The Dangers of Shutting our Eyes
I was playing hide and seek with one of my young relatives recently, and when it came to her turn to hide, she placed both of her hands over her eyes and sat stationary, giggling to herself, completely ignorant to the fact that I remained right beside her. I took a few moments to explain that although she had chosen to ignore me, she remained right in front of me. My explication sufficed and we quickly resumed the game, with her running behind the curtain when it came around to her turn to hide.
I reminded myself of her behaviour later that day when I heard the reaction to the latest spate of tragic British and American deaths in Afghanistan. The depressing reportage is normally followed by cries from familiar quarters of the media that these deaths are in vain, that if we somehow behaved in a more humble, diffident manner when conducting our international relationships these tragic repercussions would be avoided. Each casualty sustained steadily reinforces the argument that we should leave either Afghanistan or Iraq as soon as possible.
The strategy which is proffered to be an alternative solution to international terrorism is one that does not involve military intervention. The primary means of achieving this is that we must put national security first, ’securing the home base’ as it is known, ensuring that we both avoid antagonising our neighbours and evade the inevitable fatalities. If every nation maintains its own security, there will never be any requirement for our embroilment in the affairs of foreign lands, with a peaceful international coexistence free to blossom.
Based on the understanding that we ensure terrorism is not produced within our shores, other nations will reciprocate the gesture by maintaining similar levels of security; working under the assumption that they are both willing and capable of matching our levels of safety and peace.
The second strand of this argument asserts that the only possible way to deal with such threats is around the negotiating table, with alternative means being unworkable and disadvantageous for society.
To hold these theories up against some specific examples from recent world history, it can be proved that this approach is not entirely suitable for every situation. I remain unconvinced that the massacres of Sierra Leone could have been ceased through gentle persuasion of the perpetrators around the negotiating table. It is difficult to envisage that the murders of teachers who allow female students into their classrooms or the blowing up of telephone masts by the Taliban in Afghanistan could be stopped through a strongly worded statement from David Miliband. Does anybody believe that the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, resilient and inexorable after twelve years of sanctions and international isolation, would have finally capitulated through a nudge at a peace conference.
The other strain of this theory is that if we somehow forge a stronger national identity and couple it with fortified anti-terror measures we will be able to avoid the fate of the so called “home grown terrorist” But this theory neglects the fact that many recent high profile attacks were the result of a range of international factors and did not result from a national identity crisis. For example the perpetrators of 9/11 were conditioned in Pakistan, while the failed London bombers of July the 21st received their training in Africa. The idea that we could somehow ignore the problems that stem from these regions and leave these environments unchecked shows a naive disregard for recent history, and leaves us open to similar incidents that may occur in the future.
In this global, interdependent world we have a duty to support nations who are less able than us to defend themselves against the evils of terrorism. Military action should only ever be seen as a last resort, but we should never be afraid of taking this measure when it is necessary. Once we have accepted the fact that our liberal and progressive society will always be a target for the radical sectarian groups who oppose our values, we should be prepared to defend our principals and beliefs just as vigorously as they will try to attack them. The road is long, difficult and many more casualties will be suffered, but we should never forget where our enemies lie, and that they will not be defeated by simply closing our eyes and pretending they do not exist.
