pawns and king pins

One wonders about how long these cycles of violence will continue. The coalition forces bombing Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Al Queda bombing central cities. While the king pins sit behind closed doors, the pawns pay a price and pay it dearly. What will it take to put an end to the destruction of innocent lives on both sides of this divide?

I don't need to have done politics or have experience in the field to know that a "war against terror" is too abstract for success, and that its abstractness merely means that the innocent will die. As Arundhati Roy put it, how can one wage a war "against an abstract noun". I also know that terrorism has root causes that cannot be eradicated by counter violence, for causes live on after its proponents die. That is the nature of movements with causes for unlike armies these are phoenix-like, and from the ashes of their destruction new adherents are born. I have lived in a country that has had "terrorist" activity escalating into civil war, and it has not been counter-violence that solved the problem. In fact violence merely fuelled more cycles of revenge. It is the desire on both sides to see an end to it, that ends violence.

A "war on terror" is as laughable as those who magnanimously and gratiutously propound it in their lofty speeches. I didn't need to be a politicain or "special intelligence" to know that the terrain of Afghanistan would not yeild Osama Bin Laden (as predicted prior to the war) for he would never be located in the ant country landscape of Afghanistan. Or to know that the war on Iraq was a recipe for disaster and death. Did not the intelligence indicate this to those embarking? Did they not point out that removing a dictator in a tribal country is a recipe for mayhem and chaos? Lets not pretend that no one in the Western governments knew this. If they didn't it is an even greater shame and scar on their nations' intelligences. Or were they too swelled up with their own egoistic opinions that they can "sort it out"?

Maybe, just maybe, there is too much pride to believe the West can fail. But it did. And it still does. The war in Iraq was certainly not "won", for the Iraqi people.

So now the world reaps the seeds of violence sown, by both the West and Al Queda. and if a head count be taken, it would be safe to say that Al Queda is far stronger than they ever were. During the Iraq war, I watched reporters interview civilians in Iraq, Jordan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and despite the tensions between Middle Eastern nations, the cry was the same: "We will repay, for every life you destroy we will take ten". It was the voice of normal citizens. Not of Al Queda. Not of militants. But of ordinary men and women. even of children. The West is increasingly generating violence and, through it, hatred and anger, but hoping vainly that they can live in insular violence free societies. But violence breeds violence does it not?

However the West might define him, and whatever they might feel or say, Osama Bin Laden is a leader of a large part of the Islamic world, and now a leader to be reckoned with. For the sake of those who will pay the price if we don't, perhaps it's time to dialogue. The West presumably does not want to talk to this "leader" because he is a "savage" and "evil". If it wasn't so depressing I would find it almost "amusing" that the West is believed to be no different!

I often think of the one thing that can bring an end to cycles of violence and pride. The humility to ask "what have we done wrong" in our international relations with other nations. The West has too much pride to admit it has been wrong. As Blair and Bush demonstrate - they have always been right, they are always right, and they will always be right. They alone know whats best for the rest of the world and how to fix it. If they were wrong about the wmd, well who cares they got Saddam anyway and wasn't that "absolutely flipping marvelous", the ends justifies the means so it doesn't matter if we lied and we were wrong, we did this flipping good deed for the world.

How can one expect leaders to admit they were wrong to an "enemy" if they cannot admit it to their "friends" and nations?

But, for the arrogance of its leaders ordinary people will pay. For those who go to bed at night not knowing what "terror" means, it is difficult to imagine the absolute nerve twisting, gut wrenching feeling of "being a target" of violence. But people do. People in Iraq do, people in London now do. Its a "terror" you cannot get away from or fight back - you cannot stop the bombs from falling from the skies in Iraq onto your homes and streets nor can you prevent them from exploding on the underground or the streets.

No one should have to suffer for the pride, arrogance and evil of others. But people do, and no where more so, than when selfish and indifferent politicians play their power games across the chess board of the world. The term "pawn" resonates strongly for me. Those who carry out the acts of violence are no more than pawns primed to attack and trained to kill. Neither Osama Bin Laden, George Bush nor Tony Blair will ever confront one another with weapons...they place their pawns...to carry out the jobs they want done. They live while others die. Pawns are expendable, citizens and civilians are expendable.

I am so tired of the way people kill and maim each other. Disgusted that life has no value on both sides of this divide, that innocent people pay a price they shouldn't have to pay, but always do. I am sick to the heart that the innocent pay the price for the pride of politicians.

The tsunami of December 2004 taught me something - defending oneself against the vagaries of life is hard and painful enough, without the evil that humans seem to desire to inflict on one another.