|
This is an age of terrorism, but not just what is stated in the mass media. In fact, state terrorism is rarely mentioned by the mass media even though it is actually more dangerous and destructive than the terrorism of non-state organizations such as Al Qaeda. One cannot put it more eloquently than the words of the historical Jesus, "Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" As I describe in my recent paper, Culture of Peace as the Best Alternative to Terrorism, terrorism is simply an extreme development of the culture of war. In the name of the so-called "War on Terrorism" the US government (Bush administration with the help of the Congress and High Courts) are trying to turn American democracy into a dictatorship. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are increasingly threatened. Shrouded in secrecy, the FBI and CIA have been given new powers of intimidation and harassment, against all who live in America, citizens and non-citizens alike. For details, see the websites of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the National Lawyers Guild, or the Center for Constitutional Rights. This raises an age-old question: is the function of war and the culture of war primarily for external defense or for the maintaining of internal power? I submit that this question is far from resolved and needs to be debated. From the historical beginnings of the state 5,000 years ago, war had two faces: one turned outward for defense and conquest; the other turned inward to prevent revolt against the authority of the state. Thus, the early city-states of Mesopotamia were engaged in military conquest abroad and maintenance of a hierarchical social structure at home that included semi-free laborers, slaves and prisoners of war. Greece and Rome were built on slavery, the slaves captured by war and kept in check by internal military force. The crusades abroad of the Middle Ages were accompanied by the inquisition at home. Although not often discussed, today's "democratic states" have not escaped from this dynamic. My 1995 article in the Journal of Peace Research, Internal Military Interventions in the United States shows that this has been a constant theme in American history. During the period of slavery, we do not have records, although we know there was a great deal of military activity, often local, against slave rebellions and escapes and against Native Americans. More recently, for the past 120 years there are more complete records indicating approximately 18 interventions and the involvement of about 12,000 troops per year. During periods of external war, the internal wars are usually intensified and accompanied by large scale spying, deportations and witch hunts. It would appear that we have once again entered such a period. It is important to recognize the culture of war. The culture of war is broader and deeper than war itself, and easier to employ in a democracy, as it depends heavily on secrecy, propaganda and education and not necessarily on overt force. The modern democratic state is embarrassed to admit to making war on its own citizens, and so it tends more and more towards a culture of war carried out in secrecy. A note in the International Herald Tribune of May 14, 1997, reported that the cost of classification of secrets by the US government was over $5 billion dollars a year and that does not include the CIA secrets because that cost is secret. Although precise data are not available, it would appear that the present US government is increasing its secrecy. How much is being used for an internal culture of war? The persistence of internal culture of war underlines the importance of a culture of peace, and especially its emphasis on democracy and the free flow of information, without which democracy cannot properly function. Although it was eliminated by the European Union from the final version of the 1999 Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace, the following provision, contained in the draft document, A/53/370 (paragraph 98) continues to be relevant: "Study and implementation of effective measures to promote transparency in governance and economic decision-making; It is vital to promote transparency in governance and economic decision-making and to look into the proliferation of secrecy justified in terms of 'national security', 'financial security', and 'economic competitiveness'. The question is to what extent this secrecy is compatible with the access to information necessary for democratic practice and social justice and whether, in some cases, instead of contributing to long-term security, it may conceal information about processes (ecological, financial, military, etc.) which are a potential threat to everyone and which need therefore to be addressed collectively."
|