Review of Alan Dershowitz's Why Terrorism Works Article
January 1, 2004
by Bruce Fenton
My friend Bernie and I have had some great discussions about our
world, he recently recommended Why Terrorism Works as part of his explanation
for his support of the Iraq War. Dershowitz, although bias, brings up many
important points and questions, such as noting "one man's terrorist is another
man's freedom fighter" and asking: what is terrorism? If terrorism is simply the
deliberate targeting of civilians, then the bombing of Hiroshima would be
terrorism. If we make an exception of these acts (as we certainly should) and
argue they brought an end to the war and served the greater good, then we are
adding our opinion, and opinion is one place where problems lay. Clearly
terrorists think their cause is just and often argue that they too serve the
greater good. Dershowitz recognizes that terrorism is not clear cut and that
there can even be justification for terrorism. French Resistance members who
attacked Nazis were clearly justified. The big question, one I doubt Dershowitz
or anyone else can answer, is how we define terrorism. I know it when I see it
may be the only logical definition. For actions like the cowardly attacks of
9-11-01, the definition might fit the stickier issue is in areas where the
terrorist claims the action was war or even justice. Just as many in the world
call the US a terrorist, some claim that Israel is a perpetrator of terrorism
and that the difference between them and more classic terrorism is only the
method. While Israel and the US use smart bombs terrorists, due to lack of
resources, will use suicide bombers the blood left behind is no less red.
Dershowitz and most other Americans would strongly disagree with this
characterization: the debate that has been raging for ages in Palestine, Israel
and the world.
The bigger point is the question of what to do about 9-11, 1972s
attack on Israeli Olympic Athletes or the hijacking of the Achile Lauro; actions
that civilized people of the world agree are indeed terrorism. Dershowitz
examines the origin and prevention of these type of events. Dershowitz's most
shocking and angering section is his seemingly never-ending list of clear
terrorist actions where perpetrators not only went unpunished but where rewarded
for their heinous crimes. Again and again from the1960s to today, cowardly
terrorist acts have resulted in increased publicity and freedom for terrorists.
On an escalating scale, terrorists achieved their goals with publicity and
cave-ins to demands. Many nations became so fearful that, rather than risk
another attack or hijacking demanding the release of terrorists they had in
custody, they'd simply and quietly let them go. Dershowitz deserves credit for
pointing this out, the well documented list alone answers his titles question:
terrorism works because nations the media, and ultimately the citizens, give in
to terrorism.
His solution is hardly innovative: don't give in. Don't surrender,
don't negotiate, don't publicize and don't cave. Grant terrorists such a world
of pain from their actions that they know their goals cannot be achieved through
terror. Make all terrorism always a negative, never a positive. This has been
suggested before and is easier said than done. In addition to blaming media and
governments for terrorism, citizens are to blame as well, for we control these
organizations through our elected representatives and our advertising dollars.
If everyone stands together in defiance of terrorism and fear, we can combat
terrorism by pressuring our elected officials to never bow to terror and by
ignoring all media that seeks to publicize their actions. Incidentally, this
might include the National Terror Alert color warning system: a device that does
little more than to provide ongoing periodic publicity to Al Qaeda and feed the
fear that terrorists so thrive on. Another attack will happen, we all know this,
living in fear and fueling the media machine that terrorists thrive off of makes
us less safe, not more so. As far as Iraq, I agree that terrorists must be
stopped and agree with much of what Dershowitz proposes. My difference is in
whether Iraq is a nation that should have been included in the list of
terrorists. President Bush stated on September 15, 2003 that there was no link
between Saddam and 9-11. While undoubtedly an evil dictator, there were no
unpunished attacks that Saddam made against America. If we are truly to follow
the advice of Dershowitz then our efforts should have been focused on Bin Laden,
not Hussein. Once again the terrorist has gained freedom and publicity for
cowardice and evil. As a nation and a world we must stand up to Bin Laden and
his like and pressure our media and government to never surrender, never give in
and never glorify cowardly acts of terrorism.
Learn More
|