Some Roots of Terrorism

As we are daily entertained by the major news media with the latest reports of AAmerica=s New War@ rarely do we see any analysis of some of the ultimate roots of world-wide terrorism.  If the news media were honest in their reporting (or if more journalists were true to their craft of asking probing questions) the public would be much better informed.  Occasionally we get some rare glimpses of some of these causes on one of the networks, but the topic is quickly closed (time for a commercial break) or avoided altogether.  Also, we occasionally get some insights from the print media (as a recent on-line issue of Time with an article called ARoots of Rage@ or another on-line piece from MSNBC by Michael Moran called ABin Laden comes home to roost@).  Of course, the alternative press is filled with deeper analyses (e.g., Z Magazine, The Progressive Populist), but these rarely reach the general public.  What also rarely reaches the general public are the many in-depth studies of Noam Chomsky.  One example comes from a highly readable and short book (about 100 pages) published by an obscure company called Odonian Press.  The book=s title is intriguing: What Uncle Sam Really Wants.  (The price is right too, at a mere $5.)

While the ultimate roots of terrorism can be traced back as far back as the Crusades (Christianity=s attempt to take away the Holy Land from the Muslims), the more immediate sources are American foreign policies of the 20^th century.  This policy can be described variously as the protection of Anational interests@ or Amaking the world safe for democracy.@  In reality, such policies mean the preservation of vary narrow corporate interests, especially for a small group of investors (remember, about 10% of the population owns about 90% of the value of all stocks and bonds - a fact well documented, but virtually ignored by the major media and a taboo subject on such programs as ALarry King Live@ or ACrossfire@).  Chomsky=s book provides a valuable source of information about these policies.  He provides ample documentation for his assertions, including formerly classified government documents that reveal what has really been going on, in the words of insiders and in various planning documents written by State Department employees.

After World War II, policy planners began to shape the more modern version of the old Crusades of conquest and control.  In one of the earliest statements of foreign policies, George Kennan (head of the State Department planning staff until 1950) wrote a document known as APolicy Planning Study 23" in 1948 (once classified and thus kept from the general public until recently).  One part of the document reads as follows: AWe have about 50% of the world=s wealth, but only 6.3% of the 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.@  There will be no room for Asentimentality,@ Kennan writes, and we should dispense with such vague notions as Ahuman rights@ and democracy.  But we should not tell the public what our goals are and instead shower them with Aidealistic slogans.@

Kennan also observed that a major concern of U.S. foreign policy should be to contain the threat from Latin American countries who want to engage in efforts to protect their own resources and control their own destinies (ironically this was exactly what leaders of the American revolution wanted to do), which was being labeled as Acommunism@ by the American propaganda system.  Such a direct threat to American (i.e., corporate) interests must be contained, said Kennan.

Such ideas were already being developed during World War II by various Astudy groups@ within the State Department and the Council on Foreign Relations as they were developing plans for what they called the AGrand Arena@ of the world that was to be subordinated to the needs of American corporations.  What was this AGrand Arena@?  Virtually the entire world, but especially the Middle East (with all its energy resources) and the Third World, which was to Afulfill the major function as a source of raw materials and a market@ for capitalist societies, according to a 1949 State Department memo written by Kennan.

Chomsky explains that American foreign policy throughout the past half century has been to make certain that the AGrand Arena@ has Astability.@  By Astability@ planners meant that there are no attempts by local residents of these countries (especially Third World people) to take control of their own country and its resources to seek true Ademocracy.@  Whenever this has been attempted, even in the smallest of countries (like tiny Grenada), the U.S. has stepped in with ferocity to quell the uprising for fear that these ideas would Ainfect@ other countries like a Avirus@ (quoting Henry Kissinger).  Thus Astability@ means security for the local upper classes and large foreign enterprises (quoting a State Department official justifying the overthrow of Guatemala in 1954).  Chomsky observes that Awhen the rights of investors are threatened, democracy has to go; if these rights are safeguarded, killers and torturers will do just fine.@

American interference into the activities of foreign countries that have chosen to Atake matters into their own hands@ has not been a pretty sight.  The killing that takes place goes beyond the ordinary, such as Abeating infants against rocks, hanging women by their feet with their breasts cut off and the skin of their face peeled back so that they’ll bleed to death, chopping people=s heads off and putting them on stakes.@  It is not that agents of the United States do this (although they have at times engaged in similar tactics); rather it is that we have stood back and allowed it to happen for we have backed local thugs and dictatorial military rulers who often love doing these things.  This would be like a citizen who knows a child is being tortured next door but refuses to call the police.  Or, since we often supply such Aterrorists@ with financial backing, training and arms, we are Aaccessories to murder.@

Studies by respected economists Lars Schoultz and Edward Herman have documented one ugly fact: U.S. aid has tended to go disproportionately to those countries whose governments practice torture and other human rights abuses.  The explanation is clear: these two facts correlate with the aim of Aimproving the climate for business operations.@  In other words, where profit is to be made, American capitalism shows no mercy.  This was pointed out more than 150 years ago by Karl Marx. What he said was that capitalism by its very nature will seek Amarkets@ all over the globe since the Abottom line@ is all that matters.  Little did he know the truth of this observation. And although he was keenly aware of the exploitation and brutality of capitalism, he could never have imagined what would occur over 100 years later in various foreign countries.

This general attitude is illustrated perfectly by two paragons of 20^th century capitalism, Walt Disney and Ray Kroc (of McDonald=s fame).  Disney once said: AIt=s the law of the universe that the strong shall survive and the weak must fall by the way, and I don=t give a damn what idealistic plan is cooked up, nothing can change that.@  Kroc once describe the fast food industry as Arat eat rat, dog eat dog@ and vowed to do the following to his competitors: AI’ll kill >em, and I=m going to kill >em before they kill me.  You=re talking about the American way of survival of the fittest.@