News and events are updated regularly.
|North America's First|
An Independent e-Monthly
Vol. I Number 4
New War or War on Terrorism?
September 11, America “was attacked with deliberate and massive cruelty”, as
President Bush put it in his speech on September 14 at the National Cathedral in
attack on their homeland—the worst in 225 years - was no doubt the most
devastating strike not only on American soil but also on the American psyche.
This kind of attack, though spoken of and picturised by Hollywood, was
not considered possible.
Monday, September 12, 1994, Frank Eugene Corder, 38, a student pilot with a
history of alcohol and drug abuse, stole the single-engine Cessna from an
airfield north of Baltimore, and slammed it against the White House South Lawn.
officials had conceded then that Corder's flight exposed a seam in the
government's muscular, electronically sophisticated zone of presidential
defence. However nothing seems to have been done to handle such a situation.
There was no policy in place to handle an internal air strike or series of air
strikes like the one that slammed in to the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers.
Japanese planes bombed Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto,
who planned and commanded the attack, said, “I’m afraid we have awakened a
sleeping giant and filled it with terrible resolve”. Now, “as Americans
absorb what is being called their second Pearl Harbor, the giant is stirring
again”, writes Marcus Gee in The Globe and Mail.
U.S. is the world’s sole superpower and its ability to deter attacks is
essential to its well-being,” says Aurel Braun, who teaches international
relations at the University of Toronto. “It can not be allowed to be seen as a
has recently moved from Attack
on America and Sprit
of America, to America’s
New War while updating their newscast.
this an attack on America or the civilized world? UN Secretary General, Kofi
Annan, said, “This was not an attack on the United States. It was an attack on
Bush has called for War on Terrorism. Is this going to be only America’s war?
Or is this a war of the civilized world against terrorism?
President Bush does not want America to act unilaterally. He told a Boston
audience, "Just as Pearl Harbor awakened this country from the notion that
we could somehow avoid the call to duty and defend freedom in Europe and Asia in
World War II, so, too, should this most recent surprise attack erase the concept
in some quarters that America can somehow go it alone in the fight against
terrorism or in anything else for that matter."
Kaiser, a foreign policy expert in Germany, said contrary to the initial concern
in Europe “about (administration’s) unilateralism… something rather
extraordinary has happened, and the reaction…thus far, contrary to some fears
that existed, was so different, so cautious and stressing the need to act with
US wishes to go alone or with others, taking their views and advice, it is
important that they do not turn this into a war against Muslims- a war of the
North against the South- a war of the Rich against the Poor- a war of the
one-third of the world against the two-third- The Third World.
the Pearl Harbor attack, this time there is no nation that can be held
accountable directly for the attack. Secretary of Defence, Rumsfeld, said:
"In the past we were used to dealing with armies, navies and air forces.
This adversary is different. He doesn't have any of those things."
problem is to track down the enemy.
of State, Colin Powell stated, "It's not one individual, it's lots of
individuals and it's lots of cells," Powell told reporters. "Osama bin
Laden is the chairman of the holding company, and within that holding company
are terrorist cells and organisations in dozens of countries around the world,
any one of them capable of committing a terrorist act… It's not enough to get
one individual, although we'll start with that one individual."
‘prime suspect’ for terrorist attacks on US, as the Administration claims,
is “Saudi militant bin Laden, who reminds his listeners that the West not only
physically invades the Muslim world, but culturally and spiritually pollutes the
Muslim soul,” says Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former officer with the Central
Laden is a symbolic head of a movement of religious fanatics who want to purge
the world of evil and the United States is the symbol of that evil,” says
Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA officer who was deputy director of the U.S. State
Department's Office of Counter terrorism in 1989-93.
bin Laden “serves as a source of inspiration… he, in fact, is emerging as a
mascot of Islamic militancy and it hardly matters whether he is physically
involved or not. A dead Osama could inspire just as effectively, if not more. A
dead Osama, a dramatically mythified Osama could actually be more dangerous”,
writes Muzamil Jaleel, in Indian Express.
Anthony C. Zinni, who until last fall headed the United States Central Command,
which is responsible for military operations in the Middle East and Southwest
Asia, said, “They (terrorists) are spread all over. They hide in mountains and
caves. They do not lend themselves to being targeted.”
is unlikely to be the only target in the war against those nations who support
terrorism. Mr. Rumsfeld said that al Qaeda terrorist network that Mr. bin Laden
heads may have activities in 50 to 60 countries, and al Qaeda is just one of the
networks that President Bush has vowed to vanquish.
respected British Mid-East specialist, Robert Fisk, is of the view that the
perpetrators of this monstrous crime were small in number, likely no more than
three score, possibly an unknown, American-based cell without direct links to
any known terrorist organisation.
Are “terrorists” born or created?
Fisk wrote last week that a "crushed, humiliated population struck back
with the wickedness and awesome cruelty of a doomed people."
we are being constantly told that it is a war between ‘‘terror’’ and
‘‘democracy’’, it is really much more than that. It certainly has its
roots in the double standards of the democracies of the world, he said.
think for one minute that this war is new," says Sean Maloney, a professor
of war studies at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ont. "This war
against the United States has been going on for a long time."
Chomsky writes that ‘‘again, we have a choice: we may try to understand, or
refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that much worse lies
the Continent, European leaders were urging American restraint. Far closer to
the Arab world and with larger Muslim populations, European countries worry that
military action by the United States could lead to more terrorism that would
inevitably hit them as well.
Moscow, an influential parliamentarian, Aleksei G. Arbatov, said although the
consensus there was “total moral support” for the United States and the
struggle against terrorism, there also existed a strong humanitarian concern
"not to resort to massive strikes, to nonselective actions which are
unjustified from the moral point of view, to avenge the death of thousands of
innocent people with the deaths of tens of thousands of other innocent
Jiang Zemin of China telephoned Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain and
President Jacques Chirac of France. He admonished his Western counterparts to
tell Mr. Bush that "any military action against terrorism" should be
based on "irrefutable evidence and should aim at clear targets so as to
avoid casualties to innocent people," according to official news reports
Jiang also telephoned President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, and although the
two leaders denounced "terrorism in all its forms," they spoke just of
cooperating with each other and the United Nations to "develop a mechanism
for fighting terrorism," the reports said.
military ruler, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, has promised "full support" to
an American military operation. He faces a "mass exodus" from
Afghanistan's Taliban-controlled cities, which will further burden the economy.
another development that threatened the stability of this Muslim nation of 140
million people, a hard-line Islamic cleric in Karachi, has issued a religious
decree, or fatwa, calling for a "holy war" against an American
military operation from Pakistan and against General Musharraf.
the world approaches the launch of War
on Terrorism or America’s
New War, Eric
Margolis, writing in The Toronto Sun, cautions, “While carpet bombing bin
Laden's headquarters - or even mounting commando raids against him - may assuage
America's fury, even if he is killed or arrested, growing anti-American
terrorism will persist. Terrorism is not some independent evil, like a tornado
or plague, but "blowback," to use CIA terminology, from America's
policies in Asia and Africa. Lashing out in blind rage will make most Americans
feel better, but won't lower the threat or reverse the hatred of the U.S.”