20 - 26 September 2001
Issue No.552
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 20 - 26 September 2001 Issue No.552 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
One rule for all
Mohamed El-Sayed Said* argues that the fight against terrorism must encompass all: including Israel and its occupying army
The whole world grieved this week for the vast numbers of innocents killed in the United States by terrorists. It was a unique moment, because political, cultural and ideological differences temporarily ended in the face of human suffering.
But it didn't last. Once we departed from the warm consensus that terrorism must be stopped, ideology took sway. Riven by conflicting values, we risk creating a world trapped in a bloody cycle of retaliation and counter-retaliation, driven by "the need to fight terrorism."
The misguidedness has already begun. All Arabs and Muslims are under attack from the right-wing media in America, who automatically accuse them of complicity in the tragedy. The Arab media have defensively refused to admit even the possibility that Arabs or Muslims may be to blame. Both perspectives are dishonest. One specious piece of self-flagellating stupidity the Arab media has bruited about argues that the terrorist operation was too sophisticated for Arabs and Muslims; so they can't have done it. Such idiocy leaves the essential issue untouched, which is that the existence of Arab or Muslim terrorists should not, by any stretch, be used to condemn all Arabs or Muslims, any more than the presence of terrorists or criminals in the US can be used to condemn US or Western culture at large.
But there is, alas, good reason for the US to tar all Muslims with the same, opprobrium- dipped, brush. It has allowed successive US administrations to dodge all responsibility for the growth and proliferation of international terrorism. We should not forget that it was the CIA that developed and funded Osama Bin Laden; we should not forget that the US financed the Taliban. The US also nourished other violent religious groups in the region, to serve as redoubts against communism. And after they served their purpose, they were abandoned, to feed their discontent on US support of Israel, which has been unstinting, no matter Israel's crimes. But instead of squarely facing this truth, the US has been able to evade blame by loudly drawing attention to Muslim failings.
The only rational way for the United States to combat international terrorism is for it to revise its foreign policy completely. The US can easily harness the good-will of Arab public opinion in a fight against terrorism, if it establishes the fight on rational grounds that apply equally to all. Then an international treaty on terrorism (state terrorism included), may be within reach. Such a treaty should be negotiated and ratified under the auspices of the United Nations and should commit all nations to the measures necessary for eradicating terrorism. For Arab countries, the key determinant will be whether the US and its allies are willing to censure Israel for its occupation atrocities, a glaring example of terrorism by a state.
The logic is simple. In Egypt we are intrinsically committed to combating terrorism. But we will never define armed struggle against the Israeli occupation as illegitimate. We will never agree to a definition of terrorism that absolves Israel of its crimes against the Palestinians. We will never agree to a method of fighting terrorism which allows Israel to consolidate its illegitimate control of Arab territory. And we would have grave doubts about any protocol for fighting terrorism not based on an international treaty negotiated under the auspices of the United Nations.
The alternative approach -- constructing an ad-hoc alliance which targets "Islamic" terrorists alone -- would be a disaster. It would allow only the US and its NATO allies to say who is, and who is not, a terrorist. They could then prosecute the fight against terrorism without international legitimacy, and beyond the principles of fairness and justice. This would undermine the United Nations and move decisions about international peace and security into the hands of a few countries, paving the way to a semi-colonial global system, run through a cartel of power, excluding the vast majority of countries. That whole system would be prejudiced against the interests of the South.
Here is a chance for all humanity to decide its common fate, by adopting an approach to terrorism that protects all and favours none. This, in my view, is the sincerest way of respecting those lives wasted by terrorism, everywhere. But unfortunately there is also a chance that a clique of nations will seize the international system, and push the world into a cycle of senseless retaliation, war and hate. The hour of choice is come.
* The writer is deputy director of the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page