Customer Reviews

The Great Terror War

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University, has written a thoughtful survey of the war on Al Qa'ida terrorism. He differentiates this from other forms of terrorism, because of its genocidal intent and worldwide scope.

Chapter 1 looks at what winning and losing this war would mean. A proper strategy must include a justified war of self-defence focusing on Al Qa'ida, international law enforcement, and addressing the causes that recruit people to this form of fundamentalism. We must understand, not to forgive individual terrorists, but to change the social conditions that give rise to terrorism.

Chapter 2 examines 9/11's causes and effects, Chapter 3 the war on Afghanistan. Chapters 4, 5 and 6 look at how Bush has twisted the war against Al Qa'ida into unlimited, perpetual war for US domination. Bush has smeared all national liberation struggles as terrorist and delegitimised, sanctioned and isolated what he calls `rogue' states. He wars against Iraq, and threatens Iran, Cuba, Libya, Syria and others. Falk shows that the Al Qa'ida threat does not justify the assault on Iraq or any other country.

Chapter 7 criticises the US state's attacks on American society. Chapter 8 looks at our world, where "American assertiveness is no longer deterred by the Soviet presence."

From Clinton's `unreserved embrace of predatory globalization' to Bush's worldwide empire-building and warmongering, the US approach has meant `unconditional authorisation for state violence'. Attacking civilians and their homes is terrorism, whether done by states or by anti-Castro exiles, Chechen rebels, Palestinian `suicide bombers', or Animal Liberation Front fundamentalists.

Falk mostly upholds the UN Charter's prohibition on non-defensive force. Yet he backed the USA's 1999 war in Kosovo and its attack on Afghanistan (which was not limited to attacking Al Qa'ida) because he privileges the ideal of transnational government over national sovereignty.

We must uphold the democratic right of all nations to self-determination, which includes the right to self-defence against all schemes for global or continental domination, US or EU empires. Which is to say, we need a working class politics based on workers' nationalism.

Richard Falk writes with a pedantic manner, but his assertions about recent history are radical and vituperative in the extreme. He attacks the United States on virtually every page, impugning our motives, morals, and methods. He talks about his own country in terms that might be used by our most implacable enemies. He writes of an America that whose main goal is "geopolitical intimidation." He expresses alarm that America is no longer "balanced nor deterred" by an adversary like the Soviet Union. Mr. Falk reminisces fondly of the Soviets, because the threat that they might annihilate the U.S in a nuclear holocaust kept us from oppressing the rest of the world.

On the first page Mr. Falk asserts that Pearl Harbor was not a surprise attack, but part of the Roosevelt administration's "deliberate plan to lure the country into World War II." The anti-american tone is unrelenting. Many American foreign policy moves in the past century are examples of aggression, economic opportunism, and cultural imperialism. He reveals his own biases, not only with his arguments, but also with his lexicon. He refers to american leaders as "reactionary and pro-military forces." He decries the "martial atmosphere" after 9-11, with a "patriotic fervor never before seen in America." Maybe Mr. Falk has never seen it before.

Mr. Falk suggests that al-Qaeda might be "an imaginary network conjured up by intelligence agencies." He leaves the realm of the merely oppositional, and ventures into delusional thought. He gives serious consideration to many conspiracy theories that could be used by psychiatrists to identify a break with reality. If you believe that our own government blew up the World Trade Center, Mr. Falk is your muse. He suffers from that peculiar form of self-hatred that leads to self-abasement, and the condemnation of one's own country.

There is much to criticize about our country, and the war on terror. Mr. Falk is so critical of the United States that he seeks to destroy our ability to define and defend ourselves. Self criticism is a vital element of public virtue, but self-abnegation is rarely useful, and often harmful. His is a left-wing jeremiad, but Mr. Falk is no Jeremiah.