War on Terror

On September 11th, 2001, we were attacked. I remember the day well. The first attack had already happened when I arrived at work. There were murmurings about something big happening, but I didn't know what it was. When I got back to my desk, I logged on to CNN.com and saw the headline. It was one of those rare moments when you know that you are witnessing something that will be in the history books. You could tell that everything was about to change. There was no way to tell exactly how, but the falling towers altered the tilt of the world.

Before the Al-Qaeda attacks, I was thinking a lot about the future. Eight years of Bill Clinton's presidency had left us with a budget surplus and a reasonably good, but slightly cooling economy. What issues might we face in the future? I allowed myself to hope that our collective resources might be channeled toward exploring space and cleaning up the environment.

The news channels didn't have enough important stories to cover, so they turned to the banal. Gary Condit fooling around with an intern became the hot political topic. The disappearance of the same intern was almost a side issue to the sexy scandal. When there are no crises, journalists lose all sense of proportion. The vapid and low become spicy and hot. I am not cynical. I do not think that a lack of tragedy is a problem. If it results in a nation absorbed in celebrity and scandal, so be it. At least they're not dying on a battlefield.

After the attacks, I thought about what should be done. I knew that Osama bin Laden could not be allowed to run free. There was some worry about making him a martyr, but I thought allowing him to escape would be even worse. It would send the message to terrorists: you can attack the United States and get away with it. I wanted to pursue bin Laden through every possible channel-- law enforcement, diplomatic negotiation, alliances with other countries, and military action if necessary. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan.

What should be done after we caught bin Laden? I wanted to drag him in front of an international court, try him, convict him on the evidence, and dispense justice according to the law. It would have several positive effects: a public trial would leave no doubt about the evidence; it would show the world that we are fair, and that we believe in the rule of law. Make it a big affair, a Nuremberg, putting bin Laden in the same historical lineage as Hitler. It would have served Bush's World War II metaphor more exactly.

As we know, it didn't happen that way. The Bush administration shifted focus from Afghanistan to Iraq, virtually assuring that bin Laden would never be caught. We bogged down in a quagmire. We failed to pursue terrorists using the law enforcement model, and used the war model, with a much looser moral and ethical code, instead. It serves the neocons well. You can justify all manner of excesses in "war". Those who complain about the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo are labeled unpatriotic, akin to weaklings who would have surrendered to Hitler. "We're at war" is an all-encompassing slogan that means "we're fighting for our survival, and we will fight dirty if we need to."

The neocons are half right. It is a war. It is a war in a much deeper sense than the neocons understand. It is not a military war, it is a cultural war. It is a war for the survival of western liberal values. It is a war that pits democracy and transparent government against monarchy and secrecy. It is a war between the rule of law and the rule of men. It is a war between justice and fear.

Bin Laden represents a view of Islam that is incompatible with freedom and democracy. It is patriarchal, misogynistic, and absolutist. The monarchies of the Middle East represent the rule of men, as opposed to our republic in which no man is above the law. Bin Laden would prefer a Taliban-like regime encompassing the entire Islamic world, ruling through fear.

Both Liberal Progressives and Regressive Conservatives opposed all of those things. The difference is that Regressives fall on the wrong side of every contended value in this war. The Bush administration has been the most secretive administration in recent history. While paying lip service to transparency, they have established secret prisons, spied on Americans, and concealed evidence of torture. Hunting down bin Laden as an international criminal would have shown the moral superiority of the rule of law. Bush's decision to engage in orthodox war effectively makes it a top-down, personality-driven operation. It is ruled by men, not by laws. Bush has repeatedly placed people above the law, from seeking exemptions to the International Court of Justice to commuting Scooter Libby's sentence. In speech after speech, Bush tries to keep us afraid, and to use our fear to justify empowering the executive branch.

In my opinion, the Progressive position must be: we will no longer be afraid. We are no fools-- we will not allow anyone to get the best of us, but that does not mean we will be paranoid. Terrorism is a real threat, which requires smart, thoughtful, decisive action. Invading a country that has not attacked us may make some Americans feel like real action is being taken, but an unafraid America must consider the results of action. We are not merely protecting our country. We are protecting our values. Americans do not want to torture people. That is an American value. To engage in torture, or to allow it to happen, for the sake of "security", misses the point. When we torture, we have already lost that battle in the cultural war.

I do not consider Regressives to be unpatriotic, only misguided. I do somewhat hold a grudge against them for painting their political opponents as weak and unpatriotic. Their Progressive opponents have a strength that the Regressives do not understand. We are not surrendering; we are fighting a deeper war for higher stakes. The war we are fighting is sometimes fought with guns and bombs, but it is more often fought with ideas. We believe that American ideas are better than terrorist ideas. If we win that war, we win the war on terror.

© 2007 Bryan Lower
Edited by Kati McDaniel

Feedback: