EVIL IS LET LOOSE!

DR. TARIQ RAHMAN

The author is a historian of language policy with focus on South Asia

The picture of a naked Iraqi man cowering from the imminent attack of dogs is heart breaking. Or was it my naivety to expect anything but brutality under the circumstances? But what with the Geneva Convention, with all the talk about human rights, making the world safe for democracy was I that far wrong in assuming that such things had been left behind to a fiercer and a more uncouth age. After all, at least in some of the wars of the twentieth century, and even in the India-Pakistan wars, the Geneva Convention was followed – by and large. So are those instances aberrant phenomena or are these violations of human dignity in Iraq an aberration?

Frankly, I do not know. But for my peace of mind I prefer to think of the present horrifying degradation of human being as being aberrant. I console myself with the hope, fond hope maybe, that Nine Eleven—or rather the American response to it – has not unloosed such an avalanche of evil that it has washed away civilized norms of conduct and even the Geneva Convention. That the American War on Terror has taken away many of the civilized values, including the right to privacy, is very well known. It is also undoing the hard won fight against racism because anti-Muslim fear and prejudice threatens to come back in the garb of security. Yet, human beings torture people and human beings, the public opinion expressed by ordinary people, can stop them. So, let us consider what kind of post-modern human being we have in conflict situations nowadays.

People who have been born in the last decades of the twentieth century saw very little parenting in the United States. Only about 7 per cent had a parent to look after them. Others had single-parent families or both the parents had to work which meant that the children had nobody to love them, cuddle them and really give them roots of deep affection at a very impressionable period of their lives. Moreover, they watched on the average of five hours of TV a day most days of their lives and out of these hours around half were full of violent scenes. While social scientists differ with each other what effect graphic scenes of violence have on children, there is ample evidence to suggest that they do have a negative effect of many children. Perhaps those with a propensity to aggression or with a disturbed life become insensitive to violence. Insecure children, it appears, become more insecure. Combined with violence is the trivialization and commercialization of sex. This means that there are many pornographic images also available to children which often combine violence and humiliation. I do not think that any previous age had young people, young soldiers, who had seen so much violence, sex and humiliation in images when they got the power to treat their prisoners in any manner they wanted. Moreover, they probably did not think of Iraqis as fellow soldiers at all. In a mind-boggling feat of racism soldiers in the War on Terror, soldiers of state armies and not from terrorist irregular militias, are not considered soldiers. The Taliban soldiers were never dignified by the status of soldiers nor, it seems , are Iraqi army personnel. In the latter case the official status is not denied but the living reality, the worldview, of the American privates on the ground is that they are fighting an inferior species which hardly deserves the norms of behaviour of the civilized world. In short, a combination of post-modern anomie, insensitiveness, racism and misplaced patriotism led to this great human tragedy.

But let us not blame the people too much; not even the soldiers. After all, the soldiers would not have been there in the first place had they not been ordered to go there. And the orders would not have come but for the fact that when the horrendous events of Nine Eleven took place there were neo-Conservative hawks in power. Now all hawks, no matter what ideology they profess, have only one ideology: POWER. They worship power and are always trying to control others or, if they are rulers, grabbing more and more resources and even more power. This makes them suspicious of all those who mention peace because for them peace is nothing more than the interlude when everybody sharpens knives for an even bloodier fight than the last time. Also, the hawks do not trust anybody nor do they believe they will lose a war. That is why the American decision-makers did not want to hear about the parallels with Vietnam. This is nothing unusual. Wars of aggression would never have occurred if people had thought they would be defeated. The hawks are pretty unrealistic when it comes to decision-making for all their reputation for hard headedness and practicality. In the end the hawks make their own side weaker, unsafe and sorry. So, the hawkishness of the decision-makers is responsible for so much evil let loose upon the planet.

What would have happened by taking the other road—the road not taken. Why, it would have made all the difference. This road would have been as much against terrorism as the road of war and open violence. But it would have concentrated on removing the causes of terrorism. The major decisions should have been to withdraw troops from Muslim countries and, indeed, from as many countries as possible. This was Osama Bin Laden’s major demand and if the U.S.A had done it Bin Laden would have either declared a truce or, at least, the high moral ground would have been America’s. Of course the Taliban would have stayed in power but Pakistan could have been persuaded to drop them in its own interest. Pakistan could also have reversed its earlier policy about Kashmir again in its own interest. For, after all, terrorism is not in the interest of Pakistan and could have precipitated a war with India which would have been disastrous. Moreover, the groups who fought in Kashmir were also alleged to be indulging in sectarian vendettas. Thus, if Pakistan had reversed its policies the Taliban government would have been weakened. But the enormity of war, the killing and the dislocation of innocent people, would have been avoided. Again, this would have gained friends for America and not enemies.

The other policy of winning friends was to bring justice to the Palestinians. Instead America is seen as being reluctant to touch Israel even if Sharon kills their leaders and squeezes the common people till they either whimper or raise the defiant yell of the desperate suicide bomber. If real help had been given to the Palestinians then both the Israeli people and the Americans would have been safer today than they are in the ongoing Intifada in the Middle East. Moreover, to make matters worse, America’s attack on Iraq has given a place for refuge to terrorists of all kinds. Poverty and injustice are a very lethal combination and they are increasing in the Muslim world. As the elites of the Muslim world follow unpopular policies they are becoming immured in their own fortresses, their capital cities, and as there is no democracy there is no safety valve for the anger of the people. Because of the injustice of it all ordinary people, decent people, often consider terrorists their heroes for they are the only ones who defy the might of the United States. This would not have happened if the United States had followed policies of peace, justice and respect in the Muslim world.

The War on Terror should now be ended in the interest of the whole world including the people of the United States. It was too colossal a blunder not to have many evil effects even if it is ended but the longer it goes on the worse it will be. All the violations of liberal norms, all the new acts allowing detention of people without charge, all the places where the law does not apply (Guatanomo Bay; ships)—all these should now be ended. This will make the world a better place than it is threatening to become. It is the only way in which America can become safer. There are two Americas: the evil one goes attacking people and being rude to them; the good one has excellent universities, friendliness, the rule of law and egalitarianism. This is the good side of America but it cannot be imposed on the world by first stomping upon the corpse of the earth with hobnailed boots. At the moment the evil side is triumphant and the camp followers, like in Macedonia, k ill people (six Pakistanis too) only to please this evil side. This is the road America should not have taken when two diverged in the wood on September 11, 2001. Didn’t a wise man once say: “From evil comes evil and from good comes good; that is an ancient law’.