COUNTERPOINT


An Obvious Link:


U.S. Adventurism
Laid Groundwork
For Sept. 11 Attack


By Steve Dasbach
For Investor's Business Daily  Tue, 27 Nov 2001 


        Here's a thought experiment for armchair political scientists:  
Suppose that Switzerland were to suddenly abandon its policy of strict 
neutrality and embark on an entirely different course.


        Suppose Switzerland started deploying troops in dozens of 
foreign nations, some of them vehemently anti-Swiss. Suppose further 
that it began arming both Israel and the Arab states in the Middle 
East; flying in troops to eradicate coca plantations in South America; 
propping up dictatorial Third World regimes; and occasionally bombing
nations engulfed in civil war, such as Yugoslavia.


        Suppose, finally, that angry fanatics from one of those nations 
were to infiltrate Switzerland and launch a bloody terrorist attack on 
a Zurich business district, killing thousands of innocent people.


        The civilized world would be horrified, outraged, and saddened.


        But would anyone be genuinely surprised?


        In fact, wouldn't most sensible people point out that by 
embarking on this new, interventionist foreign policy, Switzerland had 
actually made itself more vulnerable to terrorism? That by taking sides 
in bloody, decades-old conflicts it was courting disaster? And that by 
returning to its former policy of neutrality it might return to the 
peace it once enjoyed?


        Sensible people would say all of those things. Unfortunately, 
sensible people are badly outnumbered in the discussion of post-
September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.


        Indeed, the common-sense position that a connection exists 
between yesterday's military interventionism and today's terrorism has 
been roundly denounced in some circles.


        In a Nov. 5 Investor's Business Daily column, for example, 
syndicated talk radio host Michael Medved ridicules Libertarians for 
suggesting a link between U.S. foreign policy and the 9-11 attacks. 
Medved claims that moving toward a non-interventionist policy could 
never reduce terrorism because it "assumes absurdly that suicidal 
killers are rational."


        But declaring that all suicidal killers are irrational is, 
well, irrational. Japanese kamikaze pilots were suicidal killers; but 
they clearly weren't irrational. Otherwise they might have chosen their 
targets at random, diving into a wayward tugboat here, taking out a 
fishing boat there.


        Likewise, the Palestinian suicide bombers who terrorize Israel 
are not irrational. When they strap on explosives and charge into an 
ice cream shop or discotheque, they know exactly what they're doing, 
and to whom they're doing it: Jews.


        And if the Islamic fanatics who murdered 5,000 innocent people 
when they destroyed the World Trade Center and Pentagon were crazy, 
precisely how did they manage to establish a sophisticated, covert 
network inside the USA, steal identities, attend flight school, 
commandeer four jumbo jets simultaneously and pull off the deadliest 
terrorist hijacking in history?


        Like it or not, bloodthirsty terrorists - like most criminals -  
do act rationally. And politically. In the case of Sept. 11, their 
motives aren't a mystery: They wanted to punish the United States for 
aiding Israel and for a perceived foreign policy bias against Arab 
nations; for stationing U.S. troops in Islamic nations; and for a host 
of other foreign policy sins, real or imagined. 


        That's why they attacked - and pledge to continue attacking - 
Americans, not people in Switzerland or the Galapagos Islands.


        To acknowledge a connection between military interventionism 
and terrorism isn't to condone terrorism, any more than acknowledging a 
connection between walking through Central Park at midnight and getting 
mugged is to condone violent crime. Recognizing that link is the first 
step toward avoiding more terrorism in the future. 


        Of course, revising our foreign policy is not a panacea; we'll 
always have enemies who loathe our culture, secular beliefs, trade 
policies, or democratic ideals. But as long as U.S. politicians insist 
on meddling in the affairs of dangerous, unstable nations, America will 
continue to be a tempting target for terrorists.  


        Our leaders still can't see that, even in the wake of Sept. 11.  
And they get plenty of help from myopic commentators like Medved.
 
        It's time to move toward a non-interventionist foreign policy. 
The lives we save may be our own.


        Steve Dasbach is national director of the Washington, DC-based 
Libertarian Party.