After Bali: Has Bush succeeded in war obsession against terrorism?<\/p>\n
Abdillah Toha, Executive Director, Institute for Socio-Economic
\nand Political Studies (In-SEP), Jakarta<\/p>\n
One year after the Sept. 11 attack we should ask ourselves
\nhonestly whether the world has become a safer place and whether
\nBush has succeeded in the \"war against terror\". We have quite
\noften heard statements made by the Pentagon and the White House
\nthat the war in Afghanistan was conducted successfully with
\nminimum casualties on the part of the allied forces.<\/p>\n
The Taliban and its militant gang has been routed, its
\nfinancial sources have been cut off, its leaders and followers
\nare now either killed or scattered in variously remote places
\nwithout much capacity to re-organize effectively. A new and
\n\"legitimate\" government has been installed in Kabul and
\nreconstruction of the devastated country is now under way.<\/p>\n
Now, less than one year after the siege began in Afghanistan,
\nthere are clear indications of a new escalation and revival of
\nterror. The recent barbaric slaughter of hundreds of innocent
\ncivilians in Kuta, Bali is the climax of the new terror. Less
\nthan 10 days before the Bali bomb attack, there were at least two
\nother incidence of terrorism, a suicide bombing of French tanker
\noff the coast of Aden and an individual attack on the U.S. Marine
\ncamp in Kuwait, which killed one U.S. marine and two Kuwaiti
\nsoldiers.<\/p>\n
Five days after the Bali tragedy, at least six people died and
\nmore than 140 seriously injured when two bombs exploded in
\ndifferent public places in Zamboanga, Southern Philippines. We
\ncould still add a longer list of deadly incidents since Bush
\ndeclared the war on terror before the joint session of Congress,
\nsuch as what happened in a Pakistani attack on a busful of French
\nmilitary advisers and on innocent people attending Christian
\nchurches there, and on the U.S. Consulate in Pakistan.<\/p>\n
Although the Bush administration frequently warns the American
\npublic that the war on terrorism is not going to be short and
\nconclusive, could we possibly conclude that we have made progress
\nin reducing the risk of terror. What kind of yardstick should we
\nuse? Is it the number of \"enemies\" killed, the sum of people
\ninterrogated and detained, or the replacement of a hostile regime
\nwith a friendly one?<\/p>\n
Or, should we measure the success and failure of the war
\nagainst terror with the frequency and quality of terrorist
\nattacks following the various military and security measures
\ntaken after the attack on New York?<\/p>\n
In the war against terrorism, we can only say that we have won
\nthe war if the terrorists have been completely stopped, or at the
\nvery least, that there are clear signs of a drastic reduction in
\nthe threat of terrorism. The evidence cited above are contrary to
\nthis. One year after Sept. 11, people are now much more
\napprehensive about terrorist attacks and the facts, especially
\nthe huge bomb explosion in Kuta, undeniably draw our attention to
\nthe escalation of terror.<\/p>\n
If we accept the above observation, the first step the world
\nshould take is to be brave enough to admit that the American way
\nof fighting terrorism has so far been a failure. The world, under
\nthe collective leadership of the United Nations should now
\nsincerely reverse its mindset and look for more effective short-
\nterm and long-term ways of eradicating terrorism.<\/p>\n
This is not to say that military and security deterrence
\nshould be completely abandoned, but we should acknowledge the
\ncold facts that those alone might not lead us to the achievement
\nof our common goal, but could perhaps even encourage a further
\nescalation of terror in the future.<\/p>\n
Being the strongest economic and military power in the world,
\nAmerica should still be in the forefront in the fight against
\nglobal terrorism using its abundant resources. But this time
\nAmerica should declare war not only against terrorism, but also
\nconcurrently against poverty, against world economic inequity and
\nagainst state terror, especially in the occupied territories of
\nPalestine.<\/p>\n
President Bush should lead the world against corrupt dictators
\nand tyrants who oppress whole societies, against unilateralism,
\nagainst international financial speculators and greedy trans-
\nnational corporations responsible for ecological damage. The
\nworld is sick, and the problems faced globally are multi-faceted,
\nhence declaring a war against terrorism alone without fighting
\nthe root causes is doomed to fail. Terrorism, as has often been
\ndiscussed, is not a cause but rather a product of so many other
\nills in the world.<\/p>\n
The fight against terrorism will only succeed if it gets the
\nsupport of the majority of the world population, especially those
\nwho feel marginalized. Once they are convinced that wealthy and
\npowerful countries are sincere in their efforts to help them get
\nfix their own deficiencies, there is no doubt that rich and poor
\npeople in the world would work hand-in-hand to make sure that the
\nworld is a safe place and that no tolerance should be given to
\nany kind of violent act.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately hawks that believe that military power alone can
\nprovide effective deterrence to the \"enemies\" of the free world
\nnow surround Bush. Sophisticated weaponry has proven incapable of
\ndeterring unseen enemies.<\/p>\n
The US$40 billion military expenditure planned for the war to
\noust Saddam Hussein of Iraq could well be placed in a much better
\nway to feed the hungry and build schools and hospitals for the
\npoor in Asia, Africa and Latin America.<\/p>\n
Success in the war against global terrorism would be
\nguaranteed if American foreign policy were based on a new
\ndefinition of its national interest that coincides with short and
\nlong term global interests and respect for a truly just cause.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/after-bali-has-bush-succeeded-in-war-obsession-against-terrorism-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}