Bulatlat.com

News Analysis
Spreading Global Terrorism

Shock. Disbelief. These were the initial reactions of peoples around the world over the simultaneous attacks on the American symbols of might. The iconic twin towers of the World Trade Center—the symbol of US financial power—and a portion of the Pentagon collapsed in one deadly swoop. Yet the American government never asked why these terror attacks happened. Bulatlat.com asks the crucial question.

BY BONN AURE
Bulatlat.com

In response to the attacks, the US government has launched a war against the terrorists and countries protecting terrorist groups or personalities, with the Taliban government of Afghanistan at the top of the list. US Pres. George W. Bush called on the people to gird for war. “Our responsibility is clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil,” Bush declared. As an added measure, 50,000 American reservists were called to active duty and the American government solicited international support for the impending war. The Philippine government was one of the first states that expressed an all-out support to the US government. In the coming days, developments on the US war footing are expected to stir significant policy shifts at the homefront.

The magnitude of the destruction right on American soil is unimaginable. Yet the American government never asked why this terror attacks happened nor, as one analyst remarked, sought to understand the motives behind the attack and see the events from the eyes of the attacker. An examination of these would have enabled the US government to stem further attacks in the future. The problem it seems lies in the US government’s adamant refusal to acknowledge failures in its foreign relations policies and dastardly acts of terrorism.

Undermining sovereignties

Blaming terrorist groups for the carnage is only half of the reason for the lives lost. The United States government is also equally responsible for the formation of dissident groups, terrorists or otherwise, to fight their proxy wars. A case in point is Osama Bin Laden and the Bin Laden network that had been beneficiaries of US military aid and training in the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. On the other hand, the Abu Sayyaf, according to Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr., was a creation of the AFP and the Central Intelligence Agency as a check for the rising influence of legitimate Moro groups, such as the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).

The US government also supported the formation of the Contras to undermine the anti-imperialist Sandinista government. US Vice-President Dick Cheney himself openly supported the Nicaraguan Contras in the 1980’s as Wyoming Congressman and backed personalities involved in the illegal operation. Cheney’s main concern, as Susskind noted, was that the scandal might threaten US aid to the Contras. During the Iran-Contra Scandal in 1987 where the US government transferred weapons to Iran in exchange for the release of US hostages, profits from the sale were coursed through to the US-backed Contras in Nicaragua despite a previous Congressional vote outlawing US aid. In 1990, the Sandinista government collapsed and was replaced with a neocolonial puppet in the person of Chamorro.

Another case is supposedly the US-instigated international campaign against illegal drug use. Under the pretext of curbing the rise of international drug trade, the US provided Latin American governments with state-of-the-art military hardware and training. Anna Rich, in her article US Exports Arms to the World, pointed out how “hundreds of millions of dollars are allocated each year…under counter-narcotics and special operations.” There is however more to the assistance than combating narco-trade. Documented cases revealed that infantry operations and aerial bombardment targeted peasant communities supporting revolutionaries while the coca plantations of paramilitary groups were spared. In reality, US military assistance is given to ensure US hegemony over Latin America and secure US interests against the strong anti-imperialist national liberation movements in this continent. This is best expressed in US President Bush’s own words when he declared his intention to use military force to protect US interests: “I will do whatever it takes to keep the (Panama) Canal open. It is in our national interest to have a peaceful hemisphere in which trade can flow freely. I’ll liberate the canal if I have to.”

The US government’s propensity to intervene and undermine the sovereignties of various nation-states engenders the rise of nationalism and anti-US sentiment — and even religious fundamentalism of the worst kind, such as Abu Sayyaf terror tactics.

Global arms supplier

Another factor leading to the rise of global terrorism is the proliferation of weapons at the global scale despite numerous multilateral treaties seeking arms control. However, as Yuffit Susskind remarked, US Pres. Bush sees arms-control treaties as barriers to US supremacy rather than as a means of embracing world peace and stability. Bush even balked from, if not opposed, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which would have controlled significantly a nuclear arms build-up amongst countries. This could have been a landmark treaty aiming at non-prejudicial nuclear disarmament (i.e. disarmament that would not only include Iran and North Korea, but most importantly the USA, which has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world).

The US remains as the top arms supplier at the global scale. From 1994-1996, the United States exported $67.3 billion dollars worth of armaments or 55% of the global arms export. US-based armaments manufacturers of the world, Lockheed Martin and Boeing, supplies weapons to countries friendly to United States interests and fueled a potentially dangerous arms race among industrialized nations.

Anna Rich, an arms-control lobbyist, revealed Pentagon officials’ willingness to sell top technology. Recently, Pentagon allowed the introduction of Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) and other ultra-high-tech armaments to the Middle East region. Specifically, the sale of arms is also aimed at strengthening US allies in the region; thereby, securing US oil interests. Top recipient of the sale and other forms of aid are Israel and Saudi Arabia. Rich further revealed that Pentagon has offered:

$3.2 billion worth of arms to Egypt, including the most advanced version of the F-16;
$110 million worth of AMRAAMs and associated technology to Bahrain;
$2 billion of AMRAAMs, ammunition, and bombs to complement a previous $6 billion F-16 fighter jet sale to the United Arab Emirates
$3.5 billion worth of attack helicopters to Turkey
$5 billion worth of military hardware to Greece, Turkey’s main rival

Aside from “market-dictated and legal” procurement of armaments, the US government has been instrumental in arming non-state groups, such as the Osama Bin Laden network and ultra-rightist groups, as well as governments with a dismal human rights record. The Philippines, for example, has been a regular recipient of military hardware courtesy of the US government despite having a military force notorious for its atrocities in war. At present, the Philippine government increased the military budget purportedly to “modernize” the Armed Forces and combat dissident guerillas.

Another case is Saddam Hussein of Iraq, who had been armed to the teeth by the United States government to fight a proxy war against Ayatollah Rahula Khomeini of Iran. Traditionally, Iraq and Iran were enemies due to certain disagreements on matters of religion (Shiite and Sunni). The Shiite-Sunni traditional conflict was used by the US, pitting one Arab country against another, to extend its control over the Middle East. A substantial control over governments in Middle East would ensure a steady and regular supply of cheap oil. However, upon the resolution of the Iran-Iraq conflict, essentially a détente, Saddam and his minions trained its guns against the Iraqi benefactor when Iraq colonized Kuwait, a strategic oil depot controlled by the United States. Thus, Saddam Hussein is pegged as one of the threats to US hegemony in the Middle East. Recently, Saddam Hussein declared that the United States government is just “reaping what they have sown,” referring to the WTC and Pentagon attacks.

While it is true that the attacks in the World Trade Center and Pentagon are condemnable, the United States government is equally guilty for acts of terrorism. The long history of the US government’s interventionist foreign policy have also resulted in a damaging impact in terms of human lives and destruction of a nation’s cultural fabric. Thus, the fight against global terrorism must also include rooting out the global conditions, US imperialism for example, which gave rise to this phenomenon.

The oft-repeated phrase that terrorism is the weapon of the weak is only half-true. Terrorism is also used by stronger nations to subjugate other nations and thus taught oppressed peoples to learn the language of the gun.

To quote Robert Fisk of www.zmag.org, “this is not the war of democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the coming hours and days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes and US helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and American shells crashing into a village called Qana a few days later and about a Lebanese militia—paid and uniformed by America’s Israeli ally—hacking and raping and murdering their way through refugee camps.” Bulatlat.com

We want to know what you think of this article.