|
Using America's Anger to Perpetuate Un-American Values
By Omer bin Abdullah
09/10/2001
U.S. President George W. President Bush has asked Congress for authority to waive all existing restrictions on U.S. military assistance and weapons exports for the next five years to any country if the administration determines the aid will help in the fight against international terrorism.
The waiver would cover those nations currently ineligible for U.S. military aid due to their alleged sponsorship of terrorism, such as Syria and Iran, or because of their nuclear and offensive-weapons programs, or lack of commitment to democracy, which would include Pakistan and China.
Considering the blanket approval of any formerly disapproved regime, and even approved, but equally culpable regime, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), chairman of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Foreign Operations Subcommittee, offered the sanest view, "Moral leadership in defense of democracy and human rights is vital to what we stand for in the world. Acts of terrorism are violations of human rights. Now is the time to show what sets us apart from those who attack us."
Leahy's voice of caution has been echoed elsewhere. Chairman Jonathan Fanton and Executive Director Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch, a New York-based advocacy group, said in a letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell that potential allies may use the war on terrorism to obscure their own oppressive policies.
"The danger is that some governments may cynically take advantage of this cause to justify their own internal crackdowns on perceived political opponents, 'separatists' or religious activists, in the expectation that the United States will now be silent," they wrote. They said China, Russia, Malaysia, Kyrgyzstan and others, have already begun to cite the budding campaign against terrorism to explain their own repression of opposition groups.
Fanton and Roth said the situation was particularly acute in Central Asia, a critical staging area for any military action against Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden's alleged terrorist network is based. Uzbekistan, a former Soviet republic, is waging a campaign that the government says is against a bin Laden-linked terrorist group but which seems instead to target all devout Muslims. His voice of caution stands in sharp contrast to Bush's declaration in an address to Congress that established an overriding test for alliance with the United States: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." This is a standard that many in Congress have said they are willing to support, despite human rights and other concerns.
The people who have lined up to take advantage from this offer a colorful mix, among others, Libya's Moammer Gaddafi, who was targeted by former U.S. president Ronald Reagan in the 1980s; Sudan, which was targeted by former U.S. president Bill Clinton; Egypt; Jordan; Syria; Pakistan, until recently sanctioned for not being a democracy; and Iran, a "rogue" state until the current crisis.
Ironically, most of the states over-enthusiastic for aiding, and indeed fighting, America's war against terrorism, are the ones that possess the worst human rights records, and given the prevailing corruption and despotism in those countries, it is only expected that they will affix the "terrorist" label on all opponents and be more confident concerning their actions against the opposition, eventually becoming more corrupt than before.
Egypt, one country already trying to outrace others in coming to the aid of the U.S., was described by Mary Anne Weaver - a classmate at AUC (American University of Cairo) of President Hosni Mubarak's wife Suzanne - in her book
Portrait of Egypt, of using American foreign aid to bomb Islamists, comparing the bombings to those of Hanoi in northern Vietnam.
Gaddafi, who now says he will supply "intelligence" to the U.S., has a record of dealing inhumanely with the opposition in Libya.
Central Asian dictatorships, for their part, are trying to sweep their human rights records under the curtain of "helping" fight America's war. The region's lineup includes a gang of ex-communists who have graduated to presidents-for-life, who brook no opposition of any sort, with their suppression of democracy sprouting armed insurrections against their regimes.
It is such brutes that Leahy had in mind when he proposed the provision that restricts military aid to human rights violators, pointing out, "But we also want to be convinced that what is being proposed is sound, measured and necessary, and not merely impulsive."
The scenario the senator probably had in mind has already begun to emerge. India, which was among one of the first to offer help and even sent a senior official to confer with the administration, wanted to use the opportunity to stifle the freedom struggle raging in Occupied Kashmir. Furthermore, India's Hindu fundamentalist government - a body that includes officials who were personally and physically involved in destroying the historic Babri Mosque - consider it an opportunity to further stifle, and indeed crush, the country's Muslim minority. One such person is federal home minister Lal Krishna Advani, whose name tops the list of those charged with the demolition of the Babri Masjid.
Acting on its offer to help the U.S., India promptly accused and banned the Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), citing an alleged link to the Taliban and bin Laden. The government has jailed about 400 of its members and sealed its offices nationwide. SIMI was established in 1977 to educate students and youth about the teachings of Islam, a job that it had been doing effectively since its inception. The banning was even condemned by Mulayam Singh, President of the Samajwadi Party and former defense minister, a Hindu, who said, "Where is the proof?' If SIMI is communal and violent, so is the Bajrang Dal [a pivotal part of India's ruling coalition] which should also be banned by the government."
A brief look at those eager to help the U.S. provides a look into the ugly faces trying to misuse America's need in order to obtain a long leash to violate the very principles that America embraces.
Turkmenistan's president, Saparmurat Niyazov, not only got himself elected through undemocratic means, but also declared himself Turkmenbashi - the father of Turkmen. Perhaps he would like the title to remain within his family after his passing?
Certainly, India, Israel, Russia, and China, would want to broaden the definition of "terrorism". Recently, China's foreign ministry suggested that the campaign against terrorism should address "separatists" in Tibet and Taiwan. India would like to kill all Muslims in Kashmir, and Israel all Palestinians. Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for a "mutual understanding in the sphere of fighting international terrorism" - in other words, a free hand for Russia to crush the freedom movement in Chechnya. Indeed, a senior German ruling party official commented, "Silence on Chechnya is the price for this new solidarity. And I don't think Germany will be the only country to pay it."
Russia, an established violator of human rights, whose record is further tainted by the on-going atrocities in Occupied Chechnya, has not only chosen to speak for itself, but indeed acting as if the Evil Empire was still alive. Russian defense minister Sergei Ivanov declared that the airport at Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan, "may be offered to the U.S. air force to carry out a retaliation strike if the need arises." Pax Russiana was all-alive, the government of Tajikistan was not needed to make the offer.
The Russians would like the world to buy the story that the Chechen freedom movement hinges on bin Laden. In fact, in 1785, the Chechens launched their first organized resistance against Russian invasion, and finally, by 1864, Russia won the war to control Chechnya and the northern
Caucuses, after all men of fighting age in Chechnya were eliminated. Despite this, the uprising against Russian occupation continued until 1944 when the Chechen people were uprooted from their homes and exiled to Central Asia and Siberia. According to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the Chechens "refused to accept the psychology of submission." Not even Communist dictator Joseph Stalin could force them to obey his laws.
Currently, Moscow is demanding the West drop all criticism of its bloody, decade-long campaign to crush the movement in Chechnya, because it is just another battlefront in the common struggle for civilization. Indeed, Chechnya, which has never been a part of Russia, declared its independence like other occupied republics when the Soviet empire disintegrated, and held democratic elections for a parliament that approved a constitution, and a general election that elected a president. The Russian invasion in 1994, undid all that.
"Things like this should be defined carefully, and handled with restraint and intelligence," says Sergei Grigoryants, head of the Glasnost Foundation, a Moscow-based human rights watchdog. "There maybe terrorists in Chechnya, but to say the 10-year-old Chechen rebellion is an expression of Islamic terrorism is fundamentally wrong. If we're not wise... the world will go backwards instead of moving forward toward greater justice for all."
China, which is barred from U.S. aid and defense exports under nearly every category of restriction, and is the object of substantial U.S. intelligence surveillance, has agreed to share intelligence on the alleged terrorists. After a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan in late September, Powell said U.S.-China cooperation "might have a military component." No matter that China occupies East Turkestan against the will of its people and violates all norms of humanity in dealing with them.
Ironically, many countries on the verge of bankruptcy due to their own erring ways are among the most eager to help America. They see the promise of gold in this war. Turkey, a gross violator of human rights and a champion of secular fascism, sent its foreign minister to Washington to share what was described as
Turkish intelligence concerning Afghanistan and the region.
Syria's human rights record is no secret and the mass murder and the destruction of the entire opposition dominated city of Hama is still fresh in memory. Thus, even Syria would like a dry-cleaning job for its record by providing "help" to America.
No doubt, September 11th is a tragedy of great magnitude and concern, but the need is to focus on Leahy's advice and choose friends that do not embarrass America, and more importantly, ensure that the U.S. is not associated with crimes that may lead to reactions that will only defeat the purpose of building the coalition.
In building coalitions, Bush should recall his own words, "This is the fight of all who believe in progress and pluralism, tolerance and freedom."
|
