Update on the Global War On Terror [Archives:2005/884/Opinion]

About the only beneficiary of the GWOT seems to be Mr. George W. Bush, or his speechwriters, who seem to find terrorism about the only subject by which they can supposedly show “feelings” and “guts”. However, this war for the sake of rhetoric is being used to disguise a continuing parade of blunders that seem to have been about the only consistent characteristic of the Bush Administration, with the biggest blunder in fact being in GWOT itself. What significant accomplishments has the Bush Administration achieved in its GWOT? It does not even have a clear perception of what would entail a victory or defeat in such a war. However, there is no definitive clue that would help bring assurances to those who have found the GWOT rhetoric convincing that indeed the terrorists are on “the run” or have been put to dormancy. In fact, while the rhetoric is expansive and “tough”, the battle on the ground is no where reflecting a genuine effort to terminate this “threat” or even to put it out of operation. The more tougher Bush speaks against “terrorism” and brings back the reminders of “9/11”, the more Bush is really looking for cover for so much ineptitude in managing the affairs of state of a great superpower. Oh sure, terror must be confronted, but to simply consider it a one man's war against “evil Islamic radicalism” is really drawing illogical courses that in the end do not reveal a real sense of awareness about your “enemy” nor the significance of involving others, not as lackeys but as partners. The war on terror need not necessarily be a war of guns and diatribes. The war on terror is best conducted when the motivations that lead many frustrated young Moslems to resort to such “non Islamic” acts are dealt with in a demonstratively prudent and logical approach. Furthermore, the war on terror did not need the War in Iraq, nor an illogical animosity against Syria, nor an ongoing assault against Iran for alleged WMD possession. All these irrational approaches have absolutely nothing to do with taming terrorists or even “hitting terror” at the source. Yet the Bush Administration is seeking to justify the Israeli inputs into US foreign policy as part and parcel of its GWOT. The truth of the matter is that as long as these Israeli inputs continue to get the upper hand in policy formulation in the White House, the more fuel will be added to the hypocrisy that most Moslems and Arabs are seeing in American policy towards the Middle East in particular and the Moslem World in general.

Anti-Israeli sentiment is not at all “terror” inspired radicalism, unless one is speaking of Israeli terrorism, which has been around far longer than “Islamic Jihadism ala Bin Laden style. Ignoring the legitimate gripes that the Palestinians have against Israeli transgressions and to continue patting Israel on the back is the anti-thesis of any GWOT. Taking guidance from Israel's own perceptions of the “threats to peace”, is in fact falling into the trap of fomenting understandable hatred and distrust of the United States and fueling more suspicion among Moslems in general and Arabs in particular that the United States is now a bona fide puppet in good standing of the International Zionist Establishment. This kind of blind support to a state that was criminally created and continues to rely on its ability to transgress against every God ordained or human instituted codes and principles is the cause d''tre of terrorism and all the fiery rhetoric of Mr. Bush against terrorism that does not take that into consideration is no more than beating around the bush and covering up for the real roots of terrorism: the ability of Israel to carry on as its chauvinistic whims dictate.

Mr. Bush is right when he says that Islam is innocent of terrorism and that terrorists may be abusing Islam to promote their own designs. But the truth of the matter is that the designs that are most likely backed by these fly by not gangs are those of the international Zionist Establishment and their newly found friends in the American Neo-Con Establishment. The structure and modus operandi of the terrorist gangs have so far not shown any real coherent systematic approach to gain political momentum or power. Thus, it is not discernible to view them as a newly established “empire seeker”. Moreover, they are not really seeking to rally grass roots support, which is essential for any political movement to succeed, at least in the initial stages. Terrorists seem to operate according to dictates that are not necessarily in line with their own declared goals or with a view towards achieving strategic successes. What seems to be obvious is that terrorists are seeking to create a venue that will help the more organized and more goal oriented bosses that direct them from a clandestine network to achieve their own narrow interests. What we are seeing in the world these days is a world that will gradually be deprived of the centuries of work on human rights and civil liberties, as the GWOT allows dictators to harness the muscles of statecraft to tighten the noose against their constituents. In such a venue, it is usually the self-centered, egotistical and oppressive lot of human beings who thrive and the distinction between right and wrong becomes ever so fuzzy. In such a venue, ideals with values have no avenues to be disseminated, because the ambitious and the greedy have distorted the operations of government and international affairs to block all attempts to restore good and kindness into the hearts of mankind. In the GWOT, good and kindness are drawbacks in the fight against terror and thus, human beings are expected to erase hundreds of years of progress in man's interaction with his own species, not to mention the readiness to destroy the environment and let profit prevail as the guiding inspiration for all socio-economic-political orientations. We are truly living in a scary world that does not show any signs of hope in the future. The strong are dictating terms to the world that are not consistent with the promotion of world peace and coexistence based on mutual respect, equal opportunities and respect for the rights of all human beings to live free from the terror of the terrorists and the far worse terror of hegemony.
——
[archive-e:884-v:14-y:2005-d:2005-10-10-p:opinion]