Are we at war?
by Robin Theurkau*, September 28, 2001
Robin Theurkauf's
husband died in the attack on the World Trade Center. Even as
she grieves, she has issued this call to look beyond military
options.
My husband, Tom Theurkauf lost his
life in the World Trade Center disaster. We all direct our grief
in different ways, this is mine.
I offer these thoughts both as a new widow and
mother of three fatherless boys as well as a scholar of international
law and politics.
We used to know what war was. It was the opposite
of peace. Wars took place between states each with armies in uniforms
and a hierarchical command structure. States went to war over
territory or more recently over ideology. It is a legal status.
One must declare it. At war's conclusion, we come to a peace agreement
and return to a non-war condition.
This seems different. The enemy stays in the shadows
even as they live among us, organised in loosely connected cells.
No state has declared war against us, at least in the familiar
way. The action was designed to spread fear and hate and so we
are not entirely sure what would be required to end this conflict.
As we assemble a military platform in the Persian
Gulf it is worth considering the fact that while political scientists
know very few things with any confidence, there is substantial
consensus on at least one relevant point. While this attack was
intended to provoke, responding in kind will only escalate the
violence. Further, if we succumb to the understandable impulse
to injure as we have been injured and in the process create even
newer widows and fatherless children, perhaps we will deserve
what we get.
Some have made the analogy to the attack on Pearl
Harbour and in at least one way it is appropriate. In the aftermath
of Pearl Harbour, thousands of young men volunteered to join the
military. I can only imagine the success of radical Islam's recruiters
after our bombs fall on their heads.
If not 'war', what words should we use? I think
a better name is 'international crime'. Restating the problems
refocuses the solution.
In the short term, the first priority should be
to hunt down and arrest the criminals with the goal of achieving
justice, not revenge. This is a task left not to the military
but to investigative police forces, who can prepare for a trial.
Ordinary Americans also can take steps to fight
back against this evil. We can combat fear and hate in part by
reaching out to Muslims in our communities and by patronising
Arab businesses. This show of solidarity will in part thwart these
criminals' purpose of creating division in American communities.
In the long term, eradicating terrorism will require
the elimination not of a group of people but rather of a set of
ideas. Paradoxically, eliminating the people will reinforce and
further legitimise the ideas. Terrorist impulses ferment in cultures
of poverty, oppression and ignorance. The elimination of those
conditions and the active promotion of a universal respect for
human rights must become a national security priority.
Finally, the United States as a matter of policy
must recognise and accept our vulnerability. In today's hyper-militarised
environment, no state can ensure security within its borders without
the cooperation of others.
The Bush administration's unilateralism has been
revealed to be hollow. Rather than infringe on our sovereignty,
international institutions enhance our ability to perform the
functions of national government, including the ability to fight
international crime.
Bombing Afghanistan today will not prevent tomorrow's
tragedy. We must look beyond military options for long term solutions.
* Robin Therkauf is a lecturer in the political
science department at Yale University. Professor Robin Therkauf
lost her husband Tom in the attacks on the World Trade Centre
on 11 September. She has spoken out against war and for justice,
not vengeance.
****************************
Interview on the Today programme,
BBC Radio 4, Tuesday, 2 October 2001
Professor Robin Therkauf
'What we need less of is war rhetoric and war against
Afghanistan in particular, and to explore the possibility of a
judicial solution...
'The last thing I wanted was for more widows and
fatherless children to be created in my name. It would only produce
a backlash.
'As the victim of violence, I'd never want this
to happen to another woman again.'
|