Dear comrads,
please let me make some remarks to your first comment on the cruel terrorist
attacks on the World Trade Center from 12th september. It's right to condemn
nationalism and I like to read your critics in this direction, but in the actual
case of religious terrorism this is not the right term.
And I don't think that those terrorist wanted to pressure the US ruling class.
I'm in dought whether they even knew what a ruling class is. But nevertheless I
think we agree in a lot of points.
In a certain way the meaning of the terrorists is very similar to the behaviour
of US politicians. They wanted to punish America, like America punished several
countries in the past and they took their motivation und self consciousness from
a religious dogma. The US presidency often calls the people to pray for this or
for that.
Your are right: the terrorists are fundamentally reactionary and that's the main
difference to US and Nato Empire. This Empire got parliaments to talk about war
affairs and they got public media to discuss. But the press won't talk about a
very interesting fact: the Americans have to be blamed for feeding the creature
of Islamic Terrorism.
In two-fold manner the US supported the arising of Islamic
Terrorism. At first they mistreated for example - you wrote it correctly - the
Iraqi population. I learned from some experts, that in the last ten years one
million Iraqi humans died because of the embargo. This politic caused a shortage
of medicine and there lives no diabetic person in Iraq - they all must die.
The second way the US supported the Terrorism was to supply the Islamic Groups in
Afghanistan with weapons and money. The result was the Taleban government and
religious terror regime in this poor country.
Now the US is responsible to stop the terror and to liberate the Afghanic
population that suffers, for example by supporting the democratic opposition or
by leading a coordinated liberation war against the Taleban. But I fear that the
US don't want to take the responsibility for their creature. May be they once
more act only symbolic and again brutal unjustified.
On the other hand the imperialism has to change his politics:
Stop the embargo against Iraq!
Force a political solution for the conflict between Israel und the Palestinians.
This solution means to end the occupation of Palestine area and to put an end to
terror and civil war.
Strategicly it is necessary to build up a proletarian revolutionary movement
who's able to gather the population over the frontiers of war - like the Lenin
party did in the first world war.
nachfolgend der Artikel aus WSWS
------------------
The political roots of the
terror attack on New York and Washington
By the Editorial Board
12 September 2001
Use
this version to print | Send this link by email
| Email
the author
The World Socialist Web
Site unequivocally condemns the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon. Those responsible for the hijacking of four commercial
passenger aircraft and their conversion into flying bombs are guilty of mass
murder. Nothing of a socially progressive character will be achieved on the
basis of such an indiscriminate and callous destruction of human life.
These acts of homicidal
terrorism manifest a toxic combination of demoralized pessimism, religious and
ultra-nationalist obscurantism, and, it must be added, political opportunism of
the vilest character. Terrorist organizations—notwithstanding their
anti-American rhetoric—base their tactics on the illusion that random acts of
horrific violence will compel the US ruling class to shift its policies. Thus,
in the final analysis, they hope to make a deal with Washington.
However it seeks to justify
itself, the terrorist method is fundamentally reactionary. Far from dealing a
powerful blow against imperialist militarism, terrorism plays into the hands of
those elements within the US establishment who seize on such events to justify
and legitimize the resort to war in pursuit of the geopolitical and economic
interests of the ruling elite. The murder of innocent civilians enrages,
disorients and confuses the public. It undermines the struggle for the
international unity of the working class, and counteracts all efforts to
educate the American people on the history and politics that form the
background to contemporary events in the Middle East.
Nevertheless, our
condemnation of Tuesday’s terrorist outrages does not in the slightest imply
any lessening of our principled and irreconcilable opposition to the policies
of the US government. Anyone who wishes to understand the why and wherefore of
yesterday’s events must study the historical and political record of the US in
the Middle East, especially over the last 30 years. The unrelenting efforts of
American imperialism to secure its domination over the oil resources of the
region, which has entailed, among other things, unstinting support for the
Israeli state’s oppression of the Palestinian people, has placed the United
States in violent opposition to the legitimate and irrepressible democratic,
national and social aspirations of the Arab masses.
In the immediate aftermath
of Tuesday’s events, politicians, editorialists and media pundits have declared
over and over that Americans must recognize that the destruction of the World
Trade Center means the United States is at war and must act accordingly. But
the fact of the matter is that the US government has been engaged in direct
warfare in the Middle East, in one form or another, for the better part of two
decades.
Putting aside the massive
material aid that it provides for Israeli military operations, the United
States has been bombing one or another Middle Eastern country almost
continuously since 1983. US bombers and/or battleships have attacked Lebanon,
Libya, Iraq, Iran, the Sudan and Afghanistan. Without actually declaring war,
the United States has conducted military operations against Iraq for nearly 11
years. The ongoing daily bombings of Iraq are barely mentioned in the American
media, which has made no attempt to ascertain the total number of Iraqis killed
by US bombs since 1991.
Given this bloody record,
why should anyone be surprised that those who have been targeted by the United
States have sought to strike back?
The same media that is now
screaming for blood has routinely applauded the use of violence against
whatever country or people are deemed to be obstacles to US interests. Let us
recall the words of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who had
this to say to the Serbian people during the US bombing campaign in 1999: “It
should be lights out in Belgrade: every power grid, water pipe, road and
war-related factory has to be hit.... [W]e will set your country back by
pulverizing you. You want 1950? We can do 1950. You want 1389? We can do 1389.”
The foreign policy of the
US is a mixture of cynicism, brutality and irresponsibility. Washington has
pursued a course that has inflamed the hatred of large sections of the world’s
population, creating an environment in which recruits can be found for bloody
terrorist operations. In rare moments of candor, foreign policy specialists
have acknowledged that the actions of the United States provoke hatred and the
desire for retribution. During the Balkan War, former Secretary of State Lawrence
Eagleburger stated: “We’ve presented to the rest of the world a vision of the
bully on the block who pushes a button, people out there die, we don’t pay
anything except the cost of a missile ... that’s going to haunt us in terms of
trying to deal with the rest of the world in the years ahead.”
This insight has not
prevented the same Eagleburger from declaring Tuesday night that the United
States should respond to the destruction of the World Trade Center by dropping
bombs immediately on any country that might have been involved.
George W. Bush’s address to
the nation Tuesday evening epitomized the arrogance and blindness of the
American ruling class. Far from America being “the brightest beacon for freedom
and opportunity in the world,” the US is seen by tens of millions as the main
enemy of their human and democratic rights, and the main source of their
oppression. The American ruling elite, in its insolence and cynicism, acts as
if it can carry out its violent enterprises around the world without creating
the political conditions for violent acts of retribution.
In the immediate aftermath
of Tuesday’s attacks, US authorities and the media are once again declaring
that Osama bin Laden is responsible. This is possible, although, as always,
they present no evidence to back up their claim.
But the charge that bin
Laden is the culprit raises a host of troubling questions. Given the fact that
the US has declared this individual to be the world’s most deadly terrorist,
whose every move is tracked with the aid of the most technologically
sophisticated and massive intelligence apparatus, how could bin Laden organize
such an elaborate attack without being detected? An attack, moreover, against
the same New York skyscraper that was hit in 1993?
The devastating success of
his assault would indicate that, from the standpoint of the American
government, the crusade against terrorism has been far more a campaign of
propaganda to justify US military violence around the world than a
conscientious effort to protect the American people.
Moreover, both bin Laden
and the Taliban mullahs, whom the US accuses of harboring him, were financed
and armed by the Reagan-Bush administration to fight pro-Soviet regimes in
Afghanistan in the 1980s. If they are involved in Tuesday’s operations, then
the American CIA and political establishment are guilty of having nurtured the
very forces that carried out the bloodiest attack on American civilians in US
history.
The escalation of US
militarism abroad will inevitably be accompanied by intensified attacks on
democratic rights at home. The first victims of the war fever being whipped up
are Arab-Americans, who are already being subjected to death threats and other
forms of harassment as a result of the media hysteria.
The calls from both Republican
and Democratic politicians for a declaration of war foreshadow a more general
crackdown on opponents of American foreign policy. General Norman Schwarzkopf,
who commanded American troops in the 1991 invasion of Iraq, spoke for much of
the political and military elite when he declared on television that the war on
alleged terrorist supporters should be conducted inside as well as outside the
borders of the US.
It is the policies pursued
by the United States, driven by the strategic and financial interests of the
ruling elite, which laid the foundations for the nightmare that unfolded on
Tuesday. The actions now being contemplated by the Bush
administration—indicated by the president’s threat to make “no distinction
between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them”—will
only set the stage for further catastrophes.
See Also:
Why the Bush administration wants
war
[15 September 2001]
Arab-Americans and Muslims attacked
in the US
[15 September 2001]
The political significance of
Israel’s assassination policy
[7 September 2001]
After the Slaughter: Political
Lessons of the Balkan War
[14 June 1999]