verbena-19

How We Can and Must Make America Safer [Proposals to the Peace and Justice Movement]

** The proposals in this article written by a fellow peace activist are thought-provoking, valid, and merit serious consideration by everyone in the movement. --- Annamarie

By Phillis Engelbert
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Saturday 29 October 2005

While no one can predict if or when the United States will again come under terrorist attack, the real or perceived threat is omnipresent. The Department of Homeland Security regularly issues yellow (elevated) and orange (high) threat-level warnings. Government officials drive home the point that we are not safe. For instance, on February 6, 2005, CIA Director Porter Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee, "It may be only a matter of time before al Qaeda or other groups attempt to use chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons. We must focus on that." And Dick Cheney stated on the Jim Lehrer News Hour of May 20, 2002: "The prospect of another attack against the United States is very, very real. It's just as real, in my opinion, as it was September 12.... Not a matter of if, but when."

The specter of another 9-11 event - while frightening for the nation as a whole - holds special significance for the peace movement. In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the "left" virtually disappeared. Americans were admonished to "watch what we say" and, by and large, we obeyed. Dissent became an endangered act.

Progressives were vilified, cast as unpatriotic, and practically blamed for the bombings. That attitude has lingered. On March 20, 2004, the one-year anniversary of the start of the Iraq War, an onlooker at an anti-war demonstration stated in The Ann Arbor News: "9-11 wasn't enough; these people want to see more terrorist attacks on our country? Don't they realize it's better to go get them and hunt them down before they come to us?"

Peace and justice activists have made great strides over the last few years, even in a sometimes-hostile national climate. My own organization, for example, was created post-9/11 and now has an office, paid staff, and some 3,000 supporters. But if another 9/11 were to happen tomorrow, as Bush administration provocation is making more likely, I fear this grassroots momentum, mirrored across the country, could be washed away.

Daniel Ellsberg, former military analyst who released the "Pentagon Papers," warns that the next 9/11 will provide the Bush administration with the opportunity to put in place legislation so draconian it will make the Patriot Act look like the Bill of Rights. Ellsberg also warns that the administration may take another terrorist attack as a green light for attacking Iran.

What will happen to peace activists and our organizations in such a climate? Will our members become afraid to associate with us? Will our support wither away? Will our organizations survive? And if they don't, who will be the voice of peace and diplomacy in response to an attack? Who will stand up to the government crackdown on civil liberties?

I propose that we act pre-emptively by emphasizing our role as the "safety people" - the people concerned with making America safer. Part of that role involves continually asking the question: "Is the Bush administration making you safer?" The answer that follows, of course, is: "No. The administration's bellicose, arrogant, and incompetent policies - exemplified by torture at Abu Ghraib, the war in Iraq, the roundup of Middle Eastern men in the US, and the indefinite detentions at Guantanamo - are providing fuel for future terrorist attacks."

Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, delivered a forceful criticism of Bush's disaster-preparedness policy in the New York Times on October 21, 2005. "If something comes along that is truly serious, truly serious," stated Wilkerson, "something like a nuclear weapon going off in a major American city, or something like a major pandemic, you are going to see the ineptitude of this government in a way that will take you back to the Declaration of Independence."

In addition to critiquing the Bush administration's policies, it's incumbent upon us to advocate a strategy of national security through international cooperation. The first step therein is to replace military tactics in the "War on Terror" with diplomatic ones. US military action in the Middle East - especially the war in Iraq - only serves to inflame anti-Americanism and recruit more people to the terrorists' cause. An alternative to using force is to rely on international law to resolve international disputes. We must press our government to become a signatory to the International Criminal Court - the body that would have the authority to bring to justice those who commit or are conspiring to commit terrorist attacks.

Key to any Middle East diplomacy effort is a peaceful resolution to the Israel/Palestine conflict. The US must become a key player in an international coalition that presses for an end to the cycle of violence and for a negotiated solution allowing Israelis and Palestinians to live together in peace and security. Essential steps to peace include an end to the Israeli occupation and the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

Another step in the plan to make America safer is to expose and oppose government cronyism. We must insist that qualified people be appointed to leadership positions in agencies charged with protecting our security, health, and well-being. Point out that we need smart protective and preventive health initiatives - not military options - for dealing with the bird flu threat. By the same token, our officials must take prudent measures to protect sensitive and vulnerable elements of our infrastructure, such as the food and water supply, communications and electrical systems, and nuclear power plants.

We must also address American people's fears about weapons of mass destruction - fears ratcheted up by the Bush administration. Insist that the government respond to the threat by strengthening international verification procedures on biological and chemical weapons, such as the Convention on Biological and Toxic Weapons. At the same time, press for an end to the development, testing, and production of nuclear warheads, including so-called low-level nuclear weapons such as "bunker busters."

We must not overlook the common-sensical step of increasing humanitarian, educational, and developmental assistance at home and abroad. Lack of adequate funding for domestic health, education, and nutrition programs is a serious threat to the well-being of Americans and to "homeland security." These problems are magnified in the world's poorest nations, such as Afghanistan - home to the Taliban. The Bush administration compromises our security by skimping on humanitarian aid (while it liberally sprinkles military aid) and by using promises of aid to coerce foreign leaders into supporting unpopular American military actions.

My final recommendation pertains to human rights. The United States cannot torture prisoners abroad and deny prisoners at home due process and basic civil liberties if it hopes to earn the respect of the international community. Rather, our nation must uphold the same standards of human rights and civil liberties that we demand of other countries.

As progressives, we must begin discussions about how to protect our movement from being silenced in the event of another 9-11. If the peace movement is able to define itself as an advocate for a safer America, perhaps we won't be such easy scapegoats should another terrorist attack occur. Our long-term survival depends on our ability to present solid alternatives - now.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillis Engelbert is the Executive Director of Michigan Peaceworks.

posted by Annamarie at 11:49 PM