SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FaultLine who wrote (297)9/18/2001 8:03:21 PM
From: alanrs  Respond to of 281500
 
Post from T Lo's thread, and others. Worth spreading around. Says a lot of the things I've thought when reading some posters. FWIW

argument.independent.co.uk

Anti-Americanism blinds the left to what's at stake
'I hear people say they are more worried by Bush than by anything Osama bin Laden might be considering'
Anne McElvoy

19 September 2001

Terrorists committed a mass execution of American citizens. This must, of course, be America's fault. It had it coming for being arrogant. It had it coming for supporting Israel. They had it coming for being so big and rich. In short, it had it coming for being America. The best thing that any self- respecting British liberal sort can do at this time is thus counsel that retaliation would be "proportionate" (what, as in 5,000-plus of their civilians, one for each killed in the World Trade Centre last Tuesday?)

The chorus of opinion has moved rapidly to articulate what measures we should not support, and what we should not do rather than what we should. On the face of it, this sounds like wise advice. No position is more agreeable to occupy than that of the voice of sound moderation, accusing others of extremism.

But I know the beginning of a slanted argument when I hear one and this is not a debate: it's an attempt to close down debate. The response of much left-of-centre comment on this side of the Atlantic has been to suggest that sweet reason, humanity and logic demand we should be intensely sceptical, if not downright hostile, to American intentions. It equates being in favour of military action with being some sort of crypto right-winger who can think of no better idea than to blast a few goat herds to kingdom come.

The tactic is depressingly familiar to anyone who had to fight it out with unilateralists during the Cold War ("Oh, so you're in favour of another Hiroshima and nuclear winter and making the planet uninhabitable...")

I should say that I appreciate how worried many people are by what to do next and how genuine their fears are. But the doctrine of "do nothing " (or "do little") can also be a handy way of concealing a gut anti-Americanism. There is something profoundly distasteful in the posture that the US must "look at" what it might have done to deserve the annihilation of thousands of its citizens, as if blame could be evenly shared out.

Reason is a delicate plant and one easily trodden under the stampede of the herd. I hear sensible people say that they are more worried by President George Bush's actions than by anything Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein have done or might be considering. Really, truly?

I hear people laughing at Bush's folksy language, as if it were an essential part of the Presidential brief to respect the rhetorical tastes of the British intelligentsia when an act of warfare has been perpetrated inside his country. What will the anti-Americans find to say when the US finally does react? The whole swelling orchestration of negativity is intended to create an atmosphere in which anything that it does, however carefully considered, is deemed to be wrong.

One of the strategic aims of all terrorists is to undermine the sense of identity and cohesion in the targeted state or institutions. If they can reduce their opponents to panicked squabbling hoards, so much the better. They are already on their way to succeeding in Britain, rather too well.

These are times when liberals and the centre-left have a special duty to think about how to use military power for the good. That cannot be done by ramping up inchoate fear rather than a sense of quiet purpose in defeating a deadly common enemy.

For me, being on the centre-left when it comes to the international role of the major democracies means not walking away from these choices. Unlike the isolationist sections of the right, we simply don't have the option of shrugging, "What a world!" and applying blinkers when we don't want to address the roots of evil.

This was the real danger of George Bush – the threat that under his leadership, America would turn inwards and spend its time counting its vast wealth and admiring itself in the glass, instead of acting as a force for good in the wider world. That is no longer an option. The isolationism of conservative America was blown apart last week. But what about the isolationism of liberal Europe?

The era of instant news breeds instant opinion to distort judgement. "Everyone" now knows that Osama bin Laden was a CIA creation. Yet the Independent on Sunday's investigation on the matter concludes that bin Laden may well not have been financed by the CIA at all. The myth that he did may be the result of confusion about Mujahedin factions.

Me, I don't know whether the CIA funded bin Laden. I do know from grinding experience on similar topics that these things are very difficult to find out with any certainty.

America's strategy is far more refined than its foes here suppose. They do seem to think Americans are genetically stupid. It is also more subtle than George Bush's warlike rhetoric. (Frankly, I could do with a bit less of that too, but then he's their president). As for the notion that it would all be different if only that nice Bill Clinton was still in charge, we are clearly in the grip of post-presidential delusion syndrome.

Clinton was a class act and a great guy and all of that. But when it came to intervention abroad , he was a very partial success, led all too often by exclusively domestic considerations. It was Clinton who rained 70 pointless missiles on Afghanistan in 1998 and hit the wrong targets in Sudan in reprisal for the US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. If you want to protest about gesture bombing, a measure carried out to appease the appetite for revenge, rather than for any rational military strategy, then Clinton's your bad guy.

For all the pious injunctions to America not to "over-react", there has been has been no immediate miscalculation by Bush. All the signs are that his administration is pursuing a point-by-point strategy: first build a coalition with Pakistan. Then locate the prime suspect, Osama bin Laden. Next, apply pressure on the Mujahedin from Pakistan to extradite him. If that fails, which it very well might, prepare for a prolonged special forces offensive with bases inside Afghanistan and possibly Iraq aimed at destroying terrorist hideouts. Cruise missile strikes may well follow – but the signs are that Washington is clearer this time about their limited usefulness than it was three years ago.

These are not stupid responses to what has happened. The naive and damaging position is to imagine that if we do nothing, terrorists will give up and go home. Modern terrorists are highly mobile, but not entirely free-range creatures. They seeks out sponsor states and are parasitic upon them. Any attempt to bring them to justice entails defeating the power which shields them.

Beyond the sound and fury, Britain does have a role and a proud one. It is not in restraining hot-headed Bush, but in helping ensure that the Atlantic alliance holds together in Europe, with each country contributing to the effort in a way which is politically acceptable and which creates the most unity, rather than the most discord. That is the proper response of democracies under threat. Anything else is irresponsible naivete.



To: FaultLine who wrote (297)9/18/2001 10:09:17 PM
From: SirRealist  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Bush Visits Mosque to Forestall Hate Crimes
President Condemns an Increase in Violence Aimed at Arab Americans


By Dana Milbank and Emily Wax
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, September 18, 2001; Page A01

President Bush, briefly setting aside his war planning efforts, visited the mosque at the Islamic Center of Washington yesterday to admonish the nation not to avenge last week's terrorist attacks on innocent American Arabs and Muslims.

In a gesture that surprised and gratified Islamic leaders, Bush stepped up an already intense effort by his administration to prevent hate crimes and discrimination against nearly 10 million American Arabs and Muslims in retaliation for the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks by Middle Eastern terrorists.

"The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam," said the president, escorted by Islamic clerics into the ornate mosque full of Turkish tile, Persian rugs and Egyptian paintings. "Islam is peace."

Quoting from the Koran's prohibitions against evil, Bush said women who cover their heads should not fear leaving their homes. "That's not the America I know," he said. "That should not and that will not stand in America."

Bush's appearance at the mosque -- rare for an American president -- comes at a time when Muslims and Arab Americans are alarmed by threats of violence. Attorney General John D. Ashcroft said the FBI had initiated 40 hate crimes investigations involving reported attacks on Arab American citizens and institutions. Among them is the case of a Pakistani Muslim store owner who was shot and killed in Dallas Saturday evening.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations said it has received reports of more than 350 attacks against Arab Americans around the country, ranging from verbal harassment to physical assaults. It also received reports of dozens of mosques firebombed or vandalized.

In Palos Hills, Ill., two Muslim girls were beaten at Moraine Valley College. In Evansville, Ind., a man driving 80 mph rammed his car into a mosque. In both cases, police arrested suspects. Fairfax County police are investigating two weekend bias crimes they say may be linked to the terror attacks.

There have also been many reported assaults against people who look Middle Eastern but are not. A Sikh gas station owner in Mesa, Ariz., was shot and killed this weekend. Another Sikh was arrested by Providence, R.I., police on a train because he was carrying a dagger, a Sikh religious icon. Sikhs are neither Arab nor Muslim; they are adherents of a separate religion, generally from India, and wear turbans and beards.

The worries were evident locally at the Washington Islamic Academy in Springfield yesterday, where security guards patrolled the parking lot and jittery students hugged their parents twice before strapping on their backpacks.

The school's principal, Saleh Nusairat, issued memos to its teachers, asking them to explain that Islam and Muslims do not tolerate such acts and that, "We condemn this evil action regardless of who committed it."

In Eloise Shim's English class, students wrote essays about the World Trade Center attacks. "They think that Muslims did it and I feel terrible," wrote Kamran Adil, 10. "My dad says that if someone comes into my school I should lie down on the floor and pretend I am dead so I don't get hurt."

Some of the students said they felt nervous and even embarrassed about being Muslims. Teachers tried to send a clear message: "Be proud you are a Muslim American," said Yasmeen Asfar, an art teacher at the Al-Qalam All Girls School, which is housed above the Washington Islamic Academy and has about 80 students in fifth to 10th grade.

"It's very, very sad news. It's very terrible," Asfar told students at a special assembly yesterday. "And it's also not good to think bad things about Muslims. If it is Muslims who did it, then it's not fair to blame all Muslims."

For the president, the quickly arranged visit (planning began at 6 p.m. Sunday) in defense of American Muslims contributed to two goals aside from the benefit of discouraging intolerance. It was part of an effort, urged by deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley, to convince would-be partners overseas that the U.S. effort is not anti-Arab or anti-Islam but anti-terrorist.

At the same time, it buttressed Bush's image as a "compassionate conservative" and earned him praise from leaders of the nation's Muslim and Arab population. A White House official involved in the effort said the two goals are intertwined. "The president wanted to send a strong signal" to American Muslims, the official said, predicting it "certainly will reverberate around the world."

Yesterday's appearance by Bush follows a vigorous effort by his administration over the last week to discourage anti-Muslim and anti-Arab sentiment. Bush aides arranged for an Islamic imam, Muzammil H. Siddiqi, to speak at last Friday's memorial at the National Cathedral. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Assistant Attorney General Ralph F. Boyd Jr. have met with Arab American leaders, and Ashcroft is scheduled to do so today.

Bush, Ashcroft and Powell have made it a point to defend Muslims and Arab Americans, and all have been careful not to use words such as "Islamic" or "Muslim" when describing the terrorists. The government's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Civil Rights Commission issued statements calling for tolerance.

Islamic leaders say the administration's efforts, combined with a resolution in Congress calling for protection of the civil rights of Arab Americans and Muslims, have helped to limit violence and discrimination. "Americans have shown great maturity," said Sayyid M. Syeed, secretary general of the Islamic Society of North America. "The number of support calls and visits to Islamic centers to show solidarity by far outnumber the nasty phone calls and attacks. This is what makes us proud to be Americans."

White House officials and Arab groups say there are about 6.5 million Muslims in the United States, fewer than a million of whom are Arabs. Of the roughly 3.5 million Arab Americans, 80 percent are Christian. While Arab Americans are influential in critical electoral states such as Michigan, James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, said Bush had little to gain politically. "They have a noble, moral reason, and also a reason with foreign policy consequences," he said.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower opened the mosque at the Islamic Center of Washington half a century ago. One of the country's oldest, the mosque is a familiar part of Washington's skyline, with its 160-foot minaret towering over Rock Creek where Massachusetts Avenue crosses it.

After a private meeting with Islamic leaders, Bush removed his shoes and entered the elaborately decorated sanctuary, with colorful Turkish tiles, an Egyptian chandelier and bookshelves full of copies of the Koran. A schedule of prayer times on the wall included a notation on September 11: "HAVE MERCY!"

Visiting between the noon and afternoon prayers, Bush spoke from a lectern in front of the qibla, the altar worshipers face when praying in the direction of Mecca. Over his left shoulder, written in Arabic, was the phrase: "In the name of Allah, the All Forgiving, the Most Compassionate."

Describing Muslims as doctors, lawyers, soldiers and parents, Bush demanded that they be treated respectfully. "Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don't represent the best of America, they represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior," he said.

Bush had been scheduled to meet with prominent Islamic leaders in the White House last Tuesday, but the meeting was called off because of the terrorist strikes.

One of the Islamic leaders who was to have attended that meeting was Siddiqi, who came from Orange County, Calif. Stranded in Washington, Siddiqi was asked by Bush aides to speak at last Friday's memorial.

Siddiqi, who has returned to California, said he gives "great credit" to Bush for easing anti-Muslim emotions -- and said he is spreading that message through the Middle East in radio and television interviews in Arabic. "I'm telling them, yes, there's a concern," Siddiqi said. "But by and large this country is showing great maturity in a time of trial and pain."

Staff writer Hanna Rosin contributed to this report.

© 2001 The Washington Post Company