onegoodmove: No Victory

Dyer: Bush briefly gets it right - no victory in the war on terror

"With the right policies, this is a war we can win, this is a war we must win, and this is a war we will win," said Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry in Tennessee on Aug. 31. "The war on terrorism is absolutely winnable," repeated his vice-presidential running mate, Sen. John Edwards. That is utter drivel, and they must privately know it, but truth generally loses to calculated lies in politics.
�� This outburst of bravado was prompted by President George W. Bush's brief brush with the truth about terrorism the previous weekend, when he told an interviewer that he did not really think you can win the war on terror, but that conditions could be changed in ways that would make terrorists less acceptable in certain parts of the world. For a moment there, you glimpsed a functioning intellect at work. Such honesty rarely goes unpunished in politics.
�� This heroic attempt to grapple with reality was a welcome departure from Bush's usual style - "I have a clear vision of how to win the war on terror and bring peace to the world," he was claiming as recently as Aug. 30 - and so his opponents pounced on it at once. "What if President Reagan had said that it may be difficult to win the war against Communism?" asked John Edwards, in one of the least credible displays of indignation in American history.
�� Bush promptly fled back to the safe terrain of hypocrisy and patriotic lies. "We meet today in a time of war for our country, a war we did not start, yet one that we will win," he told a veterans' conference in Nashville on 1 September. But it is not "a time of war" for the United States, and it cannot "win."
�� Some 140,000 young American soldiers are trapped in a neo-colonial war in Iraq (where there were no terrorists until the U.S. invasion), but their casualties are typical of colonial wars: fewer than one percent killed a year. As for the 300 million Americans at home, exactly as many of them have been killed by terrorists since 9-11 as have been killed by the Creature from the Black Lagoon in the same period. None.
��

The rhetoric of a "war on terror" has been useful to the Bush administration, and terrorism now bulks inordinately large in any media where the agenda is set by American perspectives. On the front page of the International Herald Tribune that carried the story on Bush's return to political orthodoxy on terrorism, four of the other five stories were also about terrorism: "Twin bus bombs kill 16 in Israel," "Blast leaves 8 dead in Moscow subway," "12 Nepal hostages slain in Iraq," and "French hold hectic talks on captives."
�� In other words, 36 of the quarter-million people who died on this planet on the 31st of August were killed by terrorists: close to one in 8,000. No wonder the IHT headlined its front page "A Deadly Day of Terror." Although it would have been on firmer statistical ground if it had substituted the headline "A Deadly Day for Swimming" or even "A Deadly Day for Falling Off Ladders."
�� Actually, more than 36 people were killed by "terrorists" on Aug. 31 - perhaps as many as 50 or 60. The rest were just killed in wars that the United States is not all that interested in: in Nepal, in Peru, in Burundi, and in other out-of-the-way countries where the local guerrillas are not Muslims and have no imaginable links with the terrorists who attacked the United States.
�� George W. Bush spoke the truth, briefly, at the end of August, when he said that the "war on terror" cannot be won. It cannot be won or lost, because it is only a metaphor, not an actual war. It is like the "war on crime," another metaphor. Nobody ever expected that the "war on crime" would one day end in a surrender ceremony where all the criminals come out with their hands up, and afterwards there is no more crime. It is a statistical operation, and success is measured by how successful you are in getting the crime rate down. Same goes for terrorism.
�� You could do worse than to listen to Stella Rimington, the former director of MI5, Britain's intelligence agency for domestic operations: "I'm afraid that terrorism didn't begin on 9-11 and it will be around for a long time. I was very surprised by the announcement of a war on terrorism because terrorism has been around for 35 years . . . [and it] will be around while there are people with grievances. There are things we can to improve the situation, but there will always be terrorism. One can be misled by talking about a war, as though in some way you can defeat it." As Bush said before his handlers got the muzzle back on.
��---
��Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.
��
��
��