Are You Ready?
The war's going well this week. But will our resolve last?
opinionjournal.com
BY PETE DU PONT
Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:01 a.m. EST
Polls tell us that over 80% of the American people support President Bush's war on terrorism. But what exactly are we supporting?
Certainly most Americans support the killing or capture of Osama bin Laden and the overthrow of the Taliban, aid to the victims of Sept. 11 (which include civic, governmental and private institutions as well as individuals) and the strengthening of the CIA, FBI and other agencies to protect our citizens and homeland. We are pretty resolute on these matters, at least in the providing of money and expanded government authority to carry them out.
But suppose that tomorrow morning U.S. special forces killed bin Laden, and his body was identified for all to see. Americans would rejoice, celebrate our military prowess and the leadership of our president, breathe a sigh of relief. Then what?
Would the war against terrorism now be won? No, we would have eliminated only the tip of the iceberg; one terrorist would be gone, but terrorism would not. President Bush understands that, as he puts it, "the only possible response" to terrorism "is to confront it and defeat it" in a global search-and-destroy mission. As he said at the United Nations on Saturday, we "will defend ourselves and our future against terror and lawless violence," because "there is no isolation from evil."
But what about the rest of us? Will we have the courage and the commitment to prosecute a total war on terrorism, or with the death of bin Laden will we declare the World Trade Center and the Pentagon avenged, and demand a return to normalcy?
Are we prepared to reinstitute a military draft to train and deploy the young men and women we will need to fight this war? To postpone other government spending to free up the resources to fight a billion-dollar-a-month, decade-long war on terrorism?
Will we be willing to support what will amount to serious racial profiling at home to prevent other Islamic terrorists from entering America? "Of the 22 suspects on the FBI's 'most wanted list' of international terrorists, all are Arabic, all are practitioners of Islam and all come from known state incubators of terrorism in the Middle East," Jason Riley wrote in The Wall Street Journal last month. Last year 60,500 visas were issued to Saudi citizens, 14,300 to Syrians, 3,000 to Iraqis and some 100,000 more to citizens of other Arab nations. The State Department reports there has been no change in visa policy since Sept. 11. Shouldn't there be?
Are we willing to require every American citizen to carry a national ID card? Oracle CEO Larry Ellison offered to donate his company's thumbprint technology to such a cause. When we want to fly or travel or buy weapons, we would be required to put our thumb on a scanner to verify who we are. Such cards would improve homeland security (with the added benefit of dramatically reducing voter fraud). As Mr. Ellison pointed out, if airlines had been able to cross-check passenger lists against a terrorism watch list many of the hijackers would have been caught before they boarded their flights to Boston. Have we the national will to demand that Congress enact a national ID requirement?
Are Americans committed to waging a wider international war against terrorism? To follow the money and anthrax trails wherever they may lead, to Iraq, Syria or Saudi Arabia? We know that Iraq has been training Islamic terrorists, and has the capacity to wage chemical and biological warfare. A Journal of Middle East Policy article several years ago reported that Saddam Hussein had 3,100 gallons of botulism germs, 2,200 of anthrax and 1,400 of gangrene formulation; no doubt he has more today. If the trail leads to Baghdad, are willing to do in Iraq what we are doing in Afghanistan?
If it takes a state to support terrorism, are we ready to use military force to root out terrorists in the states that do? Even if our international coalition partners and the United Nations are opposed, forcing us to go it alone?
Are we ready to export and encourage the ideas and policies of democratic capitalism--markets, individualism, personal freedoms and property rights--that have historically proved to be the only means of alleviating the terrible poverty and despair that exists in poor societies as so many Muslim nations are?
And are we willing to do all of the above, which we must to win a final victory over terrorism, in the face of nightmare scenarios that may well come true over the next few years? If Saddam lobs a missile into Israel, will we retaliate? Or will we follow State Department advice for a measured, nonconfrontational response? If the government of Pakistan falls, civil war breaks out and India is threatened, does the antiterrorism war continue?
For bin Laden and the al Qaeda organization the ultimate goal probably is to bring down the Saudi kingdom. With Saudi resources they could wreak broad and vicious havoc across the world and build the Muslim dominance they seek. How will America prop up a government that seems to sympathize with radical terrorists and still continue the war against terrorism?
Well, you say, we will have to see how it goes. Yes we will. But it is fair to say that the future security and safety of our nation depends on positive answers to most of these questions.
Students and parents, ACLU liberals and Akron blue-collar workers, professors and guys who go bowling may not yet have thought it all through as carefully as President Bush has. But they must, for the nation will need their support when the going gets tough.
Mr. du Pont, a former governor of Delaware, is policy chairman of the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis. His column appears Wednesdays. |
