Janus, Attack On America, Terrorism

The September 11th 2001 destruction of The World Trade Centre, the attack on the Pentagon and the potential attack on the White House is a form of terrorism and this cannot be denied. The tragic deaths of more than 6,000 people must be lamented, and a strong response is needful and necessary. The assault on New York and Washington is also an act of cowardice. Those who do hit and run attacks, those who do not want to be held accountable for their public actions are cowards and must be seen and called as such. So, let us at the outset, call the ATTACK ON AMERICA an unacceptable act of terrorism and the work of cowards. If we do not feel the pain and anger of the lost lives on Sept. 11th, our hearts must be made of stone. Who cannot help but feel for the vulnerable lives lost and the ripple impact on families, friends and a nation? It is quite understandable why fear, insecurity, anger and retaliation are the all too human reaction to such an event.

It is true, of course, that the World Trade Centre (economic), Pentagon (military) and White House (political) are symbols of Imperial power, and this is why they were targeted, but we must admit up front that such an attack must be called both terrorist and the work of cowards. So, if Janus is to look one way and see what must be seen, the above must be both starkly seen and spoken. There are, though, questions we must ask about why America would be attacked, how do nations in other parts of the world feel about the USA, and why is there such negative feelings in many parts of the world? Janus, in short, must also look in the other direction. We must see Sept. 11th within a much bigger global and historic context if we are to get a better feel for what happened and why.

2
AMERICA ON ATTACK
The CIA since WWII

My government is the world’s leading purveyor of violence
-Martin Luther King Jr.

The CIA, since WW II has been involved in ‘about 3,000 major covert operations and over 10,000 minor operations—all illegal, and all designed to disrupt, destabilize, or modify the activities of other countries’. (p.70), John Stockwell, ‘The Praetorian Guard: The U.S. Role in the New World Order'(1991)

The head of Janus, now, must look in the other direction if we are to understand why many outside the gravitational field of the USA often feel so negative towards them. There were 6,000 killed in the Sept.11th attack, and, as I mentioned above, this was an act of terrorism and the work of cowards. Such an action neither represents nor reflects either the Arab or the Islamic tradition and this must be stated clearly, openly and insistently. But, what has been the track record and history of American actions in other parts of the world since WW II? Dare we see them as terrorists and acting as cowards, also? If we are to be consistent, and not hypocrites we must apply standards both ways; ethics and international law ask this of us. It has been estimated that the USA can be held accountable for, at least, the deaths of 8 million people since WW II. Let us, briefly, look at some of the CIA operations and the consequences of such operations.

1)IRAQ--- 200,000 killed in the 1991 War, and in the last decade 1 Million have died (500,000 have been children). Madeline Albright thought such decisions were ‘worth the cost’

2)Guatemala---120,000 killed between 1954-1994. CIA ‘Operation PB Success’ overthrew the gov. of Jacobo Arbenz Guzman

3)Dominican Republic (1965)—3,000 deaths when the CIA toppled the gov.

4)Indonesia (1965)---2 Million killed by Suharto and in East Timor in 1975 200,000 killed.

5)Nicaragua (1980s)—30,000 killed and the USA refused to obey the World Court’s decision on the illegal nature of mined harbours.

6)El Salvador(1980s)---80,000 soft target deaths (Romero etc)

7)Angola (1970s)---I million deaths---John Stockwell was head of the Angolan operations (75-76) Vietnam (73-75), Zaire (Congo) 67-69

8)Chile (1973)—Allende overthrown and Pinochet brought to power---30,000 killed

9)Panama (1989)—Noreiga overthrown 8,000 killed

10)Iran (1953) –Mossadegh overthrown Shah brought to power---70,000 deaths

11)Israel (1948) -the conflict with Palestinians the USA has taken the Zionist position

12) Lebanon(1980s)—1000s killed

13) Indochina (1954-1975)---4 Million killed (The Pentagon papers-Daniel Ellsberg)

14) Libya (1980s)—bombed relentlessly

15) Argentenia (1976-1982)---11,000 disappeared.

16) Afghanistan(1980s)—largest CIA operation of the 80s—5-6 billion US$

Policy Planning Document 23-1948 George Kennan (head of the State Dept):

We have about 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population… In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity….To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives…we should cease to talk about vague and…. Unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.

There is little doubt that Kennan’s comments reflect American political realism, and such a position also was acted upon since WW II. We can begin to understand, I think, given what I have mentioned above, why the USA (as the New Romans) are not smiled upon in many parts of the world. The purist nationalism of the USA was embodied in Mayor Guilani’s comments to the prince of Saudi Arabia who offered $10 million to assist those in New York, but Guilani refused it because he suggested the USA needs to rethink its foreign policy in the Middle East.

Now, if we dare to, like Janus, look both ways, hear the story, the tale from both sides, and if we ever hope to be consistent and apply the same ethical standards to all states, then we need to ask who are the real terrorists, who are the real cowards and why are the deaths of some people (those in the USA) worthy of much attention and reporting but those outside the imperial centre not as worthy of attention?

3
CANADA AND THE COLONIZED MIND

Now, by way of conclusion, let me just apply the Janus image to us in Canada. Canada has, since its beginning, been most suspicious of both American republican principles and, even more worrisome, American expansionistic and imperialistic tendencies. The Canadian mind, at its best, has an international flavour, is critical of the pretensions to the empire south of us and understands why other nations might not think kindly of the USA. We, after all, have been attacked many times by the USA, and, at the present time, we are beseiged and beset by American influences in many ways. There is, though, another Canadian tendency, much truer to the liberal tradition, that is keen to genuflect, heed and hear and obey the empire; this is the colonized mind—it cannot think out of the box of the USA.

We are, at the present time, told that we cannot be neutral—I agree. But, if not being neutral means dutifully bowing before the dictates of American bombing in Afghanistan, then we need to question how language is being used----terrorism is a politically loaded term and we must recognize this. As Canadians we must we wary of being drawn into an imperial war that is more about defending American hurt and pain than standing for truth, goodness and beauty. The colonized Canadian mind asks no hard questions, assumes the USA is the bastion of civilization, justice etc. etc.. We must be ON GUARD before those who ask God to Bless America but ignore everyone else; such jingoism and misguided patriotism does not reflect the best of the Canadian way.

Yes, let us lament for what happened on Sept. 11th 2001, but if we are to call this terrorism and go after those who did such a horrendous thing, let us also look at how the Americans have done much the same thing in most parts of the world. As Canadians, let us be a restraining conscience to the empire south of us rather than dancing bears with a colonized mind. The face of Janus has looked both ways. I hope, in such looking, we see things differently.

---
Ron Dart teaches in the Dept. of Political Science and Philosophy at the University College of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford, B.C. He is editor of The Red Tory Review and has published numerous articles and two books of poetry. Dart is also the political science advisor to the Leacock Home/Museum in Orillia.

For more by Ron Dart see:
The Canadian High Tory Tradition and Our New Republican Party
What is Canadian conservatism?


Note: The Canadian High Tory ... What is Canadian conser...