Pat Lancaster writes from the United States

As the US launched another series of air strikes on forces loyal to the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden, in New York and Washington the clearing up of the rubble and detritus of the 11 September bombings continued. Mayor of New York Rudi Guiliani estimates it will be at least a year before the area known as Ground Zero is cleared.

It would be impossible not to be touched by the stories of bravery, loss and survival that came out of the terrorist attacks which claimed the lives of more than 6,000 people on 11 September. It seems that every small town across America lost a son or daughter in the bombing of the World Trade Centre’s twin towers.

It is the first time America has ever experienced a disaster of this kind and on such a scale. Patriotism has become order of the day. The American ?stars and stripes’ flag is draped across most public buildings, smaller versions flutter from the radio aerials of trucks and cars across the country. Young and old, wear t-shirts emblazoned with the flag and messages reading ?God Bless America?, and ?United We Stand?. From New York to Nebraska Americans from a wide range of ethnic backgrounds have been drawn together in mourning.

President Bush has made clear the war is anti-terrorist not anti-Islamic

But at the New York Stock Exchange it is business as usual; the local A&P supermarket still plans to be open 364 days a year and the petrol station continues to pump gas — at a fraction of the cost paid in Europe — into vehicles with interiors the size of a refugee tent in Peshawar. Meanwhile, the Americans ask each other, with what seems like genuine dismay, ?Why do the terrorists hate us??

The excuses they give themselves are many and varied: ?We stand for freedom and they hate it. We are rich and they envy us. We are strong and they resent this. It’s all about Palestine. It’s all about religion.? The truth is that the average American simply cannot get to grips with anti-American rage, or understand there is not one simple question to which a single, simple answer can be found..

Newspapers and magazines attempt to analyse the situation, television channels are running programmes on Islam and the history of the Arab people in an attempt to educate people that terrorism is diametrically opposed to the teachings of the Koran. Meanwhile, President Bush has made clear the war he is waging in Afghanistan is an anti-terrorist, not an anti-Islamic conflict. The president has publicly castigated those guilty of anti-Muslim practices and called for understanding and cohesion from all US citizens, irrespective of their race or religion.

There will always be a particular kind of xenophobic ?redneck? for whom annihilation of the foe provides the only answer. An attitude typified by one southern ?gentleman? I spoke to who said he would like to see the twin towers ?built to twice their original size?, after American forces had ?bombed the crap outta Afghanistan and every livin’ soul in there?. Fortunately, he was not representative of the majority of Americans I talked to. In Boston an employee at the Hyatt Harbourside Hotel’s business centre told me: ?Most people I know felt there should be some form of retaliation after the attacks of 11 September. Terrorists should not be able to get away with attacks like these. If there is no deterrent what’s to stop them bombing America every week. But after seeing the conditions the people of Afghanistan are living in, well, it makes you think ...?

Indeed, if this new, ?different kind of war? has done anything apart from terrorise, maim and kill innocent Afghan civilians it has made a broad band of privileged, insular, self-absorbed Americans do just that — think.

To many in the international community the decision by President Bush, earlier this year, not to sign the Kyoto agreement on global warming typified the United States ?I’m alright Jack stance’ on world issues.

In 1999 the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) concluded ?climate change is likely to have wide ranging and mostly adverse impacts on human health, with significant loss of life.? To stabilise the rising temperatures, rich industrialised countries and their multi-national companies — the principal beneficiaries and leading polluters — must cut their emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases. The Kyoto accord was to have ratified this principle but President Bush made clear he had no wish to be a signatory to the deal. Let the others go ahead if they wished but America would not be among them.

The United States has only five per cent of the world’s population but produces 25 per cent of total world pollutants, yet the president announced at a press conference on 29 March: ?We will not do anything that harms our economy, because first things first are the people who live in America. That’s my priority? It’s in our national interests that we develop a strong policy with a realistic common sense environmental policy.?

After 20 years of war the people of Afghanistan have next to nothing

Predictably, the world community reacted angrily. The richest, most powerful nation in the world was willing to pay lip service to improving the lot of humanity, to sympathise with the world’s hungry and those affected by the floods and droughts exacerbated by global warming, even to send aid, but when it came to taking action the answer was a firm no, not if it meant a loss of profits for the US conglomerates. It is difficult to equate such a decision with the caring, sharing way the US attempts to portray itself.

Following the air strikes on Afghanistan and the comprehensive television coverage ordinary Americans have been confronted with the reality of life in a place where famine, war and death are a way of life. The launch and continuation of military attacks can only worsen the humanitarian crisis which has been fermenting for many months. With a population of just under 21 million, Afghan’s have a life expectancy of 40-45 years. Only 29 per cent of the population have access to basic health services and only 12 per cent have access to a safe water supply. The country’s under five mortality rate is the fourth worst in the world with only one in four children achieving the age of five years. Even before the current crisis 35 per cent of children under five were suffering from malnutrition.

Six million Afghans will be dependent on donated wheat this winter. If the aid agencies cannot come up with a solution, large numbers will die. This catastrophe existed long before the events of 11 September took place following 20 years of war and three years of drought and famine. However, far from improving the situation of Afghan’s starving the food aid parcels the Americans are dropping on the country will only serve to compound the problem, according to some aid workers. ?Some people have been injured by the falling packages?, an aid worker explained, ?also packages rarely get to the people most in need, the widows and children, they are gathered up by those best equipped to fight for them.?

After 20 years of war the people of Afghanistan have next to nothing. Bombs razed their cities and towns to the ground long ago. Everyday life is a struggle, just locating a safe water source and transporting enough to meet the needs of the family can occupy an entire day or longer. With no links to the outside world the majority of the population do not know anything about the events of 11 September, not even that they took place.

In the cities under fire most people will have heard of Osama Bin Laden and of George Bush but the reason they are forced to flee their homes remains a mystery to them. Yet still they run because bombs are something they do understand, over two decades they have become a fact of everyday Afghan life.

It seems unlikely further military activity will flush Osama Bin Laden out of the country, if rumour is to be believed he has already gone. In this ?different kind of war? perhaps Mr Bush should now follow suit.

Copyright © IC Publications Limited 2001. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means or used for any business purpose without the written consent of the publisher. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained herein is as accurate as possible, the publisher cannot accept responsibility for any consequences arising from its use.

Back to the top
Contents