"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked
far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted
an eye... and now we are indignant, because the stuff we have done overseas is
now brought back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home
to roost." I never understood why this quote from Rev. Jeremiah Wright was
so controversial. With somewhere around 120,000 civilian deaths in Iraq; 16,000
in Afghanistan; hundreds more in drone strikes over Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia;
and a total of over 10 million foreign deaths as a direct result of U.S.
military and economic interventions since those nuclear blasts in Japan, it’s
totally understandable that there could be people out there who want to kill
Certainly, many of these interventions may have been
justifiable, and could well have prevented further loss of life; but when it’s
your son, your daughter, your father, your husband, your brother, your sister,
your wife or your mother that you bury, it’s mighty hard not to sense some
desire for revenge. And 10 million deaths add up to a lot of repressed
vengeance; sooner or later, some of it is bound to be released—or, as the Rev.
Wright put it—some of our chickens are going to come home to roost.
It doesn’t make it right. But neither does our rationale
make the death of other innocents right.
So how do we make
it right? We can play a childish game of tit-for-tat all we like, but this is
never going to stop until someone is big enough to admit they’ve done some
wrong. If we’re big enough to take on the role of global police, then it could
be that we’re big enough to take on the role of global peacemaker. If we don’t
do it, who will?
But how? And how can we expect others to follow our lead?
And won’t this make us look weak?
While answers to questions like these may be hard to find,
one thing is certain: it won’t be easy. Others won’t follow our lead: the seeds of vengeance have already been
planted and will continue to spread—for a while. Some may well see us as weak,
while others will respect us for our resilience.
Here are just a few suggestions that could send the message we’re
making an effort:
lead from 12-step programs. Acknowledge that we have an addiction to military
muscle (we’re responsible for 39% of the world’s military spending—as much as
the next 11 biggest spenders combined—which looks like an addiction from where
I sit). Make a searching and fearless
moral inventory of ourselves. Note the word ‘fearless’. Even if others don’t
recognize the courage it takes to do this, we can. We don’t need to be apologists;
we just need to be fearless. Make a list
of all persons we have harmed, and become willing to make amends to them all.
Ten million deaths, many more injuries, and everyone else affected by them, adds
up to a lot of people, but we could at least identify groups of people. Make direct
amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them
or others (including ourselves, of course). This is where the hardest, richest
and most rewarding work really begins. It worked with the Marshall Plan and the
Japanese post-war economic miracle, so it can work again. Continue to take personal inventory, and when we are wrong, promptly
admit it. Notice how counter these steps are to current diplomatic methods,
or even to our instincts? Notice how much success A.A. and its sister programs
have had? There could just be something to this.
This would be a huge statement. If reading Samir Naji al Hasan Moqbel’s
description of his experience
in the hunger strike at Guantánamo doesn’t stir
some sympathy in you, it’s probably time you asked yourself when you lost your
humanity, and how that is serving you. In short, the torture hasn’t stopped.
Even without the force-feeding and the beatings; 11 years of confinement without
trial, with limited outside contact, and with no clear end in sight is torture
enough. Try putting yourself in such a position. Even on death row, you know
what’s coming and why you’re there. Two days after his inauguration—on January
, 2009—President Obama signed an executive order to close Gitmo.
More than four years later, it still holds over 160 prisoners, many of whom
have been cleared for transfer. Certainly, there have been many seemingly
insurmountable obstacles to doing this, but we need to find ways to overcome
them. This one action alone would show that we’re making an effort to change the
way we’re seen in the world.
The Muslim world could be forgiven for believing we are closet
racists. While the abovementioned prisoners languish in suffocating conditions in
Cuba as untried ‘enemy combatants’, we rarely, if ever, treat other terrorists the same
way. Ted Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, Joe Stack, Eric Rudolph and Wade Michael
Page all belong to an extensive list of domestic terrorists who were each responsible
for at least as much destruction as the Tsarnaev brothers, and all were either
tried in civilian courts or died before that option was possible. Yet the
moment Dzhokhar Tsarnaev—a U.S. citizen—was identified as a foreign-born Muslim,
many pundits and politicians were calling for him to be tried as—you guessed it—an
enemy combatant. Meanwhile, former informant Craig Monteilh tells us
the FBI’s anti-terrorism strategy “is all about entrapment”. While we maintain
such double standards, we make ourselves look both fearful and xenophobic to
the very types of people we target (read: Muslims). And while we target them,
they will target us—and we happen to be a very big, stationary target—which makes
us pretty easy to hit.
of other countries’ business. At least where we can. Drone strikes and similar
operations—both overt and covert—do us few favors overseas. We can never hope
to kill every last remaining potential terrorist, and our attempts to do so will
only encourage more. If we know where these people are, we know how to keep an
eye on them. Let’s trust our ability to do that, while investing more in diplomacy
and nation building, and less in weapons of mass destruction. Give the
insurgency inciters as little to feed on as possible.
Wear it. While
law enforcement does an excellent job at preventing the bulk of terrorist
attacks on American soil, every now and then another Tsarnaev will slip through
the net. It’s inevitable. When it does happen, we need to stand tall and respond
without malice or fear, as has largely happened in the wake of the Boston
bombing. The more we are able to do this, the easier it will be for the world
to see that terrorism is one strategy that will never work on us.
These incidents—no matter how misguided—happen for a reason. What is that
reason? Stopping for a moment to ask is always a good idea. We may not like
what we hear, but we can still listen and take in what is relevant. As Jane
Goodall has said, “Change happens by listening and then starting a dialogue
with the people who are doing something you don't believe is right.” At no
point can we agree that people attacking us is right. At every point we should
I recall a bumper sticker that said we are making enemies
faster than we can kill them. We can reverse that trend. The ideas here are not
new, nor are they comprehensive. But we need to start somewhere, anywhere—for the
sake of our peace of mind, for our country, for our children, and for the
families and friends of all the people this country has touched for better or for
worse—and in this increasingly global environment, that’s nearly everyone (and
mostly for the better!).
Because, until we do take the lead on peacemaking, we’ll
just be playing chicken.