4 - 10 October 2001
Issue No.554
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 4 - 10 October 2001 Issue No.554 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Bitter harvest
Afraid yet? Gamil Mattar believes more is in store
The events of 11 September were an unimaginable shock. The attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington were utterly bewildering in their violence, triggering waves of reaction worldwide, yet little surprise, let alone amazement.
During the months preceding the disaster, Europe, Russia, China and the Americas were in turmoil over the missile defence programme mooted by President Bush. The proposal, raising fears of war at a time when the major world powers were at peace, was seen as most distasteful -- the last thing anyone who had experienced global belligerence wished to contemplate. In the Middle East, it seemed increasingly clear that it would be absurd to harbour hopes of a just peace, or even some break in the continuum of violence that Israel would not seize upon as a pretext to devastate more Arab land. Similarly, hopes that governments in the region would grant their citizens more rights and freedoms, apply justice more conscientiously or display greater self-respect, were vanishing as well.
A strong sense prevailed, in other words, that chaos was increasing by degrees; and the United States, it seemed, was most to blame. The superpower had restricted the part, however marginal, all the other members of the family of nations could play in shaping the new world, managing its affairs or calming its conflicts. Yet simultaneously, it appeared clear that the US had failed to free itself from domestic and international constraints, and was thus unable to exercise its leadership unfettered by partisan considerations. Nor did a greater power exist that could curb even its most irrational impulses. Fear, anxiety and uncertainty about the future thus proliferated, and the world braced itself for further repression. Anger and resentment bubbled and boiled over in many parts of the world. The anti-racism conference in Durban, South Africa was the site of many such reactions.
The events of 11 September are unparalleled in many respects: the extent of atrocity, the material damage caused, the impeccable precision the attack's planning and execution required. The repercussions are still echoing around the globe, and are certainly far greater than the perpetrators had ever envisaged.
Today, the world is in the throes of a fear greater than many it has heretofore experienced: fear of a war with unclear goals, unidentified enemies, uncertain tools and unknown allies; a war that will sweep the world at random, endlessly. The peoples of the South fear that their governments will seize this opportunity and lash out at minorities and opposition movements. East and West alike fear that hordes of militants will advance, brandishing religious banners, to exact revenge, or invoking cultural considerations to impose their lifestyle by force. It is also possible that imperialist powers will see this as their chance to create a fait accompli that will never be dislodged.
When war becomes a way of life, cruelty, hatred, suspicion and fanaticism hold sway. Opportunists and arms dealers thrive. Paranoia shapes international relations. An activity as simple as air travel is suddenly fraught with risks: one's plane could be hijacked and ploughed into a building, or downed by an American fighter. It will be entirely impossible to travel if various countries permit their air forces to fire missiles at any airplane that appears suspicious or has strayed off course. Can flying become an obsolete means of transport?
Many also fear that legislation will be promulgated that severely limits civil liberties, narrows the margins of democracy and the space for free dialogue, and facilitates the invasion of privacy. I do not believe a single government, whether in the liberal West or the far less liberal East, will object to restrictions on personal freedoms. In fact, NATO's command will rejoice -- though only for a time -- if repression can masquerade as counter-terrorism. I cannot see how High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson (under whose jurisdiction the United States has refused to place itself) will be able to exercise her mandate in such circumstances.
All nations dread -- or should fear -- the possibility of an intense conflict between civilisations. Civilisational wars, however, are as useful to those who ignite them as the attacks have been to those who destroyed the Twin Towers and damaged the Pentagon. In the US, Christian fundamentalists and right-wing extremists have been blaming homosexuals and other groups of so-called deviants for the attack. A well-known commentator urged Bush to attack the states to which the hijackers belonged, kill their rulers and force them to convert to Christianity.
Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi's statements bother me less, although he represents a species of Western leaders who are ready to trample thousands of people, at home and abroad, to score goals for their petty empires. I only wish that the anti-terrorism coalition -- if it genuinely seeks to eradicate terrorism -- will keep in mind the efforts Berlusconi, Israeli Prime Minister Sharon, and many prominent media commentators are exerting to fuel dissension. The consequences of their words and deeds can be far more devastating than the attacks of 11 September -- and should perhaps be qualified as terrorism for that reason.
Americans also fear for their investments and assets; their government fears a catastrophic loss of confidence in the US economy. The losses are indeed almost incalculable in purely financial terms, but more important still is the shock to investors and consumers alike, for their confidence will continue to reel from this blow for the foreseeable future. The recession, however, had begun some time before the terrorists struck. Nor will beefed-up "security measures" restore faith in flying. The consequence must be a precipitous decline in US exports, a corresponding drop in production levels, and a sharp increase in unemployment rates. Rampant fears of biological warfare and attacks on vital facilities will do little to improve the situation. Nothing, indeed, will change until the war ends; and this war will not end, according to the edicts issued by its perpetrators. The promise of protracted military action alone is sufficient reason to increase all these fears, real or imagined, and to create new apprehensions. The only hope, in fact, is for President Bush to dispel the anxiety besetting the world -- and to call off the war.
* The writer is director of the Arab Centre for Development and Futuristic Research.
© 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