The 9/11 tragedy is one of the fiercest terrorist attacks on USA. We can call it a terrorist attack because it was planned and executed by the terrorists of Al Qaeda (CBC News, 2004). Most would not deny that 9/11 was a typical act of terrorism; some believe that it was a war in the name of religion. A group of Islamist terrorists hijacked air planes and crashed those into the twin towers of World Trade Centre and the building of Pentagon in US, killing more than 3000 people (Inside 9/11, 2005). Noam Chomsky, the renowned intellectual supports the definition of terrorism in US Army Manual which considers terrorism to be the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature which is done through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear (TRADOC Pamphlet No. 525-37, 1984). When we judge the 9/11 attacks according to this definition, it is proven to be a terrorist attack.
But cannot the same definition be used to describe the extreme of violence done in the name of War on Terror was US army? Agreed that US could not have stayed dumb in reaction against the 9/11 attacks, but the level of violence and torture which comprised the War on Terror was also an extremist action because more than the ‘renowned’ terrorists, it led to deaths of innocent people. This essay aims at illuminating how War on Terror was US is itself a perpetuator of terrorism in the world and might be called a morally hypocritical and logically invalid.
Let’s take the example of ‘terrorism’ by the US Military itself. On 12 July 2007, a US Military helicopter attacked and killed a dozen of innocent Iraqi civilians and two Reuters staff in Baghdad (France24.com, 2010). Cannot we call it terrorism? Or let’s talk about the brutal killing of innocent Afghani children and adults while they were sleeping (dailymail.co.uk, 2012). A US Army member mercilessly shot dead more than a dozen of sleeping Afghani people, killing 9 children and then burning their dead bodies with strong chemicals. Is this a war against terror or an example of terrorist act itself? These acts too fit perfect in the category of terrorism when judged according to the definition of terrorism by the US Army Manual as these were calculated use of violence to attain goals that were political or ideological in nature which was done through intimidation and instilling fear (US Army Manual). But US did not label these acts to be ‘terrorism’; it always found a way to manipulate the words and discard the truth.
What does the War on Terror means? It was supposed to be a global war to fight terrorism and solve it; it obviously aimed at killing Osama Bin Laden for 9/11 attacks. But it has been rightly called as the World War III (Friedman, “Foreign Affairs; World War III”). Because, it has led to not only the killing of hundreds of terrorists but thousands of US Army officials, members of Army from other nations and yes, so many innocent civilians. Does this treacherous revenge defeats terrorism? It has only added to chaos in Middle East as well as US itself. Being passive in response was never the answer to fight the planners of 9/11 attacks but such outrage affecting innocent lives is also not appropriate. This makes some conclude the US War on Terror to be hypocritical and illogical in nature. William Odom puts it in American Hegemony: How to use it, how to lose it as follows:
“ Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists
and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely make the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world (Odom, American Hegemony: How to use it, how to lose it).”
More than what US did in the past, it’s the strategies of War on Terror which seems US’s slogan on anti-terrorism measures sound hypocritical.
In a personal opinion, there should be a more radical solution to the problem of terrorism. The acts of merciless killing of innocent civilians, deaths of gallant army people and huge expenditure on war should be replaced by a wiser strategy which takes into account the following points:
- Better techniques to locate terrorist base and training camps so that only terrorists get caught.
- Best efforts to curb the main suppliers of arms and ammunition or it’s ingredients to the terrorist groups- This can cut off the oxygen supply for the militants.
- No violence against innocent civilians of any country.
- No hatred for Muslim people- one’s religion is not to be blamed. There are several criminals and terrorists in the world who belong to religions other than Islam.
Illogical violence in the name of War against Terrorism has led to loss of thousands of life. The US Military budget is a jaw-dropping statistic. To have an overview of the expenditure on military purposes and the loss of human life in such operations, the following graphic presentation can be seen- http://www.loveinfographics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/us-federal-discretionary-budget-2012-statistics-tax-spending-politics-infographic1.jpg . The total spending on military budget crossed 1 trillion $ in National Security Outlays in Fiscal
When one takes a look at the cost of war in US military operations, in War on Terror, it shall leave the reader awestruck. In last 10 years, around 6000 members of US military and thousands of civilians have been killed (Costs of War). Edwin Gonzalez, a 22 year old Navy medic was the first from US military to died in War of Terror; he fell victim to a roadside bomb attack in Helmand Province on October 8th, 2010 (Cost of War). It was just the beginning. Navy Lt. Kylan A Jones-Huffman was killed in 2003, Lance Cpl. James Eric Swain in 2004, Geraldine Marquez from Air Force in 2007, Spc. Kedith L. Jacobs and Spc. Patricia L. Horne in 2012 (Costs of War). And many more- both soldiers and civilians! Though US celebrates it victory to kill Osama Bin Laden, was it logical to let die thousands to chase one man? Much more potent terrorists than Obama must have been developed in these 10 years. So, wasn’t the War on terror for taught? It did not kill Terrorism but few terrorists. And in the name of war, heinous acts of violence against innocent civilians took place. Incidents like physical and sexual abuse Abu Ghraib (Beneath the hoods, 2006) prove that the war took another form gradually. It aimed at attacking Islamists and demeaning homosexuality in those jails in the name of holding captives. Does that fight terrorism? The direct connection between the US military-industrial complex and mass media in shaping the War on Terror has been very well illustrated in by Jim Kuypers in
Bush's War: Media Bias and Justifications for War in a Terrorist Age (Kuypers, 2006). The writer has said the following to illustrate the role of media in this regard:
“Immediately following 9/11, the mainstream news media (represented by CBS, ABC, NBC, USA Today, The New York Times, and The Washington Post) did echo Bush, but within eight weeks it began to intentionally ignore certain information the president was sharing, and instead reframed the president's themes or intentionally introduced new material to shift the focus (Kuypers, 2006).”
In conclusion, this War on Terror by US military is an illogical strategy to fight terrorism. It is greatly hypocritical too because it uses terrorism in the name of fighting terrorism and spends a fortune every day to support never-fruitful wars. If US could start spending half of the money on unbiased and wise operations like providing food, shelter, education and employment to people, it could abate if not dissipate crime and terror. If US military and administration starts playing honest and wise with people, much more lives could be saved. This hypocritical approach to fight terrorism in the long run would only lead to amplified poverty and worsened chaos, one day labelling US as a perpetuator of International Terrorism.
References
- “Beneath the Hoods". War in Iraq (Newsweek). 2006. Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 from Web. http://web.archive.org/web/20070126023954/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5412316/site/newsweek/
- CBC News. October 29, 2004. Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html
- Costs of War. Watson Institute. Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 from Web http://costsofwar.org/article/us-and-allied-killed-and-wounded
- Mail Online. “Taliban vows revenge after U.S. Sergeant on SEAL team 'shoots dead nine sleeping Afghan children before burning their bodies' in deadly rampage that killed 16”- by Beth Stebner and Thomas Durante. March 2012. Retrieved on 7 Apr 2007 from Web http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2113410/US-soldier-kills-16-Afghan-civilians-deadly-shooting-rampage.html
- France24.com. Leaked video shows US military killing of civilians, Reuters staff. By Stephen Clarke and Joseph Bamat. 2010. Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 from Web http://www.france24.com/en/20100406-leaked-video-shows-us-military-killing-civilians-reuters-staff
- Inside 9/11 : Zero Hour, National Geographic Channel documentary, 2005. Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 from http://natgeotv.com/uk/inside-911
- Kuypers, Jim A. (2006). Bush's War: Media Bias and Justifications for War in a Terrorist Age. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc
- Definition of Terrorism in the US Army Manual. US Army Operational Concept for Terrorism Counteraction_ (TRADOC Pamphlet No. 525-37), 1984
- Robert Higgs. "The Trillion-Dollar Defense Budget Is Already Here". Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 from Web http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1941
- Thomas L. Friedman. "Foreign Affairs; World War III". New York Times. (13 September 2009). Retrieved on 7 Apr 2013 from Web www.nytimes.com/2001/09/13/opinion/foreign-affairs-world-war-iii.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
- William Odom. ‘American Hegemony: How to use it, how to lose it ’. Retrieved online on 7 Apr 2013 http://www.middlebury.edu/media/view/214721/original/OdomPaper.pdf
