Moskovsky Komsomolets
No. 218
October 3, 2001
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
U.S.-DECLARED ANTI-TERRORIST OPERATION RAISES MORE QUESTIONS THAN IT
GIVES ANSWERS
Interview with Sergei ROGOV, director of the Russian
Academy of Sciences' Institute of U.S. and Canadian Studies
Question: What do you think of the September 11 events in
the United States?
Answer: There are events and events. There are scandals
which remain in the focus of universal attention for some time
but which decide nothing. And there are other, global events. Such as
the breakup of the U.S.S.R. or the unification of the
two Germanys. Such events determine the life of many people for
decades ahead. And not in one country but around the world.
The September 11 terrorist operation in the U.S.A. was a
terrible shock, a strike at the national self-consciousness of
the entire American people. An event which in terms of its
significance can be compared to the 1941 attack on Pearl
Harbor. If you remember, it was Pearl Harbor that turned the
United States from a continental state, whose interests were
confined to the exploration of the vast expenses of North
America, into a world power.
Perhaps, the September 11 attack has finally put an end to
the United States' self-isolation. Paradoxically, despite half
a century of America's active involvement in international
developments, until recently it retained the image of a
"fortress" screened off from the rest of the world not by a
high fence but by missile interceptors. A fortress which lives
according to its own laws and which can do anything it likes,
even use force, if necessary.
Today, everyone understands that America's exceptional
nature or super-defence does not exist. The fortress has
collapsed. For the first time in U.S. history, war against it
was launched on its own territory. Within one hour, more
civilians were killed than over the 150 years of wars ever
waged by the United States. The number of victims still remains
unknown, as many of those who died under the ruins of the World
Trade Center will never be identified. Yet it is already clear
that the terrorist attacks killed by far more people than
Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor did.
Question: World War II was followed by Vietnam in which
the United States did not win fame, to put it mildly.
Answer: The Americans now simply have to revise the
lessons of the Vietnam war which took place 30 years ago. Now
they seem to have overcome the Vietnamese syndrome. America is
again ready to fight overseas. It is ready to wage a war which
will inflict losses not only on the enemy, as was the case in
Kosovo, but also on its own citizens.
Question: Do you think the Americans are really ready for
that?
Answer: Yes they are. Recent public opinion polls have
revealed very serious changes in the Americans' consciousness.
Naturally, they were largely caused by emotions, by the
well-understandable hysteria. Later, the pendulum, which has
swung so sharply towards militarism, will return closer to the
midpoint but never to the position it occupied before September
11.
This is connected not only with international affairs. America has
long claimed the role of the leader of democracy. But the fear it felt
during the terrorist attacks has made an
overwhelming majority of its citizens ready to waive their
privileges for the sake of their personal safety.
Today Americans agree that police can stop and search
anyone in the street with no apparent reason. The Department of
Justice now seeks to gain the right to tap telephone
conversations and check E-mails without a relevant court
decision. The U.S. government is preparing a bill which will
allow it to detain any foreigner for an indefinite period of
time or deport him or her, also without a court decision. In
other words, we are witnessing the collapse of principles which
until recently seemed unshakeable for the U.S.A.
Question: America's war against terrorists reminds me of a
fight between an elephant and an annoying little dog: their
forces are incomparable.
Answer: Let's analyze the following thing: what is the
worth of the colossal military and economic might of the huge
superpower which proved unable to defend ordinary people from a
small group of terrorists? Terrorists using primitive methods
and based in the world's most backward country.
"Fortress America" accounts for 40 percent of the world's
defence spending! There has hardly ever been a conflict in the
world's history that was characterized by such asymmetry
between the attacker and the target.
Terrorism has existed for centuries. But usually it
pursued either national or political purposes. Present-day
terrorism is the reverse side of the globalization process when
states operating on the international scene have been joined by
other players, such as multinational corporations or
international syndicates. It is not accidental that Osama bin
Laden's organization is often described as a holding company or
corporation, because it operates in strict conformity with the
rules of conduct of any multinational corporation. The scope of
operations, financing, the use of up-to-date technologies ...
Question: Are you deliberately avoiding any mention of
terrorists' religion? After President Bush declared a crusade
against international terrorism, many people took it as the
beginning of a war between the Christian civilization and the
Islamic world.
Answer: Well, this is a very primitive interpretation of
what is going on. No doubt, Islam, as the youngest religion in
the world, is now living through intense internal processes
which Christianity witnessed several ages earlier. Europe had
religious wars, too, and heretics were burned at the stake...
There is another very important aspect here: Islamic
religious extremism has given rise to an absolutely new type of
terror. Formerly, any terrorist preparing an attack knew that
he was running risks and could die. But death was not an
obligatory part of the act of terror.
Present-day fanatics fulfilling bin Laden's orders no
longer think how they can escape following a terrorist attack. They just
have no need to, as there is no escape, either,
because their goal is to reach Heaven. And here many laws that
determined the conduct of secret services in many countries
stop working. As the enemy has no self-preservation instinct,
the possibility of fighting it is very low.
Terror is a game without rules. Now the United States is
trying to figure out where a new strike can be delivered. Some
suggest placing air defense systems near each nuclear power
plant. OK, suppose they have done it, and what about chemical
plants? Or large industrial facilities? And Manhattan? There
are still so many skyscrapers left there...
Question: If this is a game without rules and if terrorism
has no face, who will America fight?
Answer: It seems the United States itself does not know
this. Do you remember the motto with which the incumbent U.S.
Administration came to power? It was simple: the country must
be further strengthened as the only superpower. Bush Jr. and
his supporters criticized Clinton not for wishing to make the
world unipolar. They criticized him for doing this in a too
delicate manner. They would like him to bang his fist on the
table, so that the whole world immediately recognize the U.S.A.
as its only leader, come to attention and orient itself to the
U.S. economy.
All means were good to implement this idea: further
strengthening of America's military superiority, implementation
of plans to build a national missile defence system, and
withdrawal from international agreements which Washington
believed restricted its actions.
These sentiments prevailed in the American elite until
September 11, until the United States encountered an enemy
against which even state-of-the-art weapons turned out
absolutely inefficient.
Of course, theoretically America can shower the whole of
Afghanistan with nuclear bombs. But such a decision can hardly
be made in the 21st century.
Or, perhaps, the U.S.A. should use precision-guided
weapons capable of hitting any target on the planet without
unnecessary casualties? But in Afghanistan there are no targets
deserving to be bombed, as U.S. Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld
said. Fire cruise missiles at each tent under which the Taliban
sleep? This will hardly yield any good results.
Today Americans themselves ask more and more often: What
are the objectives of the war proclaimed by President Bush? "A
crusade against international terrorism" sounds good, but there
arises another question: Does the United States plan to fight
ALL terrorist organizations in the world? Or only Islamic ones?
Or only bin Laden alone? Or states supporting terrorists?
Other things remain unclear, too. How should
anti-terrorist struggle be conducted? If the matter at issue is
physical destruction of terrorists, it means that one state
undertakes to destroy "enemies of the people" without trial.
Finally, there is a question about the boundaries of the
United States' unilateral actions. It seems that the
aspirations of George Bush and his team are obvious. But
struggle against international terrorism, which they have
proclaimed, requires the establishment of an international
coalition.
The United States has already tried to imitate Bush Sr.'s
Operation Desert Storm style and set up such a coalition - but
on a different, Hollywood-style basis: a sheriff chasing
robbers invites all trigger-happy people to join him. Only in
real life the number of such people has proved to be much
smaller. Also, it has turned out that it is the United States'
closest allies in the Islamic world that are needed most of all
to fight bin Laden and the Taliban. However, it is not at all
easy to make Saudi Arabia or Pakistan fight brothers in faith
and meet U.S. demands. For the Pakistani leadership, excessive
involvement in American games may have serious consequences
inside the country, up to the replacement of the ruling regime.
Question: A spokesman for the U.S. Administration said the
other day that, if the Taliban extradites bin Laden to America,
the U.S.A. will not interfere in Afghanistan's home affairs, no
matter who rules there: the Northern Alliance or the Taliban...
Answer: This is a very strange statement. President Bush
immediately after the terrorist attacks said that America would
punish not only terrorists but also countries supporting them
and giving them shelter. To strike at bin Laden and not to
strike at the Taliban would mean for Washington to refute
itself.
On the other hand, if America actually begins to overthrow
the Taliban regime, it will thus support the Northern Alliance
which is hostile to Pakistan. And Pakistan is now a U.S. ally.
So, the United States has not yet decided on the strategy of
its further actions, let alone their details. It will take
weeks or even months before things will begin to clear up.
Question: Do you think Russia can join in the U.S. anti-terrorist
operation? And if it can, what role will it play?
Answer: For the first time since 1945 Russia and the
U.S.A. have a common enemy. Common because bin Laden's
organization actively supported Chechen rebels. In addition,
the Taliban pose a great threat to present-day ruling regimes
in former Soviet republics in Central Asia. If they fall, any
new government is sure to be much more pro-Islamic and much
more anti-Russian.
When two states have a common enemy, they usually begin to
cooperate. Without a common enemy, countries can coexist and
even be on friendly terms but nothing more. Remember the
"strategic partnership" between Russia and the U.S.A. proclaimed by
presidents Yeltsin and Clinton in 1993? It did
not materialise for many reasons, but above all because there
was nothing or no one in the world against whom we could be
friends. Many political scientists said jokingly then that
Russia and the United States would have no grounds for pooling
efforts until Martians or some other little green men come to
the Earth from outer space.
So, the "little green men" have already come...
Look, over the 200-odd years of U.S. history, Russia and
the United States were allies many times. A common enemy united
our two countries which had basically different political and
economic systems. The only exception was the Cold War.
Question: In former years, the United States formed an
alliance with a powerful, well-armed empire. Present-day Russia
is not like that.
Answer: A political alliance does not at all require that
allies be equal in strength. It needs only coincidence of the
allies' major national interests.
Bin Laden's organization or the Taliban pose an obvious
threat to our national interests. If Russia and the U.S.A.
come to the conclusion that we have a common enemy, it means we
already can and even must work out mechanisms for cooperation
and define terms of mutual assistance.
There are purely technical aspects of the problem here: whether or
not Russia should allow U.S. aircraft to fly over
its territory, or whether or not Russia should send its
commandos to areas where combat operations are conducted or
just send humanitarian aid. There are many more questions, but
the most important thing is the political aspect: if Russia and
the United States form an anti-terrorist alliance, does the
U.S.A. plan to continue actually supporting Chechen terrorists?
And will its allies - Saudi Arabia and Turkey - continue
providing financial and military support for the rebels?
So, Russia has much room for bargaining here.
Question: But you can bargain only with someone who is
asking you for something. So far, as follows from Vladimir
Putin's recent speech before German politicians, the United
States has not asked us for help.
Answer: There is a difference, not always noticeable,
between politicians' official statements and what is actually
taking place. We should not hurry. There is a hard-and-fast
rule in international relations which cannot be violated under
any circumstances: even if you do something in your own
interests, you must demand that your ally do something in
return. Otherwise, he will simply swallow the free refreshments
but will not be in a hurry to reciprocate.
Interview taken by Yuri RYAZHSKY.
THE END
==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrHhl.bVKZIr
Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This email was sent to: [email protected]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
