#4
Moscow Times
September 18, 2001
Bin Laden? Better Be Sure
By Boris Kagarlitsky
The terrorist attack on New York has already been compared to Pearl Harbor
and the loss of the Kursk submarine. Mikhail Gorbachev likened it to
Chernobyl, which is probably a very accurate analogy in terms of the shock
and ignominy experienced by the U.S. administration. In both cases, we saw
incompetence and helplessness initially, followed by desperate attempts at
official face-saving.
There is, however, one analogy that does not seem to have occurred to
anyone: the burning of the Reichstag. The anti-Arab and anti-Moslem
hysteria that has followed around the globe in the wake of the catastrophe
simply calls out for comparison with the events of the 1930s. The U.S.
authorities immediately started the search for the guilty among Arabs,
Osama bin Laden cropped up almost immediately as prime suspect and
alternative versions have barely been entertained.
In the minutes immediately following the explosions, it seems there was no
doubt whatsoever regarding the "Arab" source of the attacks. However,
the
more evidence and arguments adduced in support of the "Arab version,"
the
more shaky it seems to become. In a television appearance immediately after
the explosions, the well-known pundit Vyacheslav Nikonov noted that the
guilty would undoubtedly be found, and if not, they would be
"nominated,"
adding cynically: "It would be in Russia's interest if the Taliban and bin
Laden were nominated."
To give him his due, Alexander Gordon -- who spoke on two TV programs --
pointed out that it could be far-right militia groups (such as those behind
the Oklahoma City bombing) and not Islamic terrorists at all. Analysts have
emphasised how easy it would be to carry out each individual element of the
terrorist operation: smuggling knives aboard a plane, breaking into the
cockpit, etc. However to coordinate all these actions in different parts of
the country without making a single serious blunder is devilishly hard.
The crime committed on Sept. 11 must have required enormous efforts in
management, control and logistics. The strength of Islamic terrorism is in
the simplicity of organization and its unpredictability. All groups operate
autonomously. Even the destruction of command centers doesn't have a major
impact, insofar as every one of Allah's warriors is capable of acting on
his own. The attacks on New York and Washington were very carefully
coordinated, the minutest details were thoroughly thought through, and at
no stage were there serious lapses.
It would appear that the operation was organized and carried out by people
who had free passage around the country and were considered to be above
suspicion. If they are professionals, they did not acquire their experience
in underground terrorist groups. It cannot be excluded that the attacks
were organized by forces within the United States, and this would have to
be people with considerable military experience.
Why is it that no seems even to consider a conspiracy by far-right groups
as a possibility? The masterminds could easily have covertly used people of
Arab nationality to carry out the attacks.
Whoever it is behind the Washington and New York attacks, in Russia and
Israel they have already played a role comparable to the burning of the
Reichstag. Far-right politicians -- "upholders of the values of western
civilisation" -- have already spoken out calling for revenge. Over and
over, one and the same thing is repeated: "Moslems are subhuman barbarians
and you cannot conduct negotiations with them. They are not like us, and
thus our criteria of democracy and human rights do not apply to them."
"No
need to fear unpopular measures," some say. "No need to limit
ourselves to
democratic conventions," others chime in.
At a minimum they are after: arrests without warrants, mass deportations
and wide-scale searches. Already reports are coming from the United States
of racist attacks against Islamic communities. It is clear that mass
repressions will lead to mass resistance. That is how you make enemies. Do
those who are trying to scare us with the Moslem threat really not
understand that? They understand it full well. They simply believe that a
final solution is possible -- if not globally, then at least on a more
limited territory. As a maximum, they are baying for ethnic cleansing and
genocide.
Boris Kagarlitsky is a Moscow-based sociologist.
