Roughly he proposes to avoid military action (which, according to him would have adverse effect and would be unefficient and even counter-productive), and advocates for hunting down Bin Laden and his associates by secret services and police forces all over the world, including in islamic countries.
He says that the support of islamic spiritual leaders should be asked, in order to convince the muslims that BL is indeed a criminal and to avoid other people to join his ranks. Finally, he says that in order to gain the support of the muslim world, the american policy in the middle-east should be modified and consideration should be given to muslim concerns.
I think there is nothing inherently wrong with any of those suggestions. I do not think they will be adequate in dealing with this issue however. The issue goes beyond BL to our readiness to “stand there and take it” when it comes to terrorism. Our unwillingness to respond with force to the Embassy bombings, the first WTC bombing and the bombing of the Cole have made us an easier target. Terrorists are essentially bullies and respond only to force. Even were the strategies you suggested able to root out BL, another fellow would simply take his place. I believe we need to convince the world that using terror on us, or supporting terrorist organizations is a VERY BAD IDEA. Yes, I do think that an effective use of force will increase the likelihood of American casualties in the short run, but I believe it would be effective in the long run.
As far as policies toward the middle East, I do think we should be fair to all groups in that area. However, the US exists primarily to support US interests, and I wouldn’t simply give consessions to middle east groups because we are afraid of them. That would only make us appear weak in their eyes and open us up to more attacks. Terrorists do not particularly seek any practical goals…they only want to make a point.
Do you really think if we gave BL everything he could ever ask for that he would simply become satisfied and go away. I should remind you that we heavily supported the Afghanistanians in their war against the Soviet Union and look how we get along with them now.
No, terrorists are not “essentially bullies.” Terrorists cannot be cowed by force, only eradicated by it — until another cell springs up from the same conditions of despair which spawned the original cell. Unless we want to conquer and subjugate the Islamic world, a purely military approach will yield no long term surcease of terrorist actions.
Enlisting the support, and even the guidance, of the leaders of Islam is a solid and reasonable approach, and one which would coordinate very well with an ostentatious show of military might. Having overwhelming forces at the ready and showing the restraint and control not to employ them indiscriminately may very well yield much more respect and cooperation than we’ve yet seen in the Muslim world.
Unilateral and unsupported use of our military merely to “show strength” will garner only more hatred. Destroy bin Laden that way, and 10 more like him will spring up, and they will be supported by leaders and countries who feel justified in resisting American capriciousness.
Well…I don’t know if you read the article, but it supports the opposite position : That if force is used, someone else will take BL’s place and that it would be counter-productive in the long run.
Actually, the idea is to be fair, not to give everything he wants to BL. To be fair in order…well, to be fair…but also because it would unroot the hate against western countries. If it is done along with a resolute and consistent anti-terrorist policy (after all, these are the only real ennemies), it wouldn’t appear as weakness. A fair policy doesn’t cease to be fair just because it’s part of the political goal of a terrorist.
clairobscur, you are on the right track. But there is more. People are hearing siren calls of a paradise if they commit these suicide acts. We have to offer them a better life here. If not, then we have to kill all of the sirens, even the so-called religious ones.
The fact that so many people seem to think that wiping out Osama bin Laden is going to put an end to this problem is the best evidence of the profound lack of understanding of the underlying political situation in the Middle East.
The situation is complex and multifaceted and involves the totality of US involvement in the region in the postwar period. It boils down to the fact that public opinion in the region is overwhelmingly negative vis a vis US policy in the region. This extends not only to US policy vis a vis Palestine, but to the repressive political forces which the US has supported in individual states in the region.
It is a mistake to believe that the people of the region are unsophisticated people. They live there and deal daily with the consequence of US policy in the region. They are increasingly angry and the moderate leadership in some of these states is increasingly isolated and discredited as a large section of public opinion has concluded that it is powerless or unwilling to resist what is seen as US meddling in the affairs of the region to the detriment of the people who live there.
Increasingly, the third or fourth generation of this region reject the calls for moderation of their elders as treason and are increasingly drawn to the call of the fundamentalists for a holy war against the US. It is an extremely dangerous situation, and has been so for some time. It is a hard mouthful for Americans to swallow but eventually they will have to confront this fundamental reality.
Grave and unpredictable consequence could result from any massive US military operation in the region. So-called moderate government could fall to be replace by Islamic fundamentalist regimes. It’s very difficult to imagine what the US could do to prevent this once the momentum develops. In the case of Pakistan, there is the very real possibility of a Taliban-type regime coming to power and having access to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.
Bottom line. We’d better know what the possible consequence of military action can be.
Osama bin Laden is done for. Now we’ll see that much of what galen say’s is true.
Has anyone really listened to what OBD has to say in those interviews? The man is not a nut. Nor is he a coward. He is a ‘true believer’. He has forsaken much for these beliefs. He took very real (and true) basic issues and expanded them to fit his agenda. Now he’s going to be a “martyr”. And we shall remain as “satan”.
And so it goes.
Good job, World Leaders.
Peace,
mangeorge
Your assessment of the social/political environment in the Middle East rang true for me. I believe the U.S. needst to collaborate with moderate leaders in that region in order to threaten the legitimacy of terrorist cells. Such a policy would amount to a true “show of strength”, as well as providing good examples respect for human rights and democratic ideals.
Unfortunately, I believe the U.S. government will seek quick-and-easy “fixes”. The U.S. has been relatively oblivious to the world view of it’s foreign policy. Until foreign policy is shaped by a drive toward social stability in the world, in addition to responding to U.S. economic and political interests, we will consider to generate the hatred that facilitates recruitment into terrorist organizations.