HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS JOSE IZZAGUERRA
COMMEMORATING THE ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE SEPTEMBER 11TH TERRORIST ATTACKS ON THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
HRM JOSE IZZAGUERRA
There are many funadamental questions that the Eslonian government has tried to answer. Firstly, however, I would like to renew the solidarity of my government with all those who have been victims of terror around the world.
A landmark point that must be mentioned about the current state of international affairs and the war on terrorism is that the United States has responded to the attacks of September 11. With an international alliance and consenus from the global community of nations, Afghanistan has been the most active front of this new war. Eslo has taken the war on terrorism into an objective policy investigation. We ask ourselves if the United States was justified in attacking Afghanistan. After almost one year of investigations and deliberations, we have conluded that yes, the US government had the right to intervene militarily in Afghanistan.
Firstly, we must recognize that all other options were exhuasted. The Taliban government of Afghanistan had repeatedly shown an unwillingness to negotiate or cooperate. The only law they followed was that of the Koran, having no respect for the International Declaration of Human Rights or any other international law. The rulers called these fundamental documents "instruments of Western cultural imperialism". Recalling Eslo's mandate to promote and protect Human Rights aroun the world, an eregetic rejection of the Taliban government was made by the Eslonian government both before and after September 11.
The United States was attacked in an indescriminate form by belligerents. Citing the United Nations Charter, all member states have the right to retaliate if they are attacked. Though the attacker was not a state in itself, we must remember that the Taliban refused to hand over bin Laden and his associates. Now that international forces have ousted the regime, it is important to note that the war on terror is not a precise manhunt. The war on terrorism, from an Eslonian perspective at least, consists of finding and dismantling the global terrorist networks that threaten innocent civilians. Furthermore, a genuine effort must be made by the involved parties to find the root causes of terrorism. Due to the nature of the war, some may consider it to be an unwinable war. In a sense, they are correct. Unless the broader view of causes is addressed, terrorists will continue to emerge using extremist ideologies in the future.
Another question that has been analylized by this government is the extent to which the fighting in Afghanistan is being conducted in a fair way. In the rules of jus in bellus, we find that a belligerent must refrain from using the most destructive method of warfare if the same military objective can be reached in a less destructive way. The government of Eslo finds cluster bombing in Afghanistan to be a ridiculous and unnecesarry action performed by the US. The erred management of an infringing humanitarian crisis has also been noted. Dropping 37,000 meals in the ocean in a region where famine is the daily bread is neither acceptable nor justifyable by any means. Cluster bombs often remain unexploded for long periods of time. In one of the most mine stricken countries in the world, it is simply ridiculous to assume that cluster bombing will be effective.
Just as a year ago, we said "We are all Americans", Eslo considers it imperative that we apply the same ideology to Afghanistan. "We are all Afghans". The attacks on the World Trade Center raised interest in this part of the world on a wide level. I am sure that many new conciensous global citizens will emerge from the events of last year.
Nevertheless, Eslo would like to express its idea on the reality of what the world is like today. The world one year after September 11th, 2001 is much the same as it was on September 10th. The players in the international arena remain the same, and the global institutional infrestructure has not changed at all. Globalization, famine, human security, debt burden, and disarmament remain very much the issues facing the world today. The war on terror has not changed the world, it has just changed the way many westerners look at it. September 11 was a chilling reminder that globalization goes both ways. No longer can governments like that of the USA ignore what goes on in Afghanistan, let alone other potentially terrorist states.
It is the responsiblity of every global citizen to address these problems. Though the war on terror has taken the spotlight in international relations, the bigger problems are still there, waiting to be answered. 10,000 children died on September 11, 2001...of hunger. There is yet to be a memorial service for them or a 2.7 billion dollar check issued to their families. As citizens of this planet, and I speak to Eslonians in particular when I say this, it is imperative to look at the broader picture, and work for change.
The idea that the Eslonian Plan Against Terrorism will continue to push is that which associates terrorism with the other global issues linked to it. Inevitably, poverty and supresion of civil rights triggers acts of terror. The small arms trade causes civil conflict and gives gangsters and terrosrists the power to acheive their means. By etting up concrete international mechanisms to combat the small arms trade, the concept of global security is better guarunteed. Though change cannot occur overnight, it is imperative for the leaders of the world to recognize that efforts must be made to address the problems. If there was ever any positive result emerging from the events of September 11, it is undoubtedly the interest in global sytems sparked in the general public. Through education and aid, not warfare, can the world see a brighter future.
Governments must ensure that their citizens are informed of the social, political, and environmental consequences of their individual actions. All human beings, with the exception of infants, have the power to influence behavior over others. By cultivating a culture of understanding, the global community can explore the complexities of issues such as terrorism.
A common misconception in this issue is that bin Laden's ultimate goal is to terminate the United States. This is absolutely false. Bin Laden knows perfectly well that the hegemony of the USA cannot be brought down by Al-Qaeda. Research shows that the goal of Al-Qaeda is to remove western, particularly American presence and influence from the Middle East. Al-Qaeda is a group that uses terror to acheive its goal of sparking Islamic revolution in the region, this ridding countries of American influence. When the group attacked US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, they were hoping for a strong American response that would cause uproar among the civilian population in the Middle East. The fact is that they succeeded. President Clinton sent cruise missles to "strateigic locations"in several Middle Eastern countries. Approximately three cruise missles were sent for every American casualty at the embassies. Anti-American sentiment grew widely. Having tested his method, Bin Laden was looking for the most destructive way to hit the United States. He wanted to do something so terrible that the US government would bombard the region vastly and immediately. Thankfully, the US response was meditated, thought out, and objective. Instead of sending cruise missles all over Islamic countries, they were able to take time to find Al-Qaeda strongholds and attack them.
Even so, Anti-American sentiment grew. Nevertheless, bin Laden failed in his objective, clearly seen by the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan. While it is impossible to accept that the US will "butt out" of Arab business in the future, it is important to see that the region requires great analysis and care. Bin Laden's misuse and misrepresentation of the Palestinian State as a cause is unjustified and simply untrue. As long as people like him are not controlled one way or another, the threat exsists that another attack could take place.
Finally, there is the matter of an attack on Iraq. I an convinced that the United States will eventually invade Iraq. However, Eslo considers it likely that they will go about it alone. The people of Iraq have suffered extensively from sanctions imposed by the UN. However, the USA has blocked Security Council resolutions that are aimed at altering the sanctions in a manner in which Saddam would suffer rather than his people. A reduction of santions in proportion to access given to arms inspectors, for example, would beneficial to everyone on the whole. The motion was rejected, and the people of Iraq continued to suffer. An invasion of Iraq will be costly in every sense of the word. For that reason, it is imperative that the US not act alone. It must seek UN support in its Iraqi campaign. Though belligerency might calm a problem in the short run, only education and diplomacy can safeguard true peace.
I call upon Eslonians and the international community, both macro and micronational, to come together and recognize that terrorism is a result of many other factors. I call upon all states to endorse global education, to recognize that we are all global citizens. I call upon each individual person to consider the implications of their actions, even though they may repercute in far away lands. Lastly, I call on President George Bush to continue the international campaign against terror while addressing the dilemas that really will change the state of the world. Everything is linked, and it is up to us to ensure the security of all peoples.
