A weblog with random thoughts and reflections on society and ecology.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Thursday, December 26, 2002
Choice of Response
I thought I would write down some reflections on what happened September 11 last year. My wife and I worked at our CSA farm outside of Madison that morning. Dave, one of the farmers, stopped his tractor. He sat there for a while, listening to the radio. and then walked over to us to tell us what had happened. I remember mentioning that the worst part of it would probably be yet to come in form of the response from the US government. It turned out to be true.
I have many thoughts around this that I know are relatively unpopular among many in the US. Still, they are my honest impressions.
It is always tragic when someone dies before their natural lifespan has run its full course. I feel with all those who lost their dear ones, and understand very well their diverse reactions of grief, sorrow and anger. My personal view is that we, collectively and individually, should always do what we can for those in a difficult situation, and also work strongly to prevent suffering in any form. So also in this situation.
Beyond that, I feel that it is important to step back and see any situation in perspective. How does this particular situation compare with other serious threats? About the same number dies every other day from cancer in the US. A few more dies every two weeks from traffic accidents. We are facing an unravelling of global ecological systems that threathen our economies, our quality of life, and ultimately survival. It seems that there are other areas that warrants our focus and energy to a far higher degree.
I of course realize that what happened that day may repeat itself in some form, so prevention is important. The cause of terrorism is almost always frustration. In that particular case, it seemed the frustration was fueled by the US foreign policies and world military and cultural dominance. To me, that is understandable. Most of the people I know, in Europe and the US, express concern and frustration over the same issues. Understanding to some degree the frustration behind actions does of course not in any way justify actions that hurt other beings. That goes without saying. But, it is important to understand if we want to prevent something similar in the future.
It seems then that the best prevention is to address the core issues behind the frustration many around the world experience. Reducing the gap between the wealthy and poor and increasing local control seem to be two important aspects. There are many ways of approaching this. Traditional policies and programs from Western entities (such as the World Bank) have as a rule achieved just the opposite: Increased dependence on the rich countries. Transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich countries (look at the numbers). And fragmentation of traditional cultures through infusion of - often unhealthy - Western values such as materialism and consumerism. What is needed may be smaller scale programs aimed at helping people to be truly self-reliant through strengthening their local communities, economies and cultures. We also need a strong and truly democratic United Nations where the smaller countries and the poor have a strong voice. A United Nations not dominated by the wealthy and powerful.
This approach was promoted by NATO and many European countries in the week following the tragedy. I do understand why the US government did not adopt that strategy. They have everything to loose and little to gain (in the short run) by a more just and truly democratic world.
The US government instead chose a strategy of furthering their global military and economic dominance. A strategy that is likely to fuel the cycle of violence.
This brings me to what I see as an important aspect of the situation. There is a strong principle in Western law: Any person is innocent until proven guilty through a lawful court procedure. The established process is as follows: (a) Investigate the case. (b) Capture the assumed guilty without harming anyone who is innocent. (c) Establish their innocence or guilt in a lawful and open court. This is the process followed by any civilized nation in the world. The US has, rightfully, condemned nations which - for any reason - deviate from this procedure.
There is a strong international law and justice system in place to deal with international crime, such as that of September 11. Most civilized countries would follow the principles outlined above, and used this international system, to deal with such a situation.
The US government chose another route.
To see the situation more clearly, consider reducing the scale: A person intentionally kills a another person. What happens next? The law and justice system is engaged, an investigation is mounted, and the suspected killer is arrested. There is then an open court case, and the person is found guilty or not. That is the law and justice system that we are justifiably proud of. We voice our concern if there is any deviation from this pattern. In this case, the family of the killed person takes law and justice in their own hand. Before any trials, they go out, heavily armed, to find the person they believe is the guilty one (although there are no witnesses, only circumstantial evidence). The arrive at the location where they believe the guilty is to be found (again, a belief not backed with solid evidence), and start killing the innocent people who happens to be there. They cannot find the guilty person. They then go to another location. A location where there is a person they don’t like. A person who otherwise does not have any clear links to the one they believe is guilty. They then kill even more innocent people in an attempt to get at the one person. What would happen if a person in the US acted in such a way? They would immediately be stopped by the law, tried, and found guilty. They would themselves be seen as a dangerous criminal to be stopped using any legal means available.
The US government need a smokescreen for their actions, and have found it in fueling the most primitive of emotions. Well helped along by the US media.
In many ways, the US government is the mirror image of the terrorists. They both use violence and intimidation to achieve their goals.
The US government is making young and well-meaning US women and men into killers. Last year, they killed more innocent Afghanis than the terrorists killed that day in September. They are now in the verge of killing even more innocent people - this time in Iraq. If the US government wanted to design a strategy that would fuel the frustration and anger many already feel towards the US, and give additional people reason to feel the same way, they could hardly have chosen a better course of action.
My hope is that well-intentioned people around the world, and there are many of us, will stand up to the US government - and the nations which blindly follow their lead. We need a load and diverse voice, and actions that support more just - and effective - solutions.
01:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
