Volume aaa, Number 7 November 1, 2002 f

The global repercussions of unilateral action
VINAY KASHYAP
CONTRIBUTOR

On September 11 of last year, we were attacked by a highly organized and determined group of terrorists who were acting on an ideology so forceful and radical that they were willing to take the lives of thousands of innocent civilians and themselves. Since then, we have attempted to weed out some of the Al Quaeda cells with marginal success. In fact, recent reports state Al Quaeda and other comparable terrorist groups are becoming more powerful and dangerous. What our administration seems to have lost sight of is that the same "anti-western" ideology that attacked us on September 11 is still the prevalent threat today. If we continue to move towards unilateral, pre-emptive action against Iraq, we will not only be allowing the actual threat to survive, but we will also be perpetuating it.

If any of the readers were able to attend former Secretary Robert Reich's speech last week, they would clearly remember how he introduced our new global economy. He used as an example the fact that we no longer know where our products come from as an example of this globalization. Many times they are designed in one country, manufactured in another, and then shipped all around the world to consumers. It is of the utmost importance that we understand the correlation between our evolving global economy and this new global threat.

A simple way to understand this comparison is by analyzing the dynamics of September 11. We were attacked by 19 terrorists, born and raised all over the Middle East, trained in Afghanistan and armed by the international black market, with ties to numerous European cities, and funded by people across many borders. Two distinct points must be recognized from September 11 and global events following. First of all, this "threat" that spans borders cannot be denominated to a war against a single, seasoned, despotic regime. Secondly, multilateral cooperation with nations all over the world is the only chance we have to effectively defeat this threat.

Our current administration has set a divergent course in that we are not only ignoring the prevalent threat, but our foreign policy is also actually propagating it. Examples of the strength and prevalence of this anti-western ideology can be seen in events occurring in all parts of the world since September 11. Acts of violence, such as the Bali blast and the brutal murder of a U.S diplomat in Jordan, are threatening our relations with these regions. Political tides are changing as well in the already unstable Middle East. We saw the election of a Muslim fundamentalist regime in the Pakistani state bordering Kashmir. In Turkey (our only Muslim counterpart in NATO), elections in November are expected to displace the current, moderate (anti-Iraqi war) government with a more radical government with known fundamentalist ties.

These political changes and heinous acts of violence are exactly what the September 11 terrorists set out to create. Moderate Muslims around the world are becoming radicalized with every step we take towards a war with Iraq and with every nation that we spit on unilaterally. The streets around the world are alive with this growing ideology and we seem to be the fictitious ostrich that believes if we stick our head in the sand and ignore the rest of the world we can in turn become invincible.

I fully understand well the realities of our foreign policy. I also understand reciprocity and how it underlines every bilateral action we have ever taken. But, this ideology I am clamoring over is alive and is spreading like a virus throughout the world. We must recognize that the threat is not Iraq firing biological weapons that we are not sure they have, can launch, or even plan to use. Our nation must see that the snipers in our backyard were acting along the same anti-western ideology that the September 11 terrorists were. Only then will we finally take our heads out of the sand.

And looking around in disarray for someone to help us weed out the actual threat, we will quickly become disheartened.

We will finally realize that multilateral action and globalization have uses beyond promoting our economic self-interest. We will have wished that we had given the U. N. and other nations around the world a fighting chance to work with us. This is what matters; it has to do with the basic respect for your neighbor (and believe me, today, they are all our neighbors). The same respect that today we avert for pre-emptive, unilateral action could very well be our great nation's ruinous flaw in years to come.