LZA STATEMENT ON TERRORISM

(October 2001)

The Labor Zionist Alliance, the American branch of the World Labor Zionist Movement, shares with its fellow Americans the grief and horror of the murderous attacks on our country. All of us have been touched by this terror: directly, through friends and colleagues, and as Americans. We support the United States government in its campaign to identify and punish the perpetrators of this crime against humanity. We commend those nations who have shared our sorrow and have joined us in an alliance against terrorism.

The terrorists who attack our nation have a single goal: not simply the destruction of Israel or of America, but the destruction of liberal democratic civilization, and its replacement with a triumphalist perversion of Islam. We reject their rhetoric of oppression and their apologists' claims that their plight forced them to choose terror as their only avenue of redress. We reject the obscene argument that American behavior is responsible for these attacks. This is the perennial argument of the perpetrator: blaming the victim. We are reminded that similar apologetics were offered for the Nazis and the Communists, and the result was the murder of many millions.

We oppose any cause-and-effect linkage between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the terrorist acts against America. The only connection is that a substantial portion of the Palestinians also endorses terror and suicide bombings, claiming that this is the only avenue of redress to their suffering. Yet it was their leaders who spurned negotiations and reignited the conflict from which they now suffer.

We urge the United States to not ignore the terror against Jews in its desire to form a broad anti-terror coalition. Any coalition so broad as to include terrorists and their supporters is doomed to failure. We do not object to recent statements by the U. S. government expressing support for the establishment of a Palestinian state. We have long endorsed this, and the government of Prime Minister Sharon has done so as well. We urge, however, that the U. S. make clear that its statement is not a reward for terror against Israel and America, but rather a commitment to support the formation of that state only in the context of a negotiated peace settlement, free of violence.

We hope that one consequence of the attacks on America will be the end of the moral equivocation which fails to distinguish between attack and response. In particular, we urge that this equivocation immediately end with regard to Israel in its struggle against terror. We reject the claim that "terrorism is in the eye of the beholder," that "one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter." Many legitimate liberation struggles have been won without terror. The Labor Zionist Movement was a founder of the Haganah, the Jewish defense forces in pre-state Palestine which condemned terror, either against or by Jews. Liberation struggles in which terrorists gain the leadership betray their own legitimacy. There are no grievances for which mass murder is an acceptable redress.

We recognize the inevitability of civilian casualties in any military campaign. Our enemies, with their complete disregard for human life, will doubtless use their own people as sacrifices, to attempt to delegitimize our response. We fervently hope that the numbers of innocent victims will be small. But we cannot accept the alternative, a mindless pacifism which argues that physical self-defense is unacceptable, that nothing is worth fighting for. This we reject as supremely immoral. There can be no accommodation with evil.

Clearly, this is a struggle that needs to be won on more than the military level. We commend the U.S. government for recognizing this, with its food drops and other policy initiatives. We strongly endorse the continuation and augmentation of these activities. The deepening of American understanding of the geopolitical forces which have produced this terror can only benefit us as we struggle to defeat it.

The Response

Dear Elihu,

Regarding the recent LZA Statement on Terrorism, there is absolutely no doubt that the horrific attacks of September 11th have left an indelible scar on America and the world.  Having grieved with the victims, it is now time to critically analyze the cause of the attacks, as well as the efficacy of the American-led response.  While LZA's statement suggests that these attacks were motivated by a singular goal, "the destruction of liberal democratic civilization," I see no evidence to this effect.

Framing the terrorists as enemies of freedom oversimplifies the problem at hand-- so much so that the American-led response is unlikely to significantly counter this threat and "wipe evil from the earth."  While the heinous acts of the 11th were a crime against humanity, it is nevertheless incumbent upon us to understand the motivation behind them-- especially if we are to prevent further terrorist acts.

Despite President Bush's attempts to avoid a war between the West and Islam, he cannot alter the prevailing sentiments of the world's citizens.  If we have learned anything from the Israeli experience, it is that a military response to terrorism has a boomerang effect.  I worry that "collateral damage" from American-led military incursions will impact not only Afghanistan but New York and Washington.

The terrorists exercise power precisely because the street supports their goals.  While we must not "reward" terrorist activity listening to the voice in the street weakens the terrorists’ ability to represent the masses. This is the best way to destroy the legitimacy of terrorist campaigns. It is a gusty move to support President Bush's statement concerning the eventuality of a Palestinian state.  Ending the occupation will not eliminate evil, but it likely will reduce the violence visited on the innocents of both "sides."  Perhaps Bush should apply this logic to his self-declared "crusade."  

Aleh V'Hagshem,

Jamie Levin

Mazkir Tnua, Habonim Dror

Dear Jamie,

    The only critical analysis necessary about America's response to Islamic terror is to understand that Osama bin Laden's victims were purposefully chosen because they were to be what is callously called "collateral damage."  That is to say, they were specifically not military targets.  If one wants to get more critical, perhaps one should criticize poor Jimmy Carter, who by presidential edict in 1979 sent military aid to Afghans, including those who became the Taliban, in their struggle against invading imperialist Soviets.

    Those fundamentalist Afghanis were perfectly happy to accept US aid in 1979.  That fact alone helps expose the flagrant lie of Bin Laden's claim to be attempting an expulsion of the West from Islamic lands.

Osama Bin Laden, unfortunately, represents a significant portion of the global Muslim popular opinion in today's world, an opinion which regards the values of the liberal Western intellectual tradition as offensive and threatening to Islam.  This variant of Islam, moreover, is a throwback to original Islamic thought which defines itself as seeking the world's submission to God's will according to the lights of Islam by any and all means-- if not by conversion, then by conquest.  It is not, as President Bush so misleadingly calls it, a "war against evil."  Rather, bin Laden and his supporters have declared a religious war against the West.

    You somehow assume, Jamie, that America is responsible for the six thousand deaths
of September 11th.  In that argument you buy into Hannah Arendt's fallacious notion that the "victim is guilty" (see her Eichmann in Jerusalem:  A Study in the Banality of Evil).  There are lots of ways in which America, post World War II, might have acted differently.  But there is nothing in the past fifty years of American foreign policy which excuses the terrorist assault on September 11th. (If anything, the first Bush Administration's failure to extirpate Saddam Hussein's Iraqi Baath regime in 1991 was the historically-egregious fault of American foreign policy in past decades.)

    If you seek a moral compass, consider the Talmud's teaching that "if a man comes to kill you, kill him first."

Aleh u'vneh,

Elihu Davison

17th Workshop

Elihu,

Let me unequivocally state that there can be no excuse for the acts of September 11^th. Equally, there is no excuse to be lulled by empty logic that would allow those who would destroy the ability to do so again. America did, after all, help create the conditions in Afghanistan conducive to fundamentalism.

President Carter’s edict strengthened the Mujahedin as a proxy army to fight the Soviets in a futile war. Once the battle was won, and the USSR subsequently collapsed, American backers were nowhere to be found, and the Afghans were not rewarded for their American-backed struggle. There was no Marshall plan for Afghanistan: the nation's infrastructure was left much as it is today-- nonexistent. Our loyal allies sunk into a decade of civil war that still persists.

Terrorists seek to fill voids by exploiting underprivileged masses in order to gain legitimacy and support (i.e., Hamas offers social welfare to the Palestinian population), or they seek to crush dissent (i.e., the Taliban’s record on human rights). Any war against terror must target the source from which it is born: the disaffected masses. Not a military campaign, but a campaign of decency and humanitarian support, which will ultimately solve the problem which now confronts us.

I do not share your fear of Islam, Elihu. As we know, every religion is, and has always been, corrupted by those who exploit the discontent of the underprivileged. While an American-led military campaign might succeed in "neutralizing" some of the terrorist infrastructure in Afghanistan, will not such a campaign also reinforce the grievances and suffering of the masses? Will not an American-led war encourage the very pain, affliction-- and anger-- upon which terrorists rely for sustenance? Instead of defeating Bin Ladin, might we end up feeding the fire which supports his Jihad, causing an escalation of violence?

The mainstream media would have us believe that the general population in Afghanistan is synonymous with Bin Ladin and his terrorist network. But we must not ignore the legitimate cries of the Afghan masses, even if not broadcast on CNN. In Afghanistan, human rights are absent, infrastructure barely exists, and hunger is endemic. It is one of the most heavily mined countries in the world. If Judaism teaches us anything, it is compassion. More than anything else, I believe that a focus on tikkun olam, repairing the world, would stem the tide of fundamentalism and significantly weaken roots of terrorism.

It is time for introspection. We must ask why this happened. We must not succumb to the binary notion of an eye for an eye. The great loss of life should compel us not to seek retribution and retaliation, but to make the world a better place.

Shalom,

Jamie Levin,

Workshop 45

Jamie:

If I understand you correctly, you blame US policy for somehow creating the conditions that inspired would-be terrorists to join with Osama bin Laden in his Holy War against the west. As evidence, you suggest that the US, after assisting the mujahedin in their struggle against the Soviets, failed to support the Afghan economy, earning thus the ire of the Taliban regime. The facts, however, suggest otherwise. The US closed its Embassy in Afghanistan in 1989 when the Taliban made life untenable for American diplomats. Nonetheless, prior to September 11th, over 85% of all relief aid to Afghanistan came from the U.S, while the Russian successors to the Sovites ever sent the Afghans relief in reparation for the destruction they wrought in their imperialist Afghan adventure.

Certainly we must have compassion for oppressed Afghans, who suffer under the ruthless and oppressive rule of the Taliban. But the first responsibility of any government is to assure the security and welfare of its citizenry, and our immediate concern must be the very survival of our civilization-- and civilization in general-- against whom Osama bin Ladin has declared a religious war. The Taliban have chosen to ally with bin Ladin in his jihad against dar al harb, the "world of evil," which includes liberalism, humanism and democracy-- the West, with the United States as the primary target. We are left with no choice but to do whatever is necessary to provide for the common defense-- it is the only feasible, even humane course of action. If we fail to act accordingly, scores more will be killed. While long-term humanitarian aid might have greater efficacy in curing the ills of the world, "long-term" loses its relevance when facing an immediate and imminent threat to human life.

Will military action make the local populace less kindly-disposed to the United States? As the Taliban militia flees under fire from the US and our allies, the local population, it seems, is celebrating. Even if military action did increase their indignation, for argument's sake: they weren't kindly-disposed to the United States before September 11th. It is wishful thinking to say we, not the Taliban and their oppressive leadership, caused their suffering. It is absurd to say that we, not the incitement of their clergy and education systems, has caused their hatred. Besides, even if this military campaign (and the Western presence on "holy soil") does increase their ire-- do we have a choice? And how relevant is public opinion in the tyrannical political climate of the Middle East? They are not quite Jeffersonian democrats, paying heed to the voice on the street.

"Carthago delunda est," said Cato the Elder as he concluded every speech to the ancient Roman Senate: Carthage must be destroyed. Indeed, the survival of Western Civilization depends on our ability to defend against, and destroy, bin Ladin's hateful and vicious distortions of Islam. Not to tolerate, or to understand, or to empathize with-- but to destroy. Jamie, while your desire for tikkun olam is admirable, to apply it to this situation is irrelevant-- if not absurd. The world must be alive, if there is to be a world to redeem. We did not start this war, but we must finish it. If we don't kill the leaders of Al Queda and the Taliban, more innocent blood will be shed.

Elihu Davidson