Military

DATE=March 22, 2002

TYPE=Dateline

NUMBER=7-36092

TITLE=9/11: Where Does the U-S Go from Here?

BYLINE=Judith Latham

TELEPHONE=202-619-3464

DATELINE=Washington

EDITOR=Neal Lavon

CONTENT=

INTRO: At the heart of the 9-11 terrorist attacks, say some Middle East experts, were a series of "root causes." Among them, they note, were Washington's foreign policy, the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, and the growing economic, political, cultural, and military power of the United States. Other analysts say the "root causes" of terrorism are much closer to home and have little to do with the United States. More now in this Dateline report from Judith Latham.

JL: Americans are relatively uninformed about Islam--the world's second largest religion and the major faith in 56 countries. That affects how Americans understand the events leading up to September 11. That's the view of John Esposito, Director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington. He says Americans need a deeper knowledge of Islamic affairs to appreciate the nuances and subtleties of the volatile Middle East.

TAPE: CUT #1: ESPOSITO [FM LATHAM] 1:14

"For most Americans who knew nothing about Islam, their engagement with Islam came through the Iranian Revolution. The 1.2 billion Muslims get judged in terms of Iran, and subsequently, through hostage taking in Lebanon. So, they get judged in terms of headline events. On the one hand, you do have things like the Iranian revolution. You do have underground groups like Islamic Jihad that assassinated Anwar Sadat. You do have extremists who engage in suicide bombings. On the other hand, you have a variety of Islamically oriented political and social organizations existing in authoritarian regimes. They brook no opposition. So, you have what we call 'political Islam,' or Islamic fundamentalism.

On the one hand you have a minority of extremists. On the other hand, you have a majority of people who operate in society. [BEGIN OPT] In most Muslim countries, you have movements within the country seeking to bring about change. That kind of struggle can be understood as a jihad. Jihad can also mean that part of the struggle to be a good Muslim is to be willing to defend yourself, your religion, or your community against aggression. It is the equivalent of a 'just war.' But, one person's jihad that is defensive is another person's jihad that is offensive." [END OPT]

JL: Professor Esposito believes that the 1990 Gulf war led to, in his words, a "massive presence of foreign troops" in Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Islam. Their presence, he thinks, helped foment radical movements like Osama bin Laden' al-Qeida. Since the United States led the coalition that triumphed in the Gulf War, he reasons, it became a primary target for Islamic radicals.

TAPE: CUT #2: ESPOSITO [FM LATHAM] 1:18

"What was the first thing we did? We rushed in to sell arms, as did the Europeans to all of the governments in the Gulf. Bin Laden got upset about that. He went to the King, and the King refused to look at other options. From that point on, Osama bin Laden grew in his anti-Americanism and his opposition to the royal family and to the policy in the Gulf. He then went to Sudan and then after a while went to Afghanistan. We see a lot of his lieutenants were from Egyptian movements and others. Their primary targets were in fact their own governments and governments in the region.

But their secondary target was in fact America. Why America? Because the United States in the post-Cold War is the number one gorilla on the block. The U-S with all its power is often seen as part of the problem, not the solution. To the extent that foreign powers support oppressive regimes, those who are against the oppressive regime regard the foreign powers as a problem.

What happens after the Afghan war is that the Afghan-Soviet war globalized jihad. The term jihad became a defining concept for resistance movements, liberation movements, and extremist movements in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in Chechnya, and in Kashmir. That's the second level. The third level is when the global jihad becomes a global terrorist jihad. And that's what happens with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida."

JL: Professor Esposito says that as Americans contemplate their policy options in the future, they need to recognize two major points.

TAPE: CUT #3: ESPOSITO [FM LATHAM] 0:40

"Number one, global terrorism is here to stay because the fact is that today's terrorism requires very few people and very limited resources, (OPT) whether it's Timothy McVeigh blowing up a building in Oklahoma or it is hitting the Towers in New York. (END OPT) Number two, anti-Americanism is widespread throughout the world. (OPT) In a recent study of non-Muslim areas, in places like Africa and Latin America, the percentage of people who were anti-American were roughly 84 percent. It was similar to the percentage of people in the Arab and Muslim world. It means that they have a real problem with America's foreign policy. They regard America as a uni-polar country with a uni-polar vision, being unilateral and often being very arrogant." (END OPT)

JL: And that, Professor Esposito says, leaves the United States with few options.

TAPE: CUT #4: ESPOSITO [FM LATHAM] 0:36

"Number one, you can use the military. It can capture and punish. The military cannot get at the roots of global terrorism. You can go after the economic side. But at the end of the day, you also have to engage what our government calls 'public diplomacy' and what the British tend to call 'winning the hearts and minds.' The reality is that you have to look at people's perceptions and their grievances. And these are not just the grievances of the bin Ladens of the world, and that's what is important. They are issues at the popular level one, the Arab-Israeli crisis. Two, Iraqi sanctions. Three, issues like Kashmir. Four, Russia and Chechnya."

JL: According to Professor Esposito, the United States needs to address these grievances by reconsidering its foreign policy options.

TAPE: CUT #5: ESPOSITO [FM LATHAM] 0:19

"We also have to go to our allies to the Israelis and the Palestinians, to Arafat and to Sharon, and to India and Pakistan and say, 'You're both part of the problem. And you are both going to have to be part of the solution.' And, if you look closely, our government has come more and more to realize it. And indeed, I think the Saudis have tried to help that along with their new proposal."

JL: Professor John Esposito says the real task before the United States is to change the political climate so that global terrorism can be reduced.

TAPE: CUT #6: ESPOSITO [FM LATHAM] 0:30

"The challenge for America post-9/11, in terms of where we go from here, is how to figure out a way to deal with other parts of the world and with the Muslim world in which we distinguish between extremists and non-extremists. And so we can move against global terrorism to limit the seedbeds from which the bin Ladens of the world recruit. And that means addressing real political, social, and economic issues. Without doing that, the situation will not get better. It will get worse."

JL: Professor John Esposito, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, is the author of Unholy War: Terrorism in the Name of Islam. But not all Middle East specialists agree that U-S foreign policy was the major factor leading up to the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington last September. Robert Lieber, Professor of Government and Foreign Afairs at Georgetown University, says the so-called "root causes" of terrorism can be found in Islamic societies themselves.

TAPE: CUT #7: LIEBER [FM LATHAM] 1:01

"In my judgment, what led up to September 11 has almost nothing to do with American policy and everything to do with the severe problems of many Arab and Muslim societies and with their failure to cope with modernization and globalization. It's also striking that the hijackers and people who make up the leadership of al-Qaida are not poor. They are middle class and professional people or, in some cases, wealthy people, as bin Laden was. They redirect their rage away from regimes that are untouchable. And they direct their rage outward at the symbols of the modern world. And we, the United States, become the target. There is a clash between the values of the Enlightenment and the values of a very backward traditional system, which is no longer relevant to the present day. So, the things that are hated are not just American support of a particular ruler or regime but equal rights for women, religious toleration, political pluralism, the rule of law, science, rationality, secularism, and so forth."

JL: Professor Lieber says the United States can do little about the causes of other societies' rage and terrorism, which he believes are rooted in "America's economic, military, political, and cultural power."

TAPE: CUT #8: LIEBER [FM LATHAM] 0:36

"What should the U-S do? And there my response is, 'Essentially to do what we're doing now that is, a multi-pronged approach.' In the first instance, it has to be military. That is, we have to fight and defend ourselves against those who would commit mass murder of innocent civilians on American soil. The second component is diplomatic. That is, it is useful to involve as many countries as we can in this collective effort against terror. Third, you have to dry up the financial support for terrorism. And finally, it's very important to have intelligence and police cooperation and sharing of information."

JL: Professor Robert Lieber of Georgetown University. Imad ad-Dean Ahmad, President of the Minaret of Freedom Institute in Washington D-C, says the major elements of Muslim rage are U-S policy in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and U-S support for authoritarian governments in the Islamic world.

TAPE: CUT #9: AHMAD [FM LATHAM] 0:18

"I think the main reason global terrorism is being directed against the United States is as a reaction to certain aspects of American foreign policy. Especially the uncritical support of Israel and certain excessive aspects of foreign interventionism in general."

JL: Professor Ahmad says he believes the United States can do much to alter its unpopularity in the Muslim world.

TAPE: CUT #10: AHMAD [FM LATHAM] 1:10

"I think all the United States has to do is to put primary emphasis on its own long-term interests. That is, to look at foreign policy and global issues as global issues and not to see them through a prism of domestic policy (OPT) that may have more to do with electoral politics than with the best interests of America. The best way to do this is to recognize that the 'Islamist' movement around the world is not a monolithic movement. Many of its elements are pro-democratic. (END OPT) All anyone can ask of the United States is that it have a consistent policy. The inconsistency of demonizing some countries for pursuing domestic policies that other countries that are seen as more friendly to us from a geopolitical standpoint get away with does not help us win us friends, or the hearts and minds of the people around the world. Just before the invasion of Afghanistan the Taleban were severely excoriated by the State Department for things that the Saudis also do dress codes, the ban on women driving, the lack of freedom of speech. And, while the American public may not have noticed this inconsistency, the peoples of the Muslim world certainly did."

JL: Professor Imad ad-Dean Ahmad of the University of Maryland says the single most helpful thing the United States can do at this point is to support Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah's peace initiative. If the conflict between the Israeli and Palestinians were to be resolved, he says, terrorism would also diminish.

But if terrorists are at war with modernity or the very institutions and ideals that constitute the United States, then policy shifts in Washington or diplomatic initiatives in the Middle East may make no difference at all.

That makes the future and a resolution of these problems all the more difficult on all sides. For Dateline, I'm Judith Latham.