The catastrophe resulting from the terrorist attacks on New York
City’s Twin Towers and the Pentagon
brings into focus the state of war that has existed for some time
between America and those who despise our values and our way of life.
While the rest of the world has been exposed to this type of
carnage for at least three decades,
albeit not of this magnitude, Americans
believed themselves immune from such a lethal attack.
So on September 11th our world changed dramatically with a shocking
wake-up call, telling us that we are in the midst of a different kind of
conflict. Although there is no script for President Bush to follow
(never before have we been the target of an unidentified foe), all
indications are that this administration understands the difficulty and
complexity of the nightmare we face in this protracted war against
international Terrorism. While it is essential that we have timely
retaliation, every ton of bombs dropped on the bases of these radical
fundamentalists and the states that harbor and support them, has the
potential to produce more recruits, more fanatics, more martyrs and more
atrocities.
Thus the relatively powerless Islamic Fundamentalist Radicals have put
us in a double bind. By adapting Von Clauswitz’s dictum they are
using terrorism as an extension of politics by other means.[2]
In essence, they are attempting to negotiate with the
United States and the West using the spectacle of an atrocity to affect
our policies and behavior.
It’s always hazardous to underestimate your foe especially when his
audacity and cunning have already proven as appalling as his hatred and
cruelty. But the first tenet of any savvy negotiator is to
understand the mindset of his adversary so you can then act to alter his
cost/benefit calculus. In the past they have only seen the
benefits of their strategy, the departure of the Soviets from
Afghanistan, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from South Lebanon and
Saddan Hussein’s survival and expulsion of the U.N. Inspectors after
the Gulf War.
Now, they have raised the stakes. It is no small tour de force to
have murdered so many innocent civilians, to have shattered the lives of
so many families, to have brought the world’s financial capital to a
standstill and to have produced such anxiety and fear in the viewing
audience around the globe.
Clearly, those most responsible for this atrocious act are associated
with the umbrella organization, al-Qa’eda (the group), which is
currently located in Afghanistan. Although al-Qa’eda, comparable
to a Western holding company, has consensus leadership (Ayman al
Zawahiri and Muhammed Atef), its most visible spokesman has been Osama
bin Laden. Born in 1955 in Saudi Arabia of a Yemeni father and a
Syrian mother he was raised with wealth and privilege, complete with
nannies and tutors. Indeed, he and his generation came of age
during the flourishing power of OPEC, which created rising expectations
throughout Arabdom.
From all indications, bin Laden was not a devout Muslim nor especially
interested in politics during his early years. After graduating
from King Abdul Aziz University in 1979 with a Civil Engineering degree,
he was prepared to enter the family’s construction business when three
events occurred in quick succession that changed his life. First,
the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, a Muslim nation, then Anwar Sadat of
Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel, a western nation established in
the midst of the Arab Islamic world and finally Ayatollah Khomeini
toppled the westernized Shah in Iran. It was this last occurrence
that he saw as a divinely inspired sign – Islam’s first victory over
the West since the Ottoman Empire captured Constantinople in 1453.
Motivated by a sudden religious imperative, bin Laden became a major
fundraiser for the so-called “freedom fighters” who were recruited
from the Muslim world to repel the Soviet invaders. In the course
of these endeavors he displayed considerable skill, magnetism and
success. Eventually he went to Afghanistan to personally dispense
the proceeds of his philanthropic efforts and in due course established
personal relationships with hundreds if not thousands of mujahedin
Indeed, he even fought in at least one decisive battle, which only
enhanced his reputation.
Meanwhile, when the Gulf War concluded and United States troops remained
in Saudi Arabia his anger only grew. He called it the “occupation of the Arab Holy Land by American Crusader forces”.
Because of his willingness to grant interviews and a genius for
self-promotion he became the most visible of the Radical Islamic
Fundamentalists; and surviving President Clinton’s pinprick Cruise
Missile attack has only increased his stature, making him an icon in the
Islamic world.
Obviously, he is not someone who can be intimidated by overwhelming
force but rather a fanatic devoted with maniacal vehemence to do all
that he can to rid his region and even the entire Islamic World of
western influence. From his perspective, the West not only invades
and occupies the Muslim world, but also culturally and spiritually
pollutes the Muslim soul. Bin Laden and his extremist followers
see the world moving towards a single global culture which is basically
western—and they are threatened by this.
So in the current post cold war era our conflict is no longer
ideological, political or economic but a clash of civilizations.
The battle lines are between western modernity and the threat it
presents to those who detest us not for what we’ve done but who we are
and what we stand for. For bin Laden and his followers the
stereotype of “the American Lifestyle” consists of drugs, sex, rock
and roll, materialism, scantily clad women, individual freedom,
separation of church and state and a secular rule of law. They
consider all these ideas and concepts corrupting and corrosive,
especially upon the youth in their traditional societies.
Therefore, what are the objectives of Osama bin Laden’s militants?
First of all, they want the United States to remove its troops and
support from the countries on the Arabian Peninsula (Saudi Arabia and
Kuwait). Secondly, we must discontinue in their words “the
continuing aggression against the Iraqi people” (eliminating sactions
and giving Saddam Hussein a free hand to develop weapons of mass
destruction). Thirdly to displace from all Muslim areas westerners
and their influence (destruction of the State of Israel). Finally,
to overthrow even Muslim leaders who have strayed from their extreme
idea of religious orthodoxy (expel the leaders of Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait
and Saudi Arabia).
Their strategy is to build a Pan-Islamic religious movement knitting
together all radical Islamic fundamentalists. From their mindset,
this might be done by drawing the United States into indiscriminate and
massive retaliatory responses that would attract Muslims around the
globe to fight a “Holy War”. After all, they believe that the
call to prayer from a mosque in Cairo resonates in Kuala Lumpur.
Consequently, we must take great pains to build a coalition that
contains Muslim nations plus religious leaders and scholars. To be
sure, in Islamic law there is no central authority or council and jihad
can only come from a consensus.
Most worrisome is the thought that in forging a front against these
extremists that we might compromise our principles and values in the
process. In the past we did just that, when we denied our ally,
the Shah of Iran, asylum, sent our Secretary of State to Syria
repeatedly to fawn at the feet of Haffez al Assad one of the primary
sponsors of terror and time and again warmly welcoming Yasser Arrafat to
the White House, knowing that he and his associates were pioneers in the
use of terror that included the murder of diplomats in Sudan and our
citizens on the Achille Lauro. Although the Israel-Arab struggle
dominates the Middle East, it is but one flashpoint in the terrorist’s
war on the West. Israel is our staunchest ally in the Middle East
and must not be asked to compromise or unduly sacrifice as we engage in
coalition building.
Beyond this, these radical Islamic fundamentalists see the United States
and the West as being risk-adverse, unwilling to suffer civilian or even
military casualties. They heard about or remember our national
trauma when the body bags came home from Viet Nam, the abortive Jimmy
Carter desert classic where we invaded Iran with eight helicopters, the
decision to bomb Kosovo for 78 days at an altitude of 15,000 feet to
insure that we sustained no causalities and Bill Clinton’s use of
million dollar cruise missiles in Afghanistan only to destroy tents that
were vacated the week before. What they believe is that if they
can cause us to sustain considerable loss of human life and produce
sufficient fear, that over time they will sap our morale and our will.
Undoubtedly, there will be American military casualties and regrettably
civilian casualties as well. But that is the price of war, one
that we did not start. Indeed we must fight these battles facing an evil
and vicious adversary: a prolonged conflict, with new strategies and new
tactics against an enemy that believes that they can intimidate us by
their barbaric behavior and evil carnage.
……Herb Cohen
Since
1968 there have been more than 4,000 terrorist bombings and 500
skyjackings.
Carl Von Clauswitz the
German military strategist’s axiom that
“war is an extension of politics
by other means.”