The Threat From the West
British Defence Secretary John Reid in reaction to the recent footage of British soldiers beating and abusing Iraqi teenagers commented "We ought to recognise the difficult situation our troops now fight in, far more difficult than any time in history because they face an enemy that is completely unconstrained....We face an adversary which is entirely unconstrained by any law....unfettered by any sense of morality". This line of argument has become common since the events of September 11 2001, with many arguing that the 'nature of the threat' facing the West has changed therefore the West's response must also change. The proponents of this view cite 'non state actors' such as Al Qaeda and other groups as posing an 'unprecedented' threat to the West. Yet is this really true? What really has changed?
Whilst the attacks of September 11 2001 were unprecedented in the scale of casualties inflicted on American soil, the fact remains that western countries and their outposts have been a target for attack for many years. Acts which happen today have always happened before. Examples such as the 1983 Beirut embassy bombing which killed hundreds of US marines, the murder of the Israeli athletes in Munich 1972, the ETA Basque separatist bombings, the IRA bombing campaigns in the 70s, 80s and early 90s and countless other such acts which one could cite. Whilst terrorism has always been a problem for society if anything it is the attitude of the West which has changed.
Today we are witnessing wars of aggression, fought on the pretext of the War on Terror, against Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan which have collectively killed thousands of innocent people. The prospect of further wars against Syria and Iran underline this policy. Whilst terrorist incidents always happened before, the world did certainly not witness the wholesale slaughter and destruction of whole Muslim nations in the years prior to September 11.
For many people throughout the world, the prevailing view appears that it is the West which is attacking the Muslim world using it's military might. No Muslim state has attacked any Western State. What has brought about this change of doctrine in the West? The West has always launched colonial wars against other nations, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. This is something that litters the pages of history. Today's new bloody campaigns are still being fought for the same old reasons of securing resources such as oil and other geo-political strategic objectives. However it is the nature in which they can be secured that has changed. From covert aggression, in the form of neo-colonialism, in the recent past it has returned to direct colonisation and outright aggression today, emboldened by the collapse of it's former rival, the Soviet Union. Most of the world's energy resources happen to be in Muslim lands. Increasingly the Muslim populations are becoming politically more active and emboldened in their demand for an end to the corrupt regimes that rule these lands as the West's proxy agents. It is their call for Islam to return as a political system of ruling which is why the West's stance has changed.
In an era of modern media and communications the West needs to carry and convince it's own domestic populations. To this end it seeks to explain it's behaviour to it's citizens through a combination of fear and apparent righteousness. Fear of the 'unprecedented terrorist threat' and the righteousness of it's cause in bringing 'Freedom and Democracy' to the lands that it conquers. This is not dissimilar to the claims made in the past that 'savages' in colonised lands needed to be 'civilised' for their own good. Yet in waging this war it is the West which is breaking all known accepted norms and rules. This attempted cover has been blown away by the savageness of it's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that has seen the indiscriminate killing of civilians dismissed as 'collateral damage' in the pursuit of material interest. The litany of abuse seen includes the horrors of Abu Ghraib, the Guantanamo Bay torture camp, 'extraordinary renditions', advocating the right to torture and the denial of due process to captured prisoners. With the curtailing of civil rights within western societies through anti-terror legislation and double standards over "Free Speech", it has made a mockery of the West's claims of being guardians of 'Human Rights' and in spreading 'Freedom and Democracy' throughout the world.
The nature of the threat has not changed; it is the West that has changed. It is redefining it's model of International Relations to suit it's new militant colonial agenda. Leading the West, America has given notice that it intends to wage the 'Long War', a euphemism to replace the tired slogan of the 'War on Terror'. By declaring its intent to wage this war for decades on end reveals the West's true agenda for what it really is; explicit aggression. Under the guise of bringing 'enlightenment' to the Muslim world it seeks to perpetuate and continue it's hold on Muslim lands and usurp its resources. Struggling to reconcile the failing of Western Capitalism to deal with an array of increasing domestic societal problems, it has created a climate of fear at home and incited hatred towards Islam and Muslims in an attempt to divert attention and justify it's naked aggression abroad.
Whilst the attacks of September 11 2001 were unprecedented in the scale of casualties inflicted on American soil, the fact remains that western countries and their outposts have been a target for attack for many years. Acts which happen today have always happened before. Examples such as the 1983 Beirut embassy bombing which killed hundreds of US marines, the murder of the Israeli athletes in Munich 1972, the ETA Basque separatist bombings, the IRA bombing campaigns in the 70s, 80s and early 90s and countless other such acts which one could cite. Whilst terrorism has always been a problem for society if anything it is the attitude of the West which has changed.
Today we are witnessing wars of aggression, fought on the pretext of the War on Terror, against Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan which have collectively killed thousands of innocent people. The prospect of further wars against Syria and Iran underline this policy. Whilst terrorist incidents always happened before, the world did certainly not witness the wholesale slaughter and destruction of whole Muslim nations in the years prior to September 11.
For many people throughout the world, the prevailing view appears that it is the West which is attacking the Muslim world using it's military might. No Muslim state has attacked any Western State. What has brought about this change of doctrine in the West? The West has always launched colonial wars against other nations, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. This is something that litters the pages of history. Today's new bloody campaigns are still being fought for the same old reasons of securing resources such as oil and other geo-political strategic objectives. However it is the nature in which they can be secured that has changed. From covert aggression, in the form of neo-colonialism, in the recent past it has returned to direct colonisation and outright aggression today, emboldened by the collapse of it's former rival, the Soviet Union. Most of the world's energy resources happen to be in Muslim lands. Increasingly the Muslim populations are becoming politically more active and emboldened in their demand for an end to the corrupt regimes that rule these lands as the West's proxy agents. It is their call for Islam to return as a political system of ruling which is why the West's stance has changed.
In an era of modern media and communications the West needs to carry and convince it's own domestic populations. To this end it seeks to explain it's behaviour to it's citizens through a combination of fear and apparent righteousness. Fear of the 'unprecedented terrorist threat' and the righteousness of it's cause in bringing 'Freedom and Democracy' to the lands that it conquers. This is not dissimilar to the claims made in the past that 'savages' in colonised lands needed to be 'civilised' for their own good. Yet in waging this war it is the West which is breaking all known accepted norms and rules. This attempted cover has been blown away by the savageness of it's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that has seen the indiscriminate killing of civilians dismissed as 'collateral damage' in the pursuit of material interest. The litany of abuse seen includes the horrors of Abu Ghraib, the Guantanamo Bay torture camp, 'extraordinary renditions', advocating the right to torture and the denial of due process to captured prisoners. With the curtailing of civil rights within western societies through anti-terror legislation and double standards over "Free Speech", it has made a mockery of the West's claims of being guardians of 'Human Rights' and in spreading 'Freedom and Democracy' throughout the world.
The nature of the threat has not changed; it is the West that has changed. It is redefining it's model of International Relations to suit it's new militant colonial agenda. Leading the West, America has given notice that it intends to wage the 'Long War', a euphemism to replace the tired slogan of the 'War on Terror'. By declaring its intent to wage this war for decades on end reveals the West's true agenda for what it really is; explicit aggression. Under the guise of bringing 'enlightenment' to the Muslim world it seeks to perpetuate and continue it's hold on Muslim lands and usurp its resources. Struggling to reconcile the failing of Western Capitalism to deal with an array of increasing domestic societal problems, it has created a climate of fear at home and incited hatred towards Islam and Muslims in an attempt to divert attention and justify it's naked aggression abroad.
posted by Alien Alienated at 5:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home