Blame the West’s Interventions for Today’s
Terrorism
By Stephen Kinzer
December 10, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "Boston
Globe" -
Outside powers have been
crashing into the Middle East for more than a century. At first we
presumed that people there would not mind, or even that they would
welcome us. Ultimately we realized that our interventions were
provoking hatred and violent turmoil. We took refuge in another
comforting illusion: that no matter how awful the reaction was, it
would be confined to the Middle East.
At least since the 9/11 attacks 14 years ago, it
has been clear that this is fantasy. Terrorism and mass migration
are bitter results of outside meddling in the Middle East. They will
intensify.
Interventions multiply our enemies. Every village
raid, every drone strike, and every shot fired in anger on foreign
soil produces anti-Western passion. Some are shocked when that
passion leads to violent reaction. They should not be. The instinct
to protect one’s own, and to strike back against attackers, is as
old as humanity itself.
Horrific terror assaults cannot be justified as
any kind of self-defense. Their savagery is inexcusable by all
legal, political, and moral standards. But they do not emerge from
nowhere. In countries that have been invaded and bombed, some people
thirst for bloody revenge.
It was never realistic for the West — the invading
world — to imagine that it is an impregnable fortress, or an island,
or a planet apart from the regions its armies invade. This is
especially true of Europe, which is literally just a long walk from
the conflict zone. Now that Russia has joined the list of
intervening powers, it too is vulnerable. So is the United States.
We are farther away and protected by oceans, but in the modern
world, that is not enough. Blowback is now global.
Violent intervention always leaves a trail of
“collateral damage” in the form of families killed, homes destroyed,
and lives wrecked. Usually this is explained as mistaken or
unavoidable. That does nothing to reduce the damage — or the anger
that survivors pass down through generations.
A new terror attack inside the United States is
likely. When it happens, how will Americans respond? If the past is
any guide, we will clamor to fight the evil-doers. This will be
described not as aggression, but as reaction and forward defense.
A strategy based on invading or bombing might make
sense if the number of militants were finite. It is not. Terror
groups in the Middle East are attracting recruits faster than they
can process them. Killing some creates more, not fewer.
Countries, nations, and peoples must shape their
own fates. Often they do so by reacting to oppression. Religion kept
Europe in the Dark Ages for a thousand years. Russians and Chinese
accepted brutal Communist rule for generations. Violent extremism in
the Middle East will end only when people who live there end it.
That cannot begin to happen until outsiders leave the region to its
own people. The Middle East will not stabilize until its people are
allowed to act for themselves, rather than being acted upon by
others.
Watching cruel terror in Middle Eastern countries
— or in Western capitals — is painful. It stirs our emotions. We
want to avenge the victims, and imagine that in doing so, we will
also be protecting ourselves. Too often, though, we fail to realize
that Western power, vast as it is, cannot smash cultural patterns
that have existed for longer than the United States or any European
nation. Emotion overcomes sober reasoning. It naturally intensifies
after horrific attacks. That is dangerous. Emotion pushes us toward
rash and self-defeating choices. It is always the enemy of wise
statesmanship.
Fanatics are trying to draw the United States back
into Middle East quicksand. If we fall into that trap, we will not
only intensify the war that is raging there, but bring it home.
Stephen Kinzer is a senior fellow at the Watson
Institute for International Studies at Brown University. Follow him
on Twitter @stephenkinzer.