error

Ten Alternative Responses to Terrorism

Deborah Gerner and Philip Schrodt
Baldwin, Kansas
contact: gerner@ku.edu, schrodt@ku.edu

Individuals who disagree with the approach of the United States government to the tragic events of September 11th are continually being asked "What's the alternative?" There are alternatives. We offer the following list of five thoughts and five actions.

Five Thoughts

• The events of 11 September were a massive crime against humanity. They were not an act of war against the United States.

• The acts of terror may have been intended to provoke a massive military response. The world already knows that the United States has overwhelming military capability and is willing to use it. The world needs to see that the United States can respond to this tragedy with justice, restraint, and humility.

• Our first priority must be to prevent additional terrorism against anyone. An attitude of vengeance will only alienate individuals who might assist us.

• Billions spent on food, roads, schools, and clinics in countries devastated by war and poverty will do more to prevent terrorism than billions spent on bombers and cruise missiles.

• One of the greatest sources of antagonism toward the United States is its tendency to ignore international law.

Five Actions

• This criminal act requires a multilateral police response, not a unilateral military response. A "war on terrorism" will be no more successful than the "war on drugs."

• To demonstrate a commitment to the rule of law, the United States and NATO should expedite the arrest of indicted war criminals in the former Yugoslavia and support the establishment of an International Criminal Court.

• The United States should reassess foreign policies that our allies view as counter-productive and biased against Muslims. For example, the U.S. should end economic sanctions affecting the people of Iraq and its opposition to an international observer force in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

• The United States should only undertake actions and associations that could be justified in a public forum. Word will get out anyway; if an action can't be defended, don't do it.

• We cannot eliminate terrorism alone. We should take seriously the advice and concerns of the international community.

In considering this list, remember...

• Dissent in a democracy is an expression of patriotism. Let your voice be heard.

Acknowledgement:
We have assembled this list from the thoughts expressed by friends and colleagues in Kansas, the rest of the United States, the Middle East, and around the world. Please feel free to share it.

Last update: 24 September 2001

Download the text: PDF format   MS-Word format

The events of 11 September were a massive crime against
humanity. They were not an act of war against the United
States.

Yeah, but "humanity" won't do diddley for us (they hate us, right?) unless we take the lead.

The world needs to see that the United States
can respond to this tragedy with justice, restraint, and
humility.

Justice means self-defense. Restraint is a meaningless politesse in this context, and what the hell does humility got to do with the preservation of our nation?

. An attitude of vengeance will only alienate
individuals who might assist us.

This is abstract and conjectural to the point of absurdity; after 9/11 what more do you fear from US response that you don't fear already?


Billions spent on food, roads, schools, and clinics in countries
devastated by war and poverty will do more to prevent
terrorism than billions spent on bombers and cruise missiles.

Sure, we pay, they leave us alone. Paging John Gotti.

One of the greatest sources of antagonism toward the United
States is its tendency to ignore international law.

As that noted international law scholar Bin Ladin says......


This criminal act requires a multilateral police response, not a
unilateral military response. A "war on terrorism" will be no
more successful than the "war on drugs."

You've got your opinion, and for the present at least I'll rely on US expertise on use of military. Say, aren't you the guy who said we'd get wiped out in Desert Storm?

To demonstrate a commitment to the rule of law, the United
States and NATO should expedite the arrest of indicted war
criminals in the former Yugoslavia and support the
establishment of an International Criminal Court.

Just like American criminal courts prevent crime, yeah, yeah.

The United States should reassess foreign policies that our
allies view as counter-productive and biased against Muslims.
For example, the U.S. should end economic sanctions
affecting the people of Iraq and its opposition to an
international observer force in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Why don't you propose that Colin Powell be replaced by Bin Laden as Secretary of State...wouldn
't that be more efficient?


The United States should only undertake actions and
associations that could be justified in a public forum. Word will
get out anyway; if an action can't be defended, don't do it.

Frankly, my dear, for self-defense I don't give a damn what the public thinks, except for tactical purposes. If most countries disagree with what we want to do for self-defense, that's not going to keep my family safe.

We cannot eliminate terrorism alone. We should take seriously
the advice and concerns of the international community.

Listen to advice? of course, why not. Follow advice? That depends on its merits, no?


Dissent in a democracy is an expression of patriotism. Let
your voice be heard.

Agreed.