|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home | Contact | Links | ||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
News: Globalisation & social justice
Bin Laden's strategy27 January 2003Sept 11 was an act of provocation, not hate, argues Michael Doran.
Somebody else's civil warBy Michael Scott DoranIn the weeks after the attacks of September 11, Americans repeatedly asked, "Why do they hate us?" To understand what happened, however, another question may be even more pertinent: "Why do they want to provoke us?" David Fromkin suggested the answer in Foreign Affairs back in 1975. "Terrorism," he noted, "is violence used in order to create fear; but it is aimed at creating fear in order that the fear, in turn, will lead somebody else - not the terrorist - to embark on some quite different program of action that will accomplish whatever it is that the terrorist really desires." When a terrorist kills, the goal is not murder itself but something else - for example, a police crackdown that will create a rift between government and society that the terrorist can then exploit for revolutionary purposes. Osama bin Laden sought - and has received - an international military crackdown, one he wants to exploit for his particular brand of revolution.
Bin Laden produced a piece of high political theatre he hoped would reach the audience that concerned him the most: the umma, or universal Islamic community. The script was obvious: America, cast as the villain, was supposed to use its military might like a cartoon character trying to kill a fly with a shotgun. The media would see to it that any use of force against the civilian population of Afghanistan was broadcast around the world, and the umma would find it shocking how Americans nonchalantly caused Muslims to suffer and die. The ensuing outrage would open a chasm between state and society in the Middle East, and the governments allied with the West - many of which are repressive, corrupt, and illegitimate - would find themselves adrift. It was to provoke such an outcome that bin Laden broadcast his statement following the start of the military campaign on October 7, in which he said, among other things, that the Americans and the British "have divided the entire world into two regions - one of faith, where there is no hypocrisy, and another of infidelity, from which we hope God will protect us." Polarising the Islamic world between the umma and the regimes allied with the United States would help achieve bin Laden's primary goal: furthering the cause of Islamic revolution within the Muslim world itself, in the Arab lands especially and in Saudi Arabia above all. Bin Laden had no intention of defeating America. War with the United States was not a goal in and of itself but rather an instrument designed to help his brand of extremist Islam survive and flourish among the believers. Americans, in short, have been drawn into somebody else's civil war. Washington had no choice but to take up the gauntlet, but it is not altogether clear that Americans understand fully this war's true dimensions. The response to bin Laden cannot be left to soldiers and police alone. He has embroiled the United States in an intra-Muslim ideological battle, a struggle for hearts and minds in which al Qaeda had already scored a number of victories - as the reluctance of America's Middle Eastern allies to offer public support for the campaign against it demonstrated. The first step toward weakening the hold of bin Laden's ideology, therefore, must be to comprehend the symbolic universe into which he has dragged us. Do you have a view? Send-a-LetterIf you would like to submit any commentary on the material published on this site for publishing in our letters section, please use our feedback form.
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
© 2001-2005 The Evatt Foundation Main Quadrangle (A14) URL:http://evatt.org.au/news/173.html
|
 
The Evatt Foundation is a LaborNET site, proudly designed and sponsored by Social Change Online. |
