of Muslim Volunteers Head Into Afghanistran"
Raymond Whitaker "West
Ignored Taliban Opponent" Independent October 27
Abdul Haq, the
legendary Afghan commander captured and executed by the Taliban, embarked on
a doomed mission to rally tribal leaders in the country after Britain and
the US spurned his pleas for help, sources close to him have revealed.
British
Defence Chief: This Could Take Four Years" Independent
October 27
Molly Moore and Kamran Khan,
" Strategy Fails to Splinter Taliban" Washington Post
October 25
The failure to lure
defectors is a major setback for a central aspect of the strategy to topple
the radical Islamic militia, the officials said
Jason Burke, "Why
this War Won't Work" The Observer October 21
There
has to be a pause in the war. ... We should tell the Taliban that the
bombing will stop for a set period so that a conference, that will include
them, can meet to discuss the future of the country and of bin Laden. If
they do not agree, the attacks can start again, preferably after Ramadan. In
the meantime, flood the country with aid and talk about addressing the real
causes of terrorism and Islamic extremism: poverty, repression and skewed
policies in the Middle
East.
Timothy Garden, "We
Cannot Win By Force Alone"
Timothy Garden "Air
Strikes Will Not Win this War, So Lets Send in the Ground Troops"
Independent
Air Marshal Sir Timothy Garden
visiting professor at the Centre for Defence Studies, King's College, London
The air campaign
has therefore a secondary aim: to topple a regime that supports terror.
However, this begs the question of what is to follow. Allowing the Northern
Alliance's ragged army to sweep into Kabul is unlikely to be a recipe for
peace, harmony and good governance. Whatever form of shared administration
that follows the end of the Taliban government will require a strong
international military force to ensure the rule of law.
Robin Wright "Heightened
Contradictions"
Franklin Foer, "Blind
Faith" The New Republic
Bush's
advisor on Islam doesn't really understand Islam. His simplistic views
underestimate the popular appeal of fundamentalist Islam.
"Hawks
and Doves Fight for Control of US War"
"Pentagon
Split Over War Plans" Guardian
Robert Fisk, "Will
a few holes in the runway of Kandahar airport make a difference?"
William Arkin "The
First Week of Bombing" Washington Post
Lawrence Freedman, "This
Is the Third World War" Independent October 20
This
is not so much a war against terrorism as against a radical political force
that seeks to use terroristic methods to coerce Western countries into
staying clear of these conflicts as they are brought to a head – and to
impose on the Islamic world misogynist theocracies. That is why the stakes
are so high.
The easiest part of
the Third World War may be in disrupting the operations of al-Qa'ida and
driving it and the Taliban out of their bases. The hardest part will be in
getting a grip, once and for all, of the vicious legacies of the First and
Second World Wars.
Said Arubish, "The
Coming Arab Crash" Guardian
The
west's most important friends in the Arab Middle East - Fahd of Saudi
Arabia, Abdullah of Jordan, Mubarak of Egypt and the PLO's Yasser Arafat -
are probably the world's most vulnerable political quartet. It is likely
that endemic problems and the Islamic fundamentalist tide gripping their
countries will bring an end to their regimes within the next five years.
Philip Brownling "Asian
Reservations About the War on Terror" International Herald Tribune
Oct 16
There
is unease in East Asia at events in Afghanistan and the evolution of the
"global war on terrorism." There is no sympathy for Osama bin
Laden, but unease reflects worry that the response to Sept. 11 will do more
harm than good. It also taps into old wells of anti-Western sentiment.
"Spain
Sets a Hurdle for Extraditions" New
York Times Nov. 24
Joe Stephens and David B. Ottaway,
"Afghan
Roots Keep Adviser Firmly in the Inner Circle
" Washington Post Nov. 22
Zalmay Khalilzad, a member of Bush's
National Security Council] has evolved from a Cold War activist, celebrating
the retreat of Soviet forces from his homeland, to a more moderate voice,
calling for friendly persuasion with the Taliban. Now, he is a hawk urging the
Taliban's destruction.
"Oil
Diplomacy Muddle Pursuit of Bin Laden New Book Claims" NewYork
Times
Greg Plast, "FBI
and US Spy Agencies Say Bush Spiked Bin Laden Probes Before September 11"
David B.Ottaway and Joe Stephens "Diplomats
Met With Taliban on Bin Laden" Washington Post Oct. 26
Some contend US missed its chance
Joe Conason, "House
Zealots Block Anti-Terror Efforts" New York Observer
The real menace is
posed by some of the country’s most powerful politicians, who remain
enthralled by a defunct ideology and engorged with corporate campaign
contributions.
The ideology is
right-wing extremism, characterized by an aversion to active government,
financed by corporate special interests and personified by the likes of Tom
DeLay and Dick Armey. Using their authority to stifle swift federal action,
Republican Congressional leaders are daily demonstrating how intellectually
unfit they are to cope with the current crisis
CIA,
FBI Disagree on Urgency of Warning" Los Angeles Times October
18, 2001
a CIA
cable transmitted Aug. 27 over a classified government computer network warned
that two "Bin Laden related individuals" had entered the United States
and that two other suspected terrorists should be barred from entering.
The CIA had already notified the White House and other senior policymakers in
early August that the exiled Saudi militant Osama bin Laden was determined to
launch a terrorist attack within the United States.
Martin Lee, "Anti-Terrorism
Questions for Bush" Consortium
Robert Scheer, "Bush's
Faustian Bargain with The Taliban" May 22, 2001
"...the recent
gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent
anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift..., makes
the U.S. the main sponsor of the Taliban ...
The Taliban may
suddenly be the dream regime of our own war drug war zealots, but in the end
this alliance will prove a costly failure. Our long sad history of signing up
dictators in the war on drugs demonstrates the futility of building a foreign
policy on a domestic obsession"
Wayne Madsen Why
Wasn't Bush Warned?
"the CIA and other
Bush administration officials who have had close contact with the Taliban should
be asked by Congress about the nature of their relationships with the protectors
of Bin Laden. For starters, CIA Director George Tenet should be asked what the
United States received in return for even talking to the brutal mullahs that run
Kabul. The State Department should be questioned as to why it has banned
Massoud's movement from occupying the vacant Afghan Embassy in Washington even
though it is recognized by the United Nations as the legitimate government of
Afghanistan.
At the very
least, the American people deserve to know why the Bush administration, through
its words and actions, has given tacit support to a government that has provided
safe haven to the man who may be the worst mass murderer of American civilians
in the nation's history. "
Bush
Ignored Hart-Rudman Commission Report on Terrorism
"Roadblocks
Cited In Effort to Trace Bin Laden's Money" New York Times
Sen.
Phil Gramm Blocked Bill to Trace Terrorist Money
The NY Times reports,
"Federal officials say they have not persuaded foreign banks to open
their books to investigators and that in this country, a law that would have
allowed the United States to penalize foreign banks that did not cooperate was
blocked last year by a single United States senator... The bill, introduced by
the Clinton administration, would give the Treasury secretary broad power to
bar foreign countries and banks from access to the American financial market
unless they cooperated with money-laundering investigations. It was strongly
opposed by the banking industry and [Senator Phil] Gramm. 'I was right then
and I am right now' in opposing the bill, Mr. Gramm said yesterday. He called
the bill 'totalitarian' and added, 'The way to deal with terrorists is to hunt
them down and kill them.'" According to the Times, Bin Laden's financial
methods have not changed since he worked "side by side with the C.I.A. to
support the rebels fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan."
Dick
Cheney: Friend of Terrorist Regimes
BBC:
FBI Ignored Leads
German
Newspaper Reports Echelon Gave Authorities Warning of Attacks
Times of India, "US
Had Specific Info on Laden"
The
US administration had very specific information about Osama Bin Laden, his
whereabouts, details of his al-Qaeda network and the degree of Pakistani
military and security involvement in Afghanistan as far back as March,
courtesy of the Russians, but still elected to take no action.
The latest issue of Jane's Intelligence Review, published from London,
says that Moscow's Permanent Mission at the United Nations "submitted an
unprecedentedly detailed report" to the UN Security Council six months
before the American atrocities.
According to Alex Standish, the editor of the Review, the attacks of September
11 were less of an American intelligence failure and more the result of US
inaction based on "a political decision not to act against Bin Laden."
Seymour Hersch, "What
Went Wrong: The CIA and the Failures of American Intelligence" THE
NEW YORKER
"After
more than
two weeks of around-the-clock investigation into the September 11th attacks on
the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the American intelligence community
remains confused, divided, and unsure about how the terrorists operated, how
many there were, and what they might do next. It was that lack of solid
information, government officials told me, that was the key factor behind the
Bush Administration's decision last week not to issue a promised white paper
listing the evidence linking Osama bin Laden's organization to the attacks."
Reuel Marc Gercht "The
Counterterrorist Myth" Atlantic July-August 2001
Katerina Dalacoura, "Islam and
Violence: Breaking the Link" Guardian Nov. 18
Western leaders have
emphasised time and again that this is not a war against Islam. But, to be heard
and believed, and therefore have some positive influence on the internal debate
on Islam and violence, they have to put their money where their mouth is. The
Palestinian issue and secondly, but equally importantly the Iraqi issue will
need to be resolved for any progress to be made in relations between the West
and the Muslim world.
President Bill Clinton,
"A
Struggle for the Soul of the 21st Century"
Clinton
gave a sensible speech, but
right-wingers lied about it
New
policies for a new world
The Royal United Services
Institute (RUSI) and the Guardian hosted a conference in London to examine key
issues and challenges in the aftermath of the attacks on the United States.
Speakers included the foreign office minister, Peter Hain, the historian
Professor Sir Michael Howard, Guardian journalists and security experts
Stanley Hoffman "On
the War" New York Review of Books
Foreign Policy in Focus "How
to Combat Terrorism"
Tariq Ali, "Alternatives
to Bombing" Independent (UK)
Richard Falk, "Defining a Just War" The Nation
The
war in Afghanistan against apocalyptic terrorism qualifies in my understanding
as the first truly just war since World War II. But the justice of the cause
and of the limited ends is in danger of being negated by the injustice of
improper means and excessive ends. Unlike World War II and prior just wars,
this one can be won only if tactics adhere to legal and moral constraints on
the means used to conduct it, and to limited ends.
"Critique
of Richard Falk on Just War" Z Magazine
The Nation "The
Limits of War" (editorial)
We believe that
America has a right to act in self-defense, including military action, in
response to a vicious, deadly attack on US soil by a terrorist network
identified with Osama bin Laden. There is a real threat of further attacks,
so, ... action designed to hunt down members of
the terrorist network and those in the Taliban government who collaborate with
it is appropriate.
But acknowledging a
right of response is by no means an endorsement of unlimited force. We must
act effectively but within a framework of moral and legal restraint. Our
concern is that air strikes and other military actions may not accomplish the
ends we endorse and may exacerbate the situation, kindling unrest in other
countries and leading to a wider war. They have already triggered bloody riots
in Pakistan and Indonesia and on the West Bank, where the cease-fire is in
shreds.
Ted Rall, A
Rational Alternative to Thoughtless Bombing"
AlterNet
October 17, 2001
the right-wingers are
absolutely correct when they assert that doing nothing is not a viable option.
Whether we had September 11th coming or not, giving peace a chance is a
supreme act of self-denial: there is no peace. Whether the victims cry for
vengeance or not is moot: no nation is worthy of the name unless it's willing
to react to the murder of its citizens with force. Bush is, like it or not,
doing something. People respect that, even if that something later turns out
to be counterproductive.
There is, however, an intelligent middle ground between the
commonly-considered binary of mindless bombing versus mindless pacifism.
Neither liberal nor conservative, a thoughtful solution can be found by
applying what we Americans do best: simple common sense.
Paul Starr, "The
War We Should Fight"
Let
there be no doubt that America is justified in going to war against what
President Bush describes as terrorism of "global reach." After
September 11, we have to assume that any group willing to kill thousands of
people in the World Trade Center's twin towers would be willing to use weapons
of mass destruction. We have every right to defend ourselves by pursuing such
terrorists not only in the United States and nations that ally themselves with
us, but also in the countries that provide havens for them.
Yet while a war is
justified, it is not at all clear what kind of war it should be. There are
both practical and moral risks of overextending American power and generating
new troubles for ourselves and our friends in the Islamic world.
Philip
Wilcox, The
Terror" New York Review of Books
a new
national security strategy must also include a broader foreign policy that
moves away from unilateralism and toward closer engagement with other
governments, and that deals not just with the symptoms but with the roots of
terrorism, broadly defined.
Paul Berman "Terror
and Liberalism" The American Prospect
...we
are dealing with movements of millions, who can only be persuaded, not forced.
We need the Arab radicals and Islamists to adopt a new outlook--not all of
them, but enough to discourage the others. And what might bring about such a
change? It would have to be something like the pressure that encouraged the
communists of Eastern Europe to adopt new outlooks of their own: the pressure
of a long Cold War (which was sometimes hot), culminating in the pressure of
dissidents and critics at home, whose persistent campaigns and superior
arguments made the Communists lose heart. And the long campaign against Arab
radicalism and Islamicism that has now begun will have to resemble the Cold
War in yet another respect. It will have to be a war of ideas--the liberal
ideal against the ideal of a blocklike, unchanging society; the idea of
freedom against the idea of absolute truth; the idea of diversity against the
idea
of purity; the idea of change and novelty against the idea of total stability;
the idea of rational lucidity
against the instinct of superstitious hatred.
Morton Halperin "Collective
Security" The American Prospect
The Bush
administration has a unique opportunity to create effective domestic and
international structures to deal not only with terrorism but with the other
twenty-first-century threats to national and international security.
To do so, the
administration will need to maintain its resoluteness but also change its
fundamental approach in relating to the rest of the world. Before the
terrorist attacks, the United States was telling other countries that it would
do what it wanted to do and that they could like it or not and cooperate or
not, as they chose. Now we are demanding that they follow our lead and
actively back American counterterrorism efforts. At least the administration
recognizes that it needs the help and cooperation of other states; but it
still does not understand that, even in the face of this tragedy, support over
the long run cannot be commanded. We must earn the right to lead by showing
that we care about the interests and views of others and are prepared to work
together to craft solutions that respond to others' perception of threats as
well as to our own.
How
to Defeat Bin Laden
France
Calls for American Reason
Harold
Meyerson, "Life, Liberty, and the Obligation to Defend Both"
Harold
Meyerson, "The
New Cold War"
The new
war against terrorism, like the cold war against Soviet totalitiarinism can be
fought with a reactionary or a progressive program.
David
Moberg, "The
Pursuit of Justice: A Rational Response to Terror"
"Labeling
the acts as war risks leading the United States into a strategy that may only
enlarge the catastrophe. Just as the attack demonstrated the vulnerability of
the world's only superpower, the response needs to recognize the limits of force
and violence as a solution. Rabid hawks--like Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Rick
Santorum, who called for vengeance not justice, and conservative leader William
Bennett, who called for a bloody war against 'radical Islam'--represent the kind
of shoot-first, think-later (if ever) response that is likely to lead to more
terrorist attacks on the United States and the massacre of civilians elsewhere
in the world."
Joe W. Pitts III, "Show
Us Your Evidence"
Michael Walzer, "First,
Define the Battlefield" New York Times
"Rallying the nation
against dark forces may accomplish the administration's political
objectives--putting a white hat on Bush while priming public opinion for the
counterattack, and death of more innocent people, that is sure to follow. But
pandering to people's fear of evil does nothing to promote peace. Indeed, it
stokes the worst in human nature. ..."
|
