International Political Will

All the clamor surrounding Osama bin Laden in the past couple of days has made for exciting media – though little was intelligently analyzed. Instead politicians and the media continued a smokescreen discussion that distracts Americans from addressing the true reasons for terrorism.

First, unconfirmed French and Saudi intelligence sources reported that bin Laden may have died within the last month from a severe case of typhoid. The U.S. has denied any knowledge about the reports, though Karl Rove has been promising Republicans a “surprise” before the November elections.

Then Sunday morning Bill Clinton took Chris Wallace and FOX News to task over attempts to rewrite history and put the onus of Sept. 11 on Clinton’s shoulders. If you haven’t seen it, it’s worth a few minutes, given how rare it is to see a politician – past or present – actually show some real emotion.

Yet for all Clinton’s passion, the debate and analysis surrounding these two events has been influenced by conservative ignorance on both sides of the political aisle – one that even Clinton fell into in his interview.

The reality is that regardless of the fate of bin Laden, there will always be another to fill his shoes and international terrorism will continue virtually unabated as long as the underlying causes of violence continue.

A figurehead he may be, but his ideas were there long before Sept. 11 and will persevere as long as U.S. policy continues to create the conditions conducive to violent revolution – extreme poverty, imperial war, U.S. support for corrupt and repressive regimes and dictators, unconditional support for Israel and their 40-year illegal occupation of Palestinian land and multinational corporations that rob poor countries of their resources for little, if any, compensation.

Clinton’s tirade on FOX, while entertaining, showed that even Democrats fail to address the root causes of terrorism – instead focusing on the military response that only hopes to kill the enemy.

Clinton repeatedly asserted that he tried to kill bin Laden while he was in office – and even that he came closer to doing so than the Bush administration. His defense consisted largely of attempting to convince the American public that Democrats in power during the 1990s did try to protect the nation by hunting for the Al Qaeda leader.

What Clinton should have told his interviewer is that it would have made little difference even if his administration had killed bin Laden. Clinton had his chance to stand up to the neoconservative argument that the best way to combat terrorism is to kill them, but he didn’t take it. Instead he sunk to the right-wing hawks’ level and engaged in a debate framed in a context that ignores international realities.

In the end, both news events of the weekend – alleged reports about bin Laden’s death and Clinton’s “moment” on FOX News – once again failed to address the true roots of terrorism and ignored the role played by past and present U.S. policy. Instead the politicians, and hence the “liberal” media, got in line and followed along, eager to do battle in a meaningless partisan war over who loves their country more. (And hence, who tried harder to kill.)

Until the U.S. – both political leaders and the American public alike – engage in an intelligent discussion about the true reasons why the terrorists hate the U.S., we will continue to be mired in the so-called “War on Terror.” To box up a convenient answer such as them “hating us for our freedom” and sell it to the American public only feeds the war machine.

It seems both Democrats and Republicans are willing to accept an easy answer, one that relieves the U.S. from accepting responsibility for any missteps over the decades and allows continued U.S. economic hegemony while condemning the poorest people of the earth to a future of poverty and repression.

A true measure of greatness is to first identify and then learn from mistakes. Clinton had a chance to make that identification on Sunday for both the American people and the many Democrats that praise him. Far from being vindicated, Clinton just sank the political discourse even lower.

Instead the Democrat and former president toed the line, content to ignore the real debate and continue to misinform the American public.

Bill Clinton Al Qaeda terrorism FOX bin Laden

Trackback URI | Comments RSS