|
The
war on terror is a false metaphor that has led
to counterproductive and self-defeating policies.
Five years after 9/11, a misleading figure of
speech applied literally has unleashed a real
war fought on several fronts -- Iraq, Gaza, Lebanon,
Afghanistan, Somalia -- a war that has killed
thousands of innocent civilians and enraged millions
around the world. Yet al Qaeda has not been subdued;
a plot that could have claimed more victims than
9/11 has just been foiled by the vigilance of
British intelligence.
Unfortunately,
the "war on terror" metaphor was uncritically
accepted by the American public as the obvious
response to 9/11. It is now widely admitted that
the invasion of Iraq was a blunder. But the war
on terror remains the frame into which American
policy has to fit. Most Democratic politicians
subscribe to it for fear of being tagged as weak
on defense.
What
makes the war on terror self-defeating?
•
First, war by its very nature creates innocent
victims. A war waged against terrorists is even
more likely to claim innocent victims because
terrorists tend to keep their whereabouts hidden.
The deaths, injuries and humiliation of civilians
generate rage and resentment among their families
and communities that in turn serves to build support
for terrorists.
•
Second, terrorism is an abstraction. It lumps
together all political movements that use terrorist
tactics. Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Sunni
insurrection and the Mahdi army in Iraq are very
different forces, but President Bush's global
war on terror prevents us from differentiating
between them and dealing with them accordingly.
It inhibits much-needed negotiations with Iran
and Syria because they are states that support
terrorist groups.
•
Third, the war on terror emphasizes military action
while most territorial conflicts require political
solutions. And, as the British have shown, al
Qaeda is best dealt with by good intelligence.
The war on terror increases the terrorist threat
and makes the task of the intelligence agencies
more difficult. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri
are still at large; we need to focus on finding
them, and preventing attacks like the one foiled
in England.
•
Fourth, the war on terror drives a wedge between
"us" and "them." We are innocent victims. They
are perpetrators. But we fail to notice that we
also become perpetrators in the process; the rest
of the world, however, does notice. That is how
such a wide gap has arisen between America and
much of the world.
Taken
together, these four factors ensure that the war
on terror cannot be won. An endless war waged
against an unseen enemy is doing great damage
to our power and prestige abroad and to our open
society at home. It has led to a dangerous extension
of executive powers; it has tarnished our adherence
to universal human rights; it has inhibited the
critical process that is at the heart of an open
society; and it has cost a lot of money. Most
importantly, it has diverted attention from other
urgent tasks that require American leadership,
such as finishing the job we so correctly began
in Afghanistan, addressing the looming global
energy crisis, and dealing with nuclear proliferation.
With
American influence at low ebb, the world is in
danger of sliding into a vicious circle of escalating
violence. We can escape it only if we Americans
repudiate the war on terror as a false metaphor.
If we persevere on the wrong course, the situation
will continue to deteriorate. It is not our will
that is being tested, but our understanding of
reality. It is painful to admit that our current
predicaments are brought about by our own misconceptions.
However, not admitting it is bound to prove even
more painful in the long run. The strength of
an open society lies in its ability to recognize
and correct its mistakes. This is the test that
confronts us.
----
Mr. Soros, a financier, is author of "The Age
of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror"
(Public Affairs, 2006).
Topplebush.com
Posted:
August 21,
2006
|
