you will find a link to "Reflections on September 11, 2001" by Arjun Makhijani, along with other recent postings to IEER's web site. The piece is also pasted below, but I encourage you to go to the web version, which contains links to some of the referenced items. Apologies for double postings.<br>
Lisa Ledwidge, IEER<br>
<div align="center">
- ----------------------------------------<br>
<br>
<b>Reflections on September 11, 2001<br>
</b>by Arjun Makhijani <br>
20 September 2001<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
Through violence you may murder a murderer, but you can't murder murder.<br>
Through violence you may murder a liar, but you can't establish truth.<br>
Through violence you may murder a hater, but you can't murder hate.<br>
Darkness cannot put out darkness. Only light can do that....<br>
-- Martin Luther King, Jr. <br>
<br>
An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind.<br>
Satyagraha is a process of educating public opinion, such that it covers all the elements of the society and makes itself irresistible. <br>
Satyagraha is a relentless search for truth and a determination to search truth. <br>
Satyagraha is an attribute of the spirit within. <br>
Satyagraha has been designed as an effective substitute for violence.<br>
-- Mahatma Gandhi<br>
<br>
<br>
The destruction of the World Trade Center towers and a part of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, was more than an attack<br>
on the symbols of financial and military power of the United States. It was more than what the media have called an "Attack on<br>
America." It was mass murder of people from around the world. The flames of fear and sorrow and tears spread rapidly across<br>
the oceans and north and south across the Americas that day. U.S. as well as international phone lines to New York and<br>
Washington were jammed. People from more than fifty countries were among those who perished along with thousands of<br>
Americans. No goal, however lofty, can justify the murder of innocent people.<br>
<br>
People from around the world are grieving and share the immense sadness of the families and friends of the victims of the<br>
tragedies. The staff of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) grieves with them. I have written this message<br>
and these suggestions for resistance to violence and terror and militarism at the instance of and on behalf of the entire IEER staff. <br>
<br>
The September 11 events of global terror cry out for and deserve a global response to help make the world as secure as we can<br>
from the threat of mass destruction. This was not the first or the most devastating event of mass destruction. As is well known, air<br>
warfare was created in the twentieth century as an instrument of state terror to entirely neutralize or destroy "vital centers" - that is,<br>
cities, thereby obliterating the difference between combatants and non-combatants in war. (A brief history of air warfare doctrine<br>
is posted on IEER's website.) Nuclear weapons extended the terror of conventional explosive bombing and fire bombing to a new<br>
dimension. But September 11, 2001 has nonetheless created a dreadful watershed in world history. The preponderance of<br>
evidence indicates that a non-state party, a terrorist network, has now used civilian aircraft as weapons of mass destruction to kill<br>
thousands.<br>
<br>
The possibility that terrorists may create destruction on a vast scale has until now been postulated in studies and hinted at by many<br>
actual acts of terrorism such as the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, the 1993 bombing of<br>
the World Trade Center, and the 1995 chemical attack on a Tokyo subway. But the enormous scale and coordination of the<br>
assault, the choice of targets, the years of preparation, and the results of the September 11, 2001 attack mean that what was once<br>
largely hypothetical has moved into the column of grim reality.<br>
<br>
The risk of continued terrorist attack remains, according to the U.S. government. Retributive violence would add to the risks of<br>
continued terrorism, and it may also add to the risk of escalation to the use of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons by a<br>
terrorist group. We do not know if some non-state groups already have nuclear materials. And we do not know how much they<br>
might have, if they do. Specifically, instability and conflict in Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state, over cooperation with U.S. military<br>
actions might have unpredictable consequences. <br>
<br>
It is imperative that we try to persuade the U.S. government against a policy of violence and for a process that will lead to capture<br>
of the suspects and a trial. Moreover, if eradication of terrorism is the overall goal, a trial of the suspected plotters and financiers<br>
would reveal more about how terror networks are organized and maintained than a violent elimination of the suspects. The<br>
Nuremberg trials not only brought many of the perpetrators of the Holocaust to justice but also revealed great detail about how it<br>
was organized and implemented. They also led to important advances in international law. A trial in relation to the September 11<br>
attacks would also show the world the best side of the traditions of the United States: the struggle for the rule of law and justice<br>
that motivated the American constitution, which has inspired not only generations of Americans but also freedom fighters<br>
worldwide.<br>
<br>
But we need more than a trial. We need a process will lead to a progressive diminution of the conflicts and hatreds that lead up to<br>
acts of terror and indiscriminate killing. It is widely recognized that they are rooted in the terrible injustices and inequities that<br>
characterize our world. Reducing violence requires a reduction in militarism and repression by states and a systematic reduction of<br>
the great inequities in the world, so that people can have hope instead of despair. One analysis and discussion of the world<br>
economic and military structure as a kind of global apartheid (with some important differences) can be found in a July 9, 2001<br>
article in The Nation by Salih Booker and William Minter. Another can be found in my book, From Global Capitalism to<br>
Economic Justice, (Apex Press, 1992, reprinted in 1996), along with a discussion of possible approaches to reduce global<br>
inequity and violence.<br>
<br>
Given the level, scale and geographical spread of inequity, injustice, and anger in the world, it is likely that violent retribution by the<br>
United States would lead to global disunity and more conflict. It would increase the likelihood of more terrorist attacks, possibly<br>
more devastating ones. Such a prospect would be made more likely if U.S. retribution produces large-scale civilian casualties.<br>
<br>
Oil is and has been, through much of the twentieth century, one of the central aspects to the violent tangle of Middle Eastern,<br>
Central Asian, U.S., and world politics. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor came after the U.S. imposed an oil embargo to<br>
prevent Japan from getting access to and eventual control of Indonesian oil, which belonged neither to Japan, nor to the United<br>
States, nor to the Dutch colonialists who then ruled Indonesia. As another example, the CIA-supported overthrow of an elected<br>
government in Iran in 1953 (in reaction to nationalization of the Iranian oil industry) and its replacement by the Shah of Iran led to<br>
two and a half decades of repression in which substantial dissent was only possible in the mosques. The process was central to the<br>
dynamic that led up to the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran. For an excellent history of oil politics, see Daniel Yergin, The Prize:<br>
The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991). For a fine, recent analysis of Central<br>
Asian oil resources and U.S. policy see Michael Klare, Resource Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict, (New York:<br>
Metropolitan Books, 2001).<br>
<br>
Much U.S. policy in the Middle East makes for alliances with undemocratic regimes, including the one in Saudi Arabia, where, as<br>
in Afghanistan, no freedom of religion is allowed. That the Saudi Islamic government has allowed the stationing of U.S. troops in<br>
Saudi Arabia, which has the two places most sacred to Muslims as well as the largest oil reserves in the world, has been in the<br>
center of the anger of some Islamic militants of the region. (See for instance a TV interview with Osama bin Laden partly<br>
conducted by ABC news correspondent John Miller in 1998. See also Mary Ann Weaver's article on Osama bin Laden in the<br>
New Yorker and John K. Cooley, Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism, Second Edition,<br>
(London, Pluto Press, 2000).) And as is increasingly recognized, those angry militants largely come from the phase of U.S. policy<br>
that funded and trained them in the 1980s to oust the Soviet military from Afghanistan. Later, the Taliban was partly funded by<br>
Saudi Arabia until the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. (For a brief history of the Taliban, see<br>
Ahmed Rashid, "The Taliban: Exporting Extremism," Foreign Affairs, November/December 1999, pp. 22-35).<br>
<br>
If retribution and violence are the wrong answers, how can the people of the world work together to pursue justice and increased<br>
security? Active, non-violent resistance to evil that goes to the root of the problem in a manner that everyone could participate<br>
was the hallmark of the Gandhian struggle for India's independence, known as Satyagraha, as it was of the U.S. civil rights<br>
movement, and the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa. Making salt, making cloth, and desegregating lunch counters and buses<br>
were everyday acts that mobilized millions.<br>
<br>
The Gandhian struggle in India had a part of its inspiration in U.S. history - in the acts of Henry David Thoreau in the<br>
mid-nineteenth century to resist an unjust war and slavery. The civil rights struggle led by Martin Luther King, inspired in part by<br>
Gandhi's example, was non-violent resistance to injustice returning to the United States. This rich history can perhaps provide us<br>
with the inspiration we need in these grim and sad days to find ways to resist the violence both from weapons of mass destruction<br>
but also from injustice and exploitation that has come to characterize global society. More than five hundred million children<br>
have died needless deaths from starvation, lack of clean water, and lack of elementary medical care since World War II.<br>
At the same time, the wealthiest 400 people control more wealth than the poorest two billion. Maintenance of such inequalities<br>
requires a vast and global repressive machinery that has led to many valiant struggles for justice, but also bred hopelessness,<br>
anger, and hate.<br>
<br>
October 2 is Gandhi's birthday. Perhaps it can be a day when we can all reflect on what we might do individually, in our<br>
communities, and on a global scale to resist militarism and violence, whether it comes from non-state groups or from states and to<br>
help create security, peace and justice. <br>
<br>
For instance, one way in which those of us who live in the West and consume more than our fair share of fossil fuels can resist the<br>
cynical and militarist politics of oil be to reduce our petroleum consumption as much as we can. A 25 percent reduction in oil<br>
consumption in the wealthy countries would amount to about 10 million barrels a day - more than the production of Saudi Arabia,<br>
which is the world's largest oil exporter. That could change the face of oil politics. While we cannot completely eliminate the use of<br>
oil in short and medium term - it would cause immense economic dislocation and suffering - significant voluntary reduction of oil<br>
consumption as well as sensible policies to that same end could help create a direction of greater equity, security, and<br>
environmental sanity. The soldiers who may be sent to fight in the desert sands, or those who are already there, with oil as a prime<br>
objective, would breathe easier too. (For an analysis of the proposed Bush administration energy policy and for IEER's energy<br>
policy recommendations see Science for Democratic Action, vol. 9 number 4, August 2001)<br>
<br>
Another idea that has been put forth is to send food to the villages of Afghanistan instead of bombs. That act of love might create<br>
cooperation from the heart that may increase the chance that there will be a trial instead of cycles of escalating violence. The<br>
official rhetoric in Washington makes it seem unlikely that the U.S. government would, at this stage, take actions friendly to the<br>
people of Afghanistan - indeed it is in the contrary direction.<br>
<br>
How people to people diplomacy might be conducted around the world to create a direction of peace at time when the talk of<br>
war is so loud is a major challenge, to say the least. But Nelson Mandela, the African National Congress, and the people of South<br>
Africa joined by people all over the world used Gandhi as an inspiration to get rid of apartheid in South Africa. We now need a<br>
bigger struggle that taps into the same roots to get rid of global apartheid.<br>
<br>
It will take the cooperation of organizations and people of goodwill around the world to rise to the challenge. We might begin this<br>
October 2 by gathering in our communities to remember those who died in a common global disaster and to ponder what we<br>
might do together across national boundaries that would honor the global nature of the tragedy and prevent its repetition. At<br>
meetings around the world on that date, we might gather to consider the questions of justice and of finding a path away from<br>
global apartheid, global violence and militarism, whether by states or terrorist groups, and towards global democracy, justice,<br>
equity, and friendship. <br>
<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Lisa Ledwidge<br>
Outreach Coordinator and Editor, <i>Science for Democratic Action<br>
</i>Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)<br>
2104 Stevens Ave. South | Minneapolis, MN 55404 USA<br>
