WHAT KIND OF WAR ARE WE LOOKING FOR?
By Richard Faint I am not alone in finding the present situation frightening and wonder what kind of war we are looking for and who wants it. There is an assumption (probably quite a right assumption) that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the atrocities in New York (9/11) and America (now the biggest kid on the block) has decided that we (the rest of the kids on the same block – i.e. NATO) must take this “war” to Afghanistan. This on the assumption that Osama Bin Laden is still in Afghanistan and, presumably, that no-one else was involved other than Bin Laden. The ‘weapons of mass destruction’ argument for going into Iraq is a different argument. Whether the intelligence behind that was correct is only now being properly
examined and tested. America quite rightly reacted strongly to the attack on the World Trade Centre but is proving to the rest of the world that they are the biggest kid on the block the right approach? For the moment Bush has displayed considerable constraint and not thrown America’s undoubted ability to wage a high tech attack into the equation. Before anything else we - and I speak mainly, but not only, of Britain - must decide (and then advise our American cousins of our decision) what we think the correct reaction should be. While I do agree that we should back America and support America (I am not a supporter of the
anti-America brigade) America must also listen and take account of our decision before tipping the world into a holocaust. As Paddy Ashdown mentioned in an article, Afghanistan is a fractured and divided land. When not at war with outsiders it has been almost permanently at war with itself. This almost permanent state of war is, to most westerners; difficult to put alongside the claim that ISLAM is peace. But that is not the problem here. President Bush reacted by declaring a war on terrorism and stating his intention to make that an international war on terrorism. If it is international then it is natural that America looks to her British cousins for support and Britain can do its part by attempting to keep the American reply within the bounds of reasonableness. We cannot stop them from doing “what a man has to do”. But what is this idea of a reasonable war? Is it a war that we, the British, want (and can we persuade our cousins that “war” is not the right reaction)? Is it a declaration of war that is required or a police action? America and the rest of the world – leaving out fundamentalists of any hue – were rightly appalled at the attack on the twin towers. Care must be given (and hopefully is being given) to the right reaction. Terrorists have over the years claimed to be waging war for various reasons. I believe (but could be wrong) that a future Prime Minister of Israel blew up the King David Hotel, in what was then Palestine, en route from being a terrorist/freedom fighter to respected politician. 43