Zsenialis cikk a haborurol: from Arundhati Roy (fwd)

[Fabian Katalin]

> >
> >
> >'Brutality smeared in peanut butter'
> >Why America must stop the war now. By Arundhati Roy
> >
> >Arundhati Roy
> >Tuesday October 23, 2001
> >The Guardian
> >
> >As darkness deepened over Afghanistan on Sunday October 7
2001, the US
> >government, backed by the International Coalition Against
Terror (the new,
> >amenable surrogate for the United Nations), launched air
strikes against
> >Afghanistan. TV channels lingered on computer-animated
images of cruise
> >missiles, stealth bombers, tomahawks, "bunker-busting"
missiles and Mark 82
> >high drag bombs. All over the world, little boys watched
goggle-eyed and
> >stopped clamouring for new video games.
> >
> >The UN, reduced now to an ineffective acronym, wasn't
even asked to mandate
> >the air strikes. (As Madeleine Albright once said, "We
will behave
> >multilaterally when we can, and unilaterally when we
must.") The "evidence"
> >against the terrorists was shared amongst friends in the
"coalition".
> >
> >After conferring, they announced that it didn1t matter
whether or not the
> >"evidence" would stand up in a court of law. Thus, in an
instant, were
> >centuries of jurisprudence carelessly trashed.
> >
> >Nothing can excuse or justify an act of terrorism,
whether it is committed
> >by religious fundamentalists, private militia, people's
resistance movements
> >- or whether it's dressed up as a war of retribution by a
recognised
> >government. The bombing of Afghanistan is not revenge for
New York and
> >Washington. It is yet another act of terror against the
people of the world.
> >
> >Each innocent person that is killed must be added to, not
set off against,
> >the grisly toll of civilians who died in New York and
Washington.
> >
> >People rarely win wars, governments rarely lose them.
People get killed.
> >
> >Governments moult and regroup, hydra-headed. They use
flags first to
> >shrink-wrap people's minds and smother thought, and then
as ceremonial
> >shrouds to bury their willing dead. On both sides, in
Afghanistan as well as
> >America, civilians are now hostage to the actions of
their own governments.
> >
> >Unknowingly, ordinary people in both countries share a
common bond - they
> >have to live with the phenomenon of blind, unpredictable
terror. Each batch
> >of bombs that is dropped on Afghanistan is matched by a
corresponding
> >escalation of mass hysteria in America about anthrax,
more hijackings and
> >other terrorist acts.
> >
> >There is no easy way out of the spiralling morass of
terror and brutality
> >that confronts the world today. It is time now for the
human race to hold
> >still, to delve into its wells of collective wisdom, both
ancient and
> >modern. What happened on September 11 changed the world
forever.
> >
> >Freedom, progress, wealth, technology, war - these words
have taken on new
> >meaning.
> >
> >Governments have to acknowledge this transformation, and
approach their new
> >tasks with a modicum of honesty and humility.
Unfortunately, up to now,
> >there has been no sign of any introspection from the
leaders of the
> >International Coalition. Or the Taliban.
> >
> >When he announced the air strikes, President George Bush
said: "We're a
> >peaceful nation." America1s favourite ambassador, Tony
Blair, (who also
> >holds the portfolio of prime minister of the UK), echoed
him: "We're a
> >peaceful people."
> >
> >So now we know. Pigs are horses. Girls are boys. War is
peace.
> >
> >Speaking at the FBI headquarters a few days later,
President Bush said:
> >"This is our calling. This is the calling of the United
States of America.
> >The most free nation in the world. A nation built on
fundamental values that
> >reject hate, reject violence, rejects murderers and
rejects evil. We will
> >not tire."
> >
> >Here is a list of the countries that America has been at
war with - and
> >bombed - since the second world war: China (1945-46,
1950-53), Korea
> >(1950-53), Guatemala (1954, 1967-69), Indonesia (1958),
Cuba (1959-60), the
> >Belgian Congo (1964), Peru (1965), Laos (1964-73),
Vietnam (1961-73),
> >Cambodia (1969-70), Grenada (1983), Libya (1986), El
Salvador (1980s),
> >Nicaragua (1980s), Panama (1989), Iraq (1991-99), Bosnia
(1995), Sudan
> >(1998), Yugoslavia (1999). And now Afghanistan.
> >
> >Certainly it does not tire - this, the most free nation
in the world.
> >
> >What freedoms does it uphold? Within its borders, the
freedoms of speech,
> >religion, thought; of artistic expression, food habits,
sexual preferences
> >(well, to some extent) and many other exemplary,
wonderful things.
> >
> >Outside its borders, the freedom to dominate, humiliate
and subjugate -
> >usually in the service of America1s real religion, the
"free market". So
> >when the US government christens a war "Operation
Infinite Justice", or
> >"Operation Enduring Freedom", we in the third world feel
more than a tremor
> >of fear.
> >
> >Because we know that Infinite Justice for some means
Infinite Injustice for
> >others. And Enduring Freedom for some means Enduring
Subjugation for others.
> >
> >The International Coalition Against Terror is a largely
cabal of the richest
> >countries in the world. Between them, they manufacture
and sell almost all
> >of the world's weapons, they possess the largest
stockpile of weapons of
> >mass destruction - chemical, biological and nuclear. They
have fought the
> >most wars, account for most of the genocide, subjection,
ethnic cleansing
> >and human rights violations in modern history, and have
sponsored, armed and
> >financed untold numbers of dictators and despots. Between
them, they have
> >worshipped, almost deified, the cult of violence and war.
For all its
> >appalling sins, the Taliban just isn't in the same league.
> >
> >The Taliban was compounded in the crumbling crucible of
rubble, heroin and
> >landmines in the backwash of the cold war. Its oldest
leaders are in their
> >early 40s. Many of them are disfigured and handicapped,
missing an eye, an
> >arm or a leg. They grew up in a society scarred and
devastated by war.
> >
> >Between the Soviet Union and America, over 20 years,
about $45bn (Ł30bn)
> >worth of arms and ammunition was poured into Afghanistan.
The latest
> >weaponry was the only shard of modernity to intrude upon
a thoroughly
> >medieval society.
> >
> >Young boys - many of them orphans - who grew up in those
times, had guns for
> >toys, never knew the security and comfort of family life,
never experienced
> >the company of women. Now, as adults and rulers, the
Taliban beat, stone,
> >rape and brutalise women, they don't seem to know what
else to do with them.
> >
> >Years of war has stripped them of gentleness, inured them
to kindness and
> >human compassion. Now they've turned their monstrosity on
their own people.
> >
> >They dance to the percussive rhythms of bombs raining
down around them.
> >
> >With all due respect to President Bush, the people of the
world do not have
> >to choose between the Taliban and the US government. All
the beauty of human
> >civilisation - our art, our music, our literature - lies
beyond these two
> >fundamentalist, ideological poles. There is as little
chance that the people
> >of the world can all become middle-class consumers as
there is that they
> >will all embrace any one particular religion. The issue
is not about good v
> >evil or Islam v Christianity as much as it is about
space. About how to
> >accommodate diversity, how to contain the impulse towards
hegemony - every
> >kind of hegemony, economic, military, linguistic,
religious and cultural.
> >
> >Any ecologist will tell you how dangerous and fragile a
monoculture is. A
> >hegemonic world is like having a government without a
healthy opposition. It
> >becomes a kind of dictatorship. It1s like putting a
plastic bag over the
> >world, and preventing it from breathing. Eventually, it
will be torn open.
> >
> >One and a half million Afghan people lost their lives in
the 20 years of
> >conflict that preceded this new war. Afghanistan was
reduced to rubble, and
> >now, the rubble is being pounded into finer dust. By the
second day of the
> >air strikes, US pilots were returning to their bases
without dropping their
> >assigned payload of bombs. As one pilot put it,
Afghanistan is "not a
> >target-rich environment". At a press briefing at the
Pentagon, Donald
> >Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, was asked if America
had run out of
> >targets.
> >
> >"First we're going to re-hit targets," he said, "and
second, we're not
> >running out of targets, Afghanistan is ..." This was
greeted with gales of
> >laughter in the briefing room.
> >
> >By the third day of the strikes, the US defence
department boasted that it
> >had "achieved air supremacy over Afghanistan" (Did they
mean that they had
> >destroyed both, or maybe all 16, of Afghanistan's planes?)
> >
> >On the ground in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance - the
Taliban's old
> >enemy, and therefore the international coalition's newest
friend - is making
> >headway in its push to capture Kabul. (For the archives,
let it be said that
> >the Northern Alliance's track record is not very
different from the
> >Taliban's. But for now, because it's inconvenient, that
little detail is
> >being glossed over.) The visible, moderate, "acceptable"
leader of the
> >alliance, Ahmed Shah Masud, was killed in a suicide-bomb
attack early in
> >September. The rest of the Northern Alliance is a brittle
confederation of
> >brutal warlords, ex-communists and unbending clerics. It
is a disparate
> >group divided along ethnic lines, some of whom have
tasted power in
> >Afghanistan in the past.
> >
> >Until the US air strikes, the Northern Alliance
controlled about 5% of the
> >geographical area of Afghanistan. Now, with the
coalition's help and "air
> >cover", it is poised to topple the Taliban. Meanwhile,
Taliban soldiers,
> >sensing imminent defeat, have begun to defect to the
alliance. So the
> >fighting forces are busy switching sides and changing
uniforms. But in an
> >enterprise as cynical as this one, it seems to matter
hardly at all.
> >
> >Love is hate, north is south, peace is war.
> >
> >Among the global powers, there is talk of "putting in a
representative
> >government". Or, on the other hand, of "restoring" the
kingdom to
> >Afghanistan's 89-year old former king Zahir Shah, who has
lived in exile in
> >Rome since 1973. That's the way the game goes - support
Saddam Hussein, then
> >"take him out"; finance the mojahedin, then bomb them to
smithereens; put in
> >Zahir Shah and see if he's going to be a good boy. (Is it
possible to "put
> >in" a representative government? Can you place an order
for democracy - with
> >extra cheese and jalapeno peppers?)
> >
> >Reports have begun to trickle in about civilian
casualties, about cities
> >emptying out as Afghan civilians flock to the borders
which have been
> >closed. Main arterial roads have been blown up or sealed
off. Those who have
> >experience of working in Afghanistan say that by early
November, food
> >convoys will not be able to reach the millions of Afghans
(7.5m, according
> >to the UN) who run the very real risk of starving to
death during the course
> >of this winter. They say that in the days that are left
before winter sets
> >in, there can either be a war, or an attempt to reach
food to the hungry.
> >Not both.
> >
> >As a gesture of humanitarian support, the US government
air-dropped 37,000
> >packets of emergency rations into Afghanistan. It says it
plans to drop a
> >total of 500,000 packets. That will still only add up to
a single meal for
> >half a million people out of the several million in dire
need of food.
> >
> >Aid workers have condemned it as a cynical, dangerous,
public-relations
> >exercise. They say that air-dropping food packets is
worse than futile.
> >
> >First, because the food will never get to those who
really need it. More
> >dangerously, those who run out to retrieve the packets
risk being blown up
> >by landmines. A tragic alms race.
> >
> >Nevertheless, the food packets had a photo-op all to
themselves. Their
> >contents were listed in major newspapers. They were
vegetarian, we're told,
> >as per Muslim dietary law (!) Each yellow packet,
decorated with the
> >American flag, contained: rice, peanut butter, bean
salad, strawberry jam,
> >crackers, raisins, flat bread, an apple fruit bar,
seasoning, matches, a set
> >of plastic cutlery, a serviette and illustrated user
instructions.
> >
> >After three years of unremitting drought, an air-dropped
airline meal in
> >Jalalabad! The level of cultural ineptitude, the failure
to understand what
> >months of relentless hunger and grinding poverty really
mean, the US
> >government1s attempt to use even this abject misery to
boost its self-image,
> >beggars description.
> >
> >Reverse the scenario for a moment. Imagine if the Taliban
government was to
> >bomb New York City, saying all the while that its real
target was the US
> >government and its policies. And suppose, during breaks
between the bombing,
> >the Taliban dropped a few thousand packets containing nan
and kebabs impaled
> >on an Afghan flag. Would the good people of New York ever
find it in
> >themselves to forgive the Afghan government? Even if they
were hungry, even
> >if they needed the food, even if they ate it, how would
they ever forget the
> >insult, the condescension? Rudi Guiliani, Mayor of New
York City, returned a
> >gift of $10m from a Saudi prince because it came with a
few words of
> >friendly advice about American policy in the Middle East.
Is pride a luxury
> >that only the rich are entitled to?
> >
> >Far from stamping it out, igniting this kind of rage is
what creates
> >terrorism. Hate and retribution don't go back into the
box once you've let
> >them out. For every "terrorist" or his "supporter" that
is killed, hundreds
> >of innocent people are being killed too. And for every
hundred innocent
> >people killed, there is a good chance that several future
terrorists will be
> >created.
> >
> >Where will it all lead?
> >
> >Setting aside the rhetoric for a moment, consider the
fact that the world
> >has not yet found an acceptable definition of what
"terrorism" is. One
> >country's terrorist is too often another1s freedom
fighter. At the heart of
> >the matter lies the world's deep-seated ambivalence
towards violence.
> >
> >Once violence is accepted as a legitimate political
instrument, then the
> >morality and political acceptability of terrorists
(insurgents or freedom
> >fighters) becomes contentious, bumpy terrain. The US
government itself has
> >funded, armed and sheltered plenty of rebels and
insurgents around the
> >world.
> >
> >The CIA and Pakistan's ISI trained and armed the
mojahedin who, in the 80s,
> >were seen as terrorists by the government in
Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.
> >Today, Pakistan - America's ally in this new war -
sponsors insurgents who
> >cross the border into Kashmir in India. Pakistan lauds
them as
> >"freedom-fighters", India calls them "terrorists". India,
for its part,
> >denounces countries who sponsor and abet terrorism, but
the Indian army has,
> >in the past, trained separatist Tamil rebels asking for a
homeland in Sri
> >Lanka - the LTTE, responsible for countless acts of
bloody terrorism.
> >
> >(Just as the CIA abandoned the mujahideen after they had
served its purpose,
> >India abruptly turned its back on the LTTE for a host of
political reasons.
> >It was an enraged LTTE suicide bomber who assassinated
former Indian prime
> >minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1989.)
> >
> >It is important for governments and politicians to
understand that
> >manipulating these huge, raging human feelings for their
own narrow purposes
> >may yield instant results, but eventually and inexorably,
they have
> >disastrous consequences. Igniting and exploiting
religious sentiments for
> >reasons of political expediency is the most dangerous
legacy that
> >governments or politicians can bequeath to any people -
including their own.
> >
> >People who live in societies ravaged by religious or
communal bigotry know
> >that every religious text - from the Bible to the Bhagwad
Gita - can be
> >mined and misinterpreted to justify anything, from
nuclear war to genocide
> >to corporate globalisation.
> >
> >This is not to suggest that the terrorists who
perpetrated the outrage on
> >September 11 should not be hunted down and brought to
book. They must be.
> >
> >But is war the best way to track them down? Will burning
the haystack find
> >you the needle? Or will it escalate the anger and make
the world a living
> >hell for all of us?
> >
> >At the end of the day, how many people can you spy on,
how many bank
> >accounts can you freeze, how many conversations can you
eavesdrop on, how
> >many emails can you intercept, how many letters can you
open, how many
> >phones can you tap? Even before September 11, the CIA had
accumulated more
> >information than is humanly possible to process.
(Sometimes, too much data
> >can actually hinder intelligence - small wonder the US
spy satellites
> >completely missed the preparation that preceded India's
nuclear tests in
> >1998.)
> >
> >The sheer scale of the surveillance will become a
logistical, ethical and
> >civil rights nightmare. It will drive everybody clean
crazy. And freedom -
> >that precious, precious thing - will be the first
casualty. It's already
> >hurt and haemorrhaging dangerously.
> >
> >Governments across the world are cynically using the
prevailing paranoia to
> >promote their own interests. All kinds of unpredictable
political forces are
> >being unleashed. In India, for instance, members of the
All India People's
> >Resistance Forum, who were distributing anti-war and
anti-US pamphlets in
> >Delhi, have been jailed. Even the printer of the leaflets
was arrested.
> >
> >The rightwing government (while it shelters Hindu
extremists groups such as
> >the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal) has banned
the Islamic
> >Students Movement of India and is trying to revive an
anti- terrorist Act
> >which had been withdrawn after the Human Rights
Commission reported that it
> >had been more abused than used. Millions of Indian
citizens are Muslim. Can
> >anything be gained by alienating them?
> >
> >Every day that the war goes on, raging emotions are being
let loose into the
> >world. The international press has little or no
independent access to the
> >war zone. In any case, mainstream media, particularly in
the US, have more
> >or less rolled over, allowing themselves to be tickled on
the stomach with
> >press handouts from military men and government
officials. Afghan radio
> >stations have been destroyed by the bombing. The Taliban
has always been
> >deeply suspicious of the press. In the propaganda war,
there is no accurate
> >estimate of how many people have been killed%ined: rice, peanut butter, bean
salad, strawberry jam,
> >crackers, raisins, flat bread, an apple fruit bar,
seasoning, matches, a set
> >of plastic cutlery, a serviette and illustrated user
instructions.
> >
> >After three years of unremitting drought, an air-dropped
airline meal in
> >Jalalabad! The level of cultural ineptitude, the failure
to understand what
> >months of relentless hunger and grinding poverty really
mean, the US
> >government1s attempt to use even this abject misery to
boost its self-image,
> >beggars description.
> >
> >Reverse the scenario for a moment. Imagine if the Taliban
government was to
> >bomb New York City, saying all the while that its real
target was the US
> >government and its policies. And suppose, during breaks
between the bombing,
> >the Taliban dropped a few thousand packets containing nan
and kebabs impaled
> >on an Afghan flag. Would the good people of New York ever
find it in
> >themselves to forgive the Afghan government? Even if they
were hungry, even
> >if they needed the food, even if they ate it, how would
they ever forget the
> >insult, the condescension? Rudi Guiliani, Mayor of New
York City, returned a
> >gift of $10m from a Saudi prince because it came with a
few words of
> >friendly advice about American policy in the Middle East.
Is pride a luxury
> >that only the rich are entitled to?
> >
> >Far from stamping it out, igniting this kind of rage is
what creates
> >terrorism. Hate and retribution don't go back into the
box once you've let
> >them out. For every "terrorist" or his "supporter" that
is killed, hundreds
> >of innocent people are being killed too. And for every
hundred innocent
> >people killed, there is a good chance that several future
terrorists will be
> >created.
> >
> >Where will it all lead?
> >
> >Setting aside the rhetoric for a moment, consider the
fact that the world
> >has not yet found an acceptable definition of what
"terrorism" is. One
> >country's terrorist is too often another1s freedom
fighter. At the heart of
> >the matter lies the world's deep-seated ambivalence
towards violence.
> >
> >Once violence is accepted as a legitimate political
instrument, then the
> >morality and political acceptability of terrorists
(insurgents or freedom
> >fighters) becomes contentious, bumpy terrain. The US
government itself has
> >funded, armed and sheltered plenty of rebels and
insurgents around the
> >world.
> >
> >The CIA and Pakistan's ISI trained and armed the
mojahedin who, in the 80s,
> >were seen as terrorists by the government in
Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.
> >Today, Pakistan - America's ally in this new war -
sponsors insurgents who
> >cross the border into Kashmir in India. Pakistan lauds
them as
> >"freedom-fighters", India calls them "terrorists". India,
for its part,
> >denounces countries who sponsor and abet terrorism, but
the Indian army has,
> >in the past, trained separatist Tamil rebels asking for a
homeland in Sri
> >Lanka - the LTTE, responsible for countless acts of
bloody terrorism.
> >
> >(Just as the CIA abandoned the mujahideen after they had
served its purpose,
> >India abruptly turned its back on the LTTE for a host of
political reasons.
> >It was an enraged LTTE suicide bomber who assassinated
former Indian prime
> >minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1989.)
> >
> >It is important for governments and politicians to
understand that
> >manipulating these huge, raging human feelings for their
own narrow purposes
> >may yield instant results, but eventually and inexorably,
they have
> >disastrous consequences. Igniting and exploiting
religious sentiments for
> >reasons of political expediency is the most dangerous
legacy that
> >governments or politicians can bequeath to any people -
including their own.
> >
> >People who live in societies ravaged by religious or
communal bigotry know
> >that every religious text - from the Bible to the Bhagwad
Gita - can be
> >mined and misinterpreted to justify anything, from
nuclear war to genocide
> >to corporate globalisation.
> >
> >This is not to suggest that the terrorists who
perpetrated the outrage on
> >September 11 should not be hunted down and brought to
book. They must be.
> >
> >But is war the best way to track them down? Will burning
the haystack find
> >you the needle? Or will it escalate the anger and make
the world a living
> >hell for all of us?
> >
> >At the end of the day, how many people can you spy on,
how many bank
> >accounts can you freeze, how many conversations can you
eavesdrop on, how
> >many emails can you intercept, how many letters can you
open, how many
> >phones can you tap? Even before September 11, the CIA had
accumulated more
> >information than is humanly possible to process.
(Sometimes, too much data
> >can actually hinder intelligence - small wonder the US
spy satellites
> >completely missed the preparation that preceded India's
nuclear tests in
> >1998.)
> >
> >The sheer scale of the surveillance will become a
logistical, ethical and
> >civil rights nightmare. It will drive everybody clean
crazy. And freedom -
> >that precious, precious thing - will be the first
casualty. It's already
> >hurt and haemorrhaging dangerously.
> >
> >Governments across the world are cynically using the
prevailing paranoia to
> >promote their own interests. All kinds of unpredictable
political forces are
> >being unleashed. In India, for instance, members of the
All India People's
> >Resistance Forum, who were distributing anti-war and
anti-US pamphlets in
> >Delhi, have been jailed. Even the printer of the leaflets
was arrested.
> >
> >The rightwing government (while it shelters Hindu
extremists groups such as
> >the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal) has banned
the Islamic
> >Students Movement of India and is trying to revive an
anti- terrorist Act
> >which had been withdrawn after the Human Rights
Commission reported that it
> >had been more abused than used. Millions of Indian
citizens are Muslim. Can
> >anything be gained by alienating them?
> >
> >Every day that the war goes on, raging emotions are being
let loose into the
> >world. The
in