War Against Terrorism
"By contrast, Bush Jr. has discovered the
perfect way to avoid his father's
fate — war without end. The war against
terror can go on indefinitely because,
unlike the Gulf War, or World War II or
even the Cold War, it involves no
measurable criteria of success."
By Thomas Walkom
Toronto Star
The war against terrorism is a brilliant
construct. It may not have been started
by George W. Bush, but it certainly works
to his advantage.
It has provided oomph to the sagging
U.S. economy and a new raison d'être for
the alliance of politicos, defence contractors
and security specialists who make up what
former U.S. president Dwight Eisenhower
christened the military-industrial complex.
What makes this war so superior, in political terms,
is its vagueness. Since the terrorist, by definition,
can be anyone — the man in the next apartment,
the person lurking on the subway platform — we
can never be sure who the enemy is.
More important, we can never know when we've won.
As a result, this war has the capacity to go on
forever. It will be called off only when those
in charge choose to do so. And why would they?
Thanks to the war, Bush has been transformed
from a figure of fun into a national icon.
Before Sept. 11, the U.S. president was viewed
as a slightly moronic frat boy — mocked even
on prime-time television. The very legitimacy
of his election was in question.
Now the frat boy is a war president, every
patriotic American's commander-in-chief.
Those who mock Bush now — those who even
dare criticize him — do so at their peril.
For Bush, an end to the war against terrorism
could spell political disaster. Look what
happened to his father. George Bush Sr.
was an immensely popular president when
he was waging war against Iraq. But as soon
as the fighting stopped, his ratings tumbled.
Without war to focus their attention,
Americans remembered why they disliked
the elder Bush and threw him out of the
White House.
By contrast, Bush Jr. has discovered the
perfect way to avoid his father's
fate — war without end. The war against
terror can go on indefinitely because,
unlike the Gulf War, or World War II or
even the Cold War, it involves no
measurable criteria of success.
Is Afghanistan defeated and its former
Taliban government in chains? No matter,
says U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Afghanistan is small potatoes, the Taliban
mere tools. The terrorists, we are told,
live on. They are everywhere, part of
the international conspiracy known as Al Qaeda.
Yet even Al Qaeda escapes definition. Each time
its alleged leaders are identified, we are warned
that more are hiding in the shadows. And whenever
the world's attention flags, a new discovery
is made. A notebook found in a bombed-out
house in Kabul proves that Al Qaeda is planning
a nuclear attack. A videotape found in Singapore demonstrates that Al Qaeda is preparing
another terror bombing.
Luckily for us, these fanatic anti-modernists
make plenty of videos. They video each other
plotting, video attack plans, video their
dinner parties, then leave the videos lying about.
Luckily also, they write down many of their
schemes in English. In November, for instance,
journalists searching through a Kabul home said
to be an Al Qaeda training centre found
hand-printed plans, in English, on how to
manufacture a multi-million-dollar, homemade
stealth bomber.
Other reporters found jars of "foul smelling
liquids" and notebooks filled with equations,
all of which were taken as evidence of an
Al Qaeda germ warfare factory.
Even when the New York Times reported
that the most well-publicized find — plans
for the manufacture of a homemade nuclear
bomb — had probably been cribbed from
a hoax website, the thunder of fear and
condemnation continued.
Not since novelist Ian Fleming invented
SPECTRE, the shadowy force of evil dedicated
to eliminating 007 agent James Bond, has
the world's imagination been seized in quite
the same way. Is there a rebellion in
the Philippines? Al Qaeda is responsible.
A plot in Malaysia? Al Qaeda again.
Like Fleming's SPECTRE, Al Qaeda has
access to unlimited funds. Its leaders,
like the villains of Bond movies, live
in vast underground complexes staffed
by fanatical minions.
Even the occasional intervention of reality
has no effect. In Afghanistan, the underground
complexes turn out to be cramped, primitive
caves rather than sumptuous subterranean cities.
No matter. All it proves is that the real Al Qaeda headquarters are somewhere else — perhaps Yemen
or Somalia.
In George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four,
the enemy of the state is personified
in Emmanuel Goldstein. Goldstein is
the Osama bin Laden figure of the novel,
an elusive figure who is never seen,
never captured but believed by all
patriotic citizens of Oceania
(Orwell's fictitious state, an amalgamation
of North America and Europe) to be an evil
genius bent on their destruction.
Since Goldstein is never captured, Oceania's
battle against him must never cease. Sometime
it wages war on one country said to be aiding
the nefarious Goldstein, sometimes on another.
The battleground may change but the war never
ends. It cannot. The government's very existence
depends upon it.
torontostar.com |
