|
Home
Search
Subscribe Online
Archives
About
Us
Cartoons
Online
Book Store
E-Greetings
Jobs @ MG
Advertise
on MG
Our
Team
Contact Us
Muslim
Matrimonials
Our Advertisers
| |
An Overview of the global war against
terrorism
By Syed Shahabuddin
 Mankind
has unequivocally and universally condemned the terrorist attack on the
USA on 11 September, 2001 as a crime against humanity, as an outrage
against conscience, and expressed its unreserved sympathy for the victims,
irrespective of their nationality or religion. Practically all states have
offered, in principle, all possible cooperation to the USA in its resolve
to root out terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, from all parts
of the globe. Some have joined the USA-led alliance and are privy to its
war plans. But while preparing to ‘smoke out’ Osama bin Laden from his
shelter in Afghanistan by all possible means, the USA and its allies have
wisely taken note of the criticism of USA goals, immediate and long-term,
and of the legality and effectiveness of the methods contemplated.
The USA is now making a distinction between Osama bin Laden, the Afghan
people and the Taliban regime, which is still in control of the Afghan
territory and commands the allegiance of a majority of the Afghan people,
though it is now recognized only by Pakistan. The stated goal of the US
military action now no longer mentions bombing Afghanistan ‘back to the
Stone Age’, which would have implied killing of hundreds of thousands of
innocent Afghans. It has even disavowed the goal of toppling the Taliban
regime, so long as it does not impede the capture of Osama, leaving it to
the continuing civil war, which appears to have gathered momentum since 11
September and to the emergence of the ex-King Zahir Shah as the head of an
interim national Government. By delaying military action, the USA is not
only trying to ensure the success of its pin-pointed intervention when it
comes but also to reduce loss of life and property to the minimum. It has
created the impression that it is not acting hastily, in anger or revenge,
but executing a well-considered plan to achieve an objective which
generally enjoys the overall support of the people of the world.
Yet, critical questions remain to be answered. While the USA may have
showed the evidence it has to link Osama bin Laden or the Taliban with the
terrorist outrage, to its close allies, it is yet to place them before
such staunch supporters like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan which were
to play key role in the USA strategy, and before the people of the world
who remain sceptical about the world outreach of an individual, or his
terrorist network.
Secondly, the UN Security Council has reiterated no doubt its condemnation
of terrorism but has not sanctioned unilateral use of force by the USA.
The USA may not care but the world would have been more satisfied if the
military operations against Afghanistan were not taken unilaterally but
under the UN flag. The basic dilemma is whether US undertakes this
operation as right of self-defence under Article 51, or as the head of a
UN collective operation to eliminate a threat to world peace. Self-defence
plea by a superpower against an individual looks ridiculous to many
people. It is doubtful whether the UN Charter when it was adopted
envisaged aggression against sovereign states by individuals or private
groups in the form of terrorist strikes. The UN system is an inter-state
system and is designed to deal with the relationship of states with each
other which are held accountable for their action and inaction, in the
larger interest of world peace and stability. The Charter cannot envisage
chasing shadows but responsible and accountable states. What the world
needs is a comprehensive UN Convention against Terrorism which obliges
states to cooperate politically, economically and militarily, to fight
terrorist networks across the globe and defines terrorism to take in acts
of terrorism, internal or international, by individuals, groups or states,
directed against states or their people, or a section thereof, to overawe
them, in order to promote or gain a political objective.
Thirdly, Osama bin Laden has repeatedly linked his hostility to the USA
and even his ‘Islamic’ zeal to the USA military presence in the Arab
Peninsula, of which Saudi Arabia occupies nearly 75%, and to the USA
policy towards Palestine. While the first factor is not widely known nor
does it evoke much reaction, being limited in scope, the second, indeed,
is the basic source of the widely prevalent antipathy, nay, hostility,
towards the USA throughout the world particularly in the Arab and Muslim
world. One hoped that the USA would, at this tragic moment, engage in
introspection as to why, despite its unquestionable greatness as the most
powerful State in human history, and, its unparalleled contribution to the
progress and welfare of mankind in many fields and its generous sharing of
its wealth with the stricken people everywhere, it does not command love.
Perhaps, the powerful do not need nor care for love. But the USA must try
to understand the genesis of the condensed anger and frozen hatred which
motivates fanatics to hurt it, at the cost of their own lives. There is no
sign yet that the US has undertaken any review of its long-term policy
towards Israel which exists only because of continuous flow of US aid,
military and financial, and more so, towards the Palestinian people who
have been defrauded at every turn and robbed of their homeland, and today
live at the mercy of Israel, like animals in cages! It has even made no
attempt to restrain Israel from committing ever-expanding punitive acts
against the civil population, which have reached new levels of savagery
since 11 September, with anti-Muslim and anti-Arab waves which have surged
in the West and even reached our shores. This is an unfortunate
development as terrorism has no religion and no habitation. In India, we
recognize the many features of terrorism which are not limited to any
particular religion or ethnicity or locale.
Also there is no doubt, considerable resentment in many parts of the world
towards the hypocrisy implicit in the USA consistently chanting democracy
and supporting dictators, evoking freedom and repressing people! USA also
comes in for criticism for adopting double standards even in humanitarian
situations. But such criticism presupposes the hope and trust the people
of the world repose in the capacity of the USA to set things right, to put
the world on the right course.
The USA has so far failed to show full consciousness of its moral
responsibility as the only superpower today. Terrorism arising out of a
deep sense of national grievance or ethnic humiliation or religious
persecution cannot be eradicated from the face of the earth through
military means but only through political means. People of the world,
above all, want peace and justice. They all believe that no cause,
howsoever just, can justify the cold-blooded massacre of innocent human
beings; they are all prepared to engage the scourge of terrorism in a
global campaign but not selectively.
Finally, by focusing so far on Osama bin Laden in the first phase and by
arousing but not fulfilling the expectations of other States and peoples
which have been targets of terrorism, indigenous as well as imported, for
decades, the USA has failed to harness, in full measure, mankind’s
profound revulsion in the wake of 11 September tragedy. The least that
could be done by the US policy planners, by themselves or through the UN
system, is to take the initiative to build an international structure
against terrorism in all its forms and manifestation and at the same time
revive and reinforce the UN machinery to tackle the political roots of
terrorism. q |
Subscribe
Now
|
