| I agree with Rob Steinhauer that the 9/11 attacks were inexcusable (Writer shouldn’t excuse 9/11, Letters, Oct 24, 2002). They were not a blow against globalization, about which Osama Bin Laden couldn’t care less, nor were they an attempt to foment global justice – as an organization, Al Qaeda is generally acknowledged to have practically no knowledge, let alone consideration, of global politics and economics.
However, Mr. Stienhauer is incorrect in his insinuation that the United States has never commited an act of terrorism. In fact, it is the only state ever condemned by the United Nations for "unlawful use of force," essentially a euphemism for terror attacks. Any discussion of terrorism which does not acknowledge the U.S. as a leading terrorist state is without much meaning. Concrete examples of U.S. terror are plentiful:
· The CIA organized the public assasination of Salvador Allende, the democratically elected leader of Chile, for the purpose of replacing his government with one headed by Augusto Pinochet, who was considered, and in fact proved to be, more compliant with U.S. foriegn policy. Tens of thousands of Chileans were killed by Pinochet’s regime.
· Zbigniew Brzezinski incited Russia to invade Afganistan by assembling and training an army of fanatical Islamic guerillas who were subsequently encouraged to attack Russian positions.
· Without provocation, the U.S. military destroyed Sudan’s Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant, which produced half of that nation’s medicine. The consequences of this were far worse than any directly or indirectly associated with 9/11; at least 80,000 Sudanese civilians died as a result of the following lack of medicine.
Certainly, no one should excuse 9/11. However, any account of the history and continuing practice of terror which does not devote most of its attention to crimes of the American state cannot be taken seriously.
|
