America is preparing to go to war. Last week President Bush assured us this wouldn't just be a military operation. He said his administration would use 'every means of diplomacy, every tool of intelligence, every instrument of law enforcement, every financial influence and every necessary weapon of war' to root out the 'global terror network.' Many believe that this multi-pronged attack is the answer to the horrific attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C., just two weeks ago.
At this time, our country is probably the most patriotic and unified it has been in nearly 60 years, if not longer. Our elected representatives and media proudly display their stars and stripes. And they are right to do so. We should be proud that America is the world's symbol of freedom.
But what seems to be lost in the tragedy is any discussion as to what brought about these attacks. How much does the average American know about the motives of these terrorists? How many think terrorists attacked us because of our freedom? Our prosperity? Our way of life? If one were to listen to politicians and numerous media outlets, any of these might seem like the right answer.
Those are the easy answers that we, the mindless public, would like to hear. We want to think this is a world of good versus evil. Right versus wrong. Freedom versus oppression. It's how we fought communism during the Cold War. But these are nothing less than euphemisms politicians use to motivate the public to support the mobilization of troops.
In reality, the terrorists were attacking America's policies in the Middle East. In 1998 Osama bin Laden demanded Muslims kill Americans because the United States had declared war on God by stationing troops in Saudi Arabia (their holy land), bombing Iraq and supporting Israeli oppression of the Palestinians. Many in the Middle East are further incensed by what they see as American hypocrisy'promoting democracy around the world but stifling democratic regimes in the Middle East. Where is the debate over America's foreign policy? No attempt to end terrorism can be complete without resolving these difficult issues:
Iraq's despotic leader, Saddam Hussein, has long been a thorn in America's collective backside. Since President George H.W. Bush's reluctance to march to Baghdad and forcefully remove him from office, the United States has failed to devise any long-term strategy for reducing the threat he poses. We need to end the counter-productive economic sanctions on Iraq that simply fuel antipathy toward the West. Should we move to depose its leader, Saddam Hussein? Or pressure other members of the United Nations Security Council to impose 'smart sanctions' and demand international compliance (or face the threat of being labeled a state that sponsors terrorism)?
The United States needs to help broker a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Palestine. Bush's detachment from the conflict has been widely interpreted in the Arab world as showing tacit support for Israeli attacks (with U.S.-exported munitions) on the Palestinian Authority. Ensuring an end to this conflict that would appease Palestinians is an essential step toward showing Arab countries that the West is not trying to exploit and impose its will on Arab countries.
How can America promote democracy and at the same time inhibit its development in the Middle East? Because we are afraid of what will happen if these countries would become democratic. An important part of American foreign policy is the balance of power. If the balance swings in favor of democratically elected Islamic fundamentalists who detest Western involvement and, more specifically, the presence of Jews in their holy land, the region could destabilize and American economic and security interests could be threatened. Should America end its double standard and support democracies? Or should it defend its own interests in the Middle East? This is a troubling question.
The media need to end what Susan Sontag, a contributor for The New Yorker, coins 'a campaign to infantilize the public' and push our nation to redefine its policies on the Middle East and monitor how those positions are interpreted abroad. Such a debate won't yield easy, bipartisan answers, but it is needed to prevent the seeds of anti-Americanism from taking hold.
