[Infowarrior] - Must read.... Terrorized by 'War on Terror'

[Richard Forno]

Terrorized by 'War on Terror'
How a Three-Word Mantra Has Undermined America
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301
613_pf.html

By Zbigniew Brzezinski
Sunday, March 25, 2007; B01

The "war on terror" has created a culture of fear in America. The Bush
administration's elevation of these three words into a national mantra since
the horrific events of 9/11 has had a pernicious impact on American
democracy, on America's psyche and on U.S. standing in the world. Using this
phrase has actually undermined our ability to effectively confront the real
challenges we face from fanatics who may use terrorism against us.

The damage these three words have done -- a classic self-inflicted wound --
is infinitely greater than any wild dreams entertained by the fanatical
perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks when they were plotting against us in
distant Afghan caves. The phrase itself is meaningless. It defines neither a
geographic context nor our presumed enemies. Terrorism is not an enemy but a
technique of warfare -- political intimidation through the killing of
unarmed non-combatants.

But the little secret here may be that the vagueness of the phrase was
deliberately (or instinctively) calculated by its sponsors. Constant
reference to a "war on terror" did accomplish one major objective: It
stimulated the emergence of a culture of fear. Fear obscures reason,
intensifies emotions and makes it easier for demagogic politicians to
mobilize the public on behalf of the policies they want to pursue. The war
of choice in Iraq could never have gained the congressional support it got
without the psychological linkage between the shock of 9/11 and the
postulated existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Support for
President Bush in the 2004 elections was also mobilized in part by the
notion that "a nation at war" does not change its commander in chief in
midstream. The sense of a pervasive but otherwise imprecise danger was thus
channeled in a politically expedient direction by the mobilizing appeal of
being "at war."

To justify the "war on terror," the administration has lately crafted a
false historical narrative that could even become a self-fulfilling
prophecy. By claiming that its war is similar to earlier U.S. struggles
against Nazism and then Stalinism (while ignoring the fact that both Nazi
Germany and Soviet Russia were first-rate military powers, a status al-Qaeda
neither has nor can achieve), the administration could be preparing the case
for war with Iran. Such war would then plunge America into a protracted
conflict spanning Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and perhaps also Pakistan.

The culture of fear is like a genie that has been let out of its bottle. It
acquires a life of its own -- and can become demoralizing. America today is
not the self-confident and determined nation that responded to Pearl Harbor;
nor is it the America that heard from its leader, at another moment of
crisis, the powerful words "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself";
nor is it the calm America that waged the Cold War with quiet persistence
despite the knowledge that a real war could be initiated abruptly within
minutes and prompt the death of 100 million Americans within just a few
hours. We are now divided, uncertain and potentially very susceptible to
panic in the event of another terrorist act in the United States itself.

That is the result of five years of almost continuous national brainwashing
on the subject of terror, quite unlike the more muted reactions of several
other nations (Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany, Japan, to mention just a few)
that also have suffered painful terrorist acts. In his latest justification
for his war in Iraq, President Bush even claims absurdly that he has to
continue waging it lest al-Qaeda cross the Atlantic to launch a war of
terror here in the United States.

Such fear-mongering, reinforced by security entrepreneurs, the mass media
and the entertainment industry, generates its own momentum. The terror
entrepreneurs, usually described as experts on terrorism, are necessarily
engaged in competition to justify their existence. Hence their task is to
convince the public that it faces new threats. That puts a premium on the
presentation of credible scenarios of ever-more-horrifying acts of violence,
sometimes even with blueprints for their implementation.

That America has become insecure and more paranoid is hardly debatable. A
recent study reported that in 2003, Congress identified 160 sites as
potentially important national targets for would-be terrorists. With
lobbyists weighing in, by the end of that year the list had grown to 1,849;
by the end of 2004, to 28,360; by 2005, to 77,769. The national database of
possible targets now has some 300,000 items in it, including the Sears Tower
in Chicago and an Illinois Apple and Pork Festival.

Just last week, here in Washington, on my way to visit a journalistic
office, I had to pass through one of the absurd "security checks" that have
proliferated in almost all the privately owned office buildings in this
capital -- and in New York City. A uniformed guard required me to fill out a
form, show an I.D. and in this case explain in writing the purpose of my
visit. Would a visiting terrorist indicate in writing that the purpose is
"to blow up the building"? Would the guard be able to arrest such a
self-confessing, would-be suicide bomber? To make matters more absurd, large
department stores, with their crowds of shoppers, do not have any comparable
procedures. Nor do concert halls or movie theaters. Yet such "security"
procedures have become routine, wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and
further contributing to a siege mentality.

Government at every level has stimulated the paranoia. Consider, for
example, the electronic billboards over interstate highways urging motorists
to "Report Suspicious Activity" (drivers in turbans?). Some mass media have
made their own contribution. The cable channels and some print media have
found that horror scenarios attract audiences, while terror "experts" as
"consultants" provide authenticity for the apocalyptic visions fed to the
American public. Hence the proliferation of programs with bearded
"terrorists" as the central villains. Their general effect is to reinforce
the sense of the unknown but lurking danger that is said to increasingly
threaten the lives of all Americans.

The entertainment industry has also jumped into the act. Hence the TV
serials and films in which the evil characters have recognizable Arab
features, sometimes highlighted by religious gestures, that exploit public
anxiety and stimulate Islamophobia. Arab facial stereotypes, particularly in
newspaper cartoons, have at times been rendered in a manner sadly
reminiscent of the Nazi anti-Semitic campaigns. Lately, even some college
student organizations have become involved in such propagation, apparently
oblivious to the menacing connection between the stimulation of racial and
religious hatreds and the unleashing of the unprecedented crimes of the
Holocaust.

The atmosphere generated by the "war on terror" has encouraged legal and
political harassment of Arab Americans (generally loyal Americans) for
conduct that has not been unique to them. A case in point is the reported
harassment of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) for its
attempts to emulate, not very successfully, the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Some House Republicans recently described CAIR
members as "terrorist apologists" who should not be allowed to use a Capitol
meeting room for a panel discussion.

Social discrimination, for example toward Muslim air travelers, has also
been its unintended byproduct. Not surprisingly, animus toward the United
States even among Muslims otherwise not particularly concerned with the
Middle East has intensified, while America's reputation as a leader in
fostering constructive interracial and interreligious relations has suffered
egregiously.

The record is even more troubling in the general area of civil rights. The
culture of fear has bred intolerance, suspicion of foreigners and the
adoption of legal procedures that undermine fundamental notions of justice.
Innocent until proven guilty has been diluted if not undone, with some --
even U.S. citizens -- incarcerated for lengthy periods of time without
effective and prompt access to due process. There is no known, hard evidence
that such excess has prevented significant acts of terrorism, and
convictions for would-be terrorists of any kind have been few and far
between. Someday Americans will be as ashamed of this record as they now
have become of the earlier instances in U.S. history of panic by the many
prompting intolerance against the few.

In the meantime, the "war on terror" has gravely damaged the United States
internationally. For Muslims, the similarity between the rough treatment of
Iraqi civilians by the U.S. military and of the Palestinians by the Israelis
has prompted a widespread sense of hostility toward the United States in
general. It's not the "war on terror" that angers Muslims watching the news
on television, it's the victimization of Arab civilians. And the resentment
is not limited to Muslims. A recent BBC poll of 28,000 people in 27
countries that sought respondents' assessments of the role of states in
international affairs resulted in Israel, Iran and the United States being
rated (in that order) as the states with "the most negative influence on the
world." Alas, for some that is the new axis of evil!

The events of 9/11 could have resulted in a truly global solidarity against
extremism and terrorism. A global alliance of moderates, including Muslim
ones, engaged in a deliberate campaign both to extirpate the specific
terrorist networks and to terminate the political conflicts that spawn
terrorism would have been more productive than a demagogically proclaimed
and largely solitary U.S. "war on terror" against "Islamo-fascism." Only a
confidently determined and reasonable America can promote genuine
international security which then leaves no political space for terrorism.

Where is the U.S. leader ready to say, "Enough of this hysteria, stop this
paranoia"? Even in the face of future terrorist attacks, the likelihood of
which cannot be denied, let us show some sense. Let us be true to our
traditions.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, is
the author most recently of "Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis
of American Superpower" (Basic Books).