[pf] anti-NZ graffiti(Belgrade);only 3 join ground action, Afghanistan

· Letter to the op-ed page of NZ Herald, by a theoretical biophysicist.

  It contains:
  “our joining the attack cannot be justified morally, not even by those
who believe that war between nations is a legitimate human activity.
  Let's look at it from the point of view of national self-interest first.
After all, that's the fundamental premise of American foreign policy. It's
not a good guide to how to behave morally, but ...
  Although New Zealand has occasionally shown remarkable independence, as
in our policy on nuclear weapons, we have been enthusiastic participants in
virtually every war we could conceivably have joined. Now, we have sent our
SAS to Diego Garcia where they are joining their Australian and British
counterparts ready to engage in behind-the-lines missions against terrorist
enemies ...
  We strain to comprehend how a person can be so instilled with calm hate
that he sits in a cockpit and annihilates himself in an inferno of burning
fuel and crashing metal and concrete. 
  But we do not ask what special techniques of psychological numbing are
taught to SAS soldiers who are ready to kill by hand, silently, soldier or
civilian, innocent or guilty, anyone whose action could compromise the
cover of the operation they have been sent to carry out. ...
  If one-tenth of what we have been told about Osama bin Laden is true, he
must be brought to answer before an international court. Unfortunately,
that is not the main goal of what is being done in Afghanistan, and our SAS
will not achieve it. 
  The main goal has become to kill as many as possible of the people who
now appear somehow to be on his side. That includes anyone identified with
the Taleban, but excludes their rivals to the north who are practically
indistinguishable in terms of their political goals and religious fanaticism.
  However, if the Northern Alliance remain friendly to the US, Russia and
China will probably be prevented from controlling the flow of oil from the
huge untapped reserves in the Caspian basin. 
  ... What is most distressing is that the strategy is no different from
the one that bred the terrorists who murdered thousands of our American
friends. 
  although there are 12 coalition nations represented at the US Central
Command Air Force Base in Tampa, only three have committed themselves to
join action on the ground in Afghanistan - Britain, Australia and, of
course, New Zealand.”  D.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=news&thesubsection=&st
oryID=226597&reportID=53510 [all on same line in browser]
  is:

Dialogue: New Zealand is now prime target for hateful revenge 

05.11.2001
If New Zealand does not recall its SAS troops now, it stands to become a
target for acts of terrorism, writes PETER WILLS*. 

The decision to send our SAS to join the attack on Afghanistan is a serious
misjudgment. Worse, our joining the attack cannot be justified morally, not
even by those who believe that war between nations is a legitimate human
activity. 

More pragmatically, it is not in our interests. We are making ourselves a
potential target for acts of terrorism that the annihilation of thousands
of Taleban will encourage. 

Let's look at it from the point of view of national self-interest first.
After all, that's the fundamental premise of American foreign policy. It's
not a good guide to how to behave morally, but it can help us understand
the context of our actions. 

Earlier this year I was in Belgrade, the last capital city before Kabul to
be bombed by United States forces. Driving down a main street I was
startled to see bold, anti-New Zealand graffiti scrawled across a street
corner. I asked my hosts why New Zealand had become a target of such abuse,
imagining it could be the prank of a drunk Australian. 

It turned out the intention behind the graffiti was more sinister. It had
appeared the day after a nationalist member of the fledgling Parliament had
decried the growing Serbian use of words from English, the language of the
nation which had so recently bombed their city with the support of their
other English-speaking friends, Britain, Canada, Australia "and, of course,
New Zealand". 

In his eyes, New Zealand was a willing junior partner, always expected to
put up a hand and say "me too, me too" when its friends decided it was time
for military action. 

Although New Zealand has occasionally shown remarkable independence, as in
our policy on nuclear weapons, we have been enthusiastic participants in
virtually every war we could conceivably have joined. Now, we have sent our
SAS to Diego Garcia where they are joining their Australian and British
counterparts ready to engage in behind-the-lines missions against terrorist
enemies who cannot be identified clearly. 

Americans have been terrorised by suicide bombers who attacked their
military-planning headquarters and killed thousands of people going about
their ordinary lives in New York. Now they are terrorised when they collect
the mail, realistically fearing that they may be under biological attack.
Their Government has responded by making war against Afghanistan. 

Despite the heavy daily attacks, Afghani civilians are assured they should
not be terrorised by US bombs and missiles. The houses, offices, mosque,
Red Cross depot and hospital that have been hit and the innocent dead were
not targets. The collateral damage is a result of human error and
technological malfunction. The mix-up between food parcels and cluster
bombs is the sort of thing that comes out of any complex bureaucracy like
the US Government that is trying to do a good job. 

For us, the loss of life and terror suffered by the mostly Christian and
Jewish-Americans is a scandalous outrage. But we are not open to the same
feeling about the death and terror now being endured by Muslim Afghanis. 

We strain to comprehend how a person can be so instilled with calm hate
that he sits in a cockpit and annihilates himself in an inferno of burning
fuel and crashing metal and concrete. 

But we do not ask what special techniques of psychological numbing are
taught to SAS soldiers who are ready to kill by hand, silently, soldier or
civilian, innocent or guilty, anyone whose action could compromise the
cover of the operation they have been sent to carry out. 

Action such as the SAS intends becoming involved in would have to pass a
supremely high moral test and would have to be directed only by those with
a judicial mandate: international law enforcers not motivated by their own
need for revenge. United Nations resolutions do not provide such a mandate. 

If one-tenth of what we have been told about Osama bin Laden is true, he
must be brought to answer before an international court. Unfortunately,
that is not the main goal of what is being done in Afghanistan, and our SAS
will not achieve it. 

The main goal has become to kill as many as possible of the people who now
appear somehow to be on his side. That includes anyone identified with the
Taleban, but excludes their rivals to the north who are practically
indistinguishable in terms of their political goals and religious fanaticism. 

However, if the Northern Alliance remain friendly to the US, Russia and
China will probably be prevented from controlling the flow of oil from the
huge untapped reserves in the Caspian basin. 

Layer upon layer of military, political and economic strategy is being
worked over in the assault on Afghanistan. What is most distressing is that
the strategy is no different from the one that bred the terrorists who
murdered thousands of our American friends. 

When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, the US backed the Taleban and
bin Laden. Now bin Laden is the enemy and the US are attacking the Taleban,
giving succour to their tribal enemies from the Northern Alliance. There is
no real difference. The Northern Alliance will likely turn against the US
when their broader goals are not supported, just as quickly as the Taleban
and bin Laden. 

The US has ignored all the other nations of the world when it comes to the
Kyoto Treaty on climate change, verification of the Biological Weapons
Convention, the Biosafety Protocol and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
But when it comes to attacking Afghanistan you either join the US or you
are an enemy. 

The economic order and Western corporate interests are preserved, with the
prospect of gains from the Caspian area at the ultimate expense of the
already-poor. 

What do those who sympathise with the Taleban and bin Laden think of us and
what will they do? 

They will know that although there are 12 coalition nations represented at
the US Central Command Air Force Base in Tampa, only three have committed
themselves to join action on the ground in Afghanistan - Britain, Australia
and, of course, New Zealand. 

The millions of aggrieved Muslims who feel unjustly treated are not as
naive as us about the global power of the US and some do not stop at
graffiti when it comes to expressing their anger. By identifying ourselves
so closely with American aims while failing, rightly, to question the whole
context of the action, we have made ourselves a prime target for hateful
revenge. 

There is no point to courage in the face of such a threat when we lack
moral rectitude. 

If New Zealand wants to get off the list of future targets, the Government
must start talking honestly in international forums about justice and the
failure of centuries of imperialist adventures - military, political and
economic - to deliver it. 

Having taken steps to set our own house in order and peacefully address
some historic grievances of our own citizens, it is high time we demanded
the best for others who have not been dealt with fairly. 

Helen Clark should pull the SAS back from Diego Garcia and stop using cheap
revenge as an instrument to gain political popularity based on misguided
nationalistic fervour. 


* Peter Wills is an associate professor of physics at the University of
Auckland.

©Copyright 2001, New Zealand Herald
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

· For reference, from Sept.5:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
GE debate in Orewa

IS IT SAFE TO RELEASE GMOS INTO OUR ENVIRONMENT? 
  
 Orewa College Auditorium, Orewa
 5th Sept 7.30pm
 Cost $2.00 (to cover costs)
  
Chair     Mayor John Law
  
Speakers
 _For_:
   David Saul     School of Biological Sciences Auckland University
   Colin Bull     Federated Farmers
 _Against_:
   Peter Wills    Theoretical Biology Auckland University
   Kay Baxter     Koanga Gardens
  
PLEASE BRING ALONG EVERYONE YOU KNOW

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
sent on to PF by David.
David MacClement [davd @ ihug.co.nz] (remove spaces)
http://davd.tripod.com/GrRR-011109_titles.html#top
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
***********************************************

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: csf@moscow.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.aVEN4x
Or send an email to: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================