Why Americans fought the War in Afghanistan - Essay Example

WHY AMERICANS FOUGHT THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN? It is the fact beyond doubt that one single event of the terrorist attacks of 09/11/2001 at the renowned World Trade Center, New York, USA, drastically changed the very scenario of the world politics and the direction of international relations at large. Costing thousands of precious lives of the people belonging to the divergent regions of the world, the horrible attacks served as the great surprise for the whole globe, and the people heard the shocking news in a perplexed state of utter astonishment, fear and bewilderment. It not only forced over 150 nations revise their foreign policies, in order to eradicate terrorism, violence and bloodshed from the very face of the Earth under the US commands and instructions, but also laid the foundation of the future political scenario on the basis of this horrible catastrophe. The attacks on the United States on 11 September 2001 have incalculable consequences for domestic politics and world affairs. Reliable predictions about these consequences are impossible. However, it may be worthwhile, even at this early point, to reflect on what these acts of violence reveal about the adequacy of our theories of world politics. (Keohane 2001) The political and strategic analysts from different corners of the earth were consulted, and debates and discussions were arranged haphazardly in order to investigate into the motives behind these attacks and the causes and consequences at social, political, economic, geographic, regional, religious and racial levels. The religio-political rivalries of the USA, from international perspective, were assessed and estimated and it was concluded that the so called terrorist organization under the title Al-Qaeda could be involved in these attacks. The US President George W. Bush announced the involvement of the Al Qaeda in the terrorist attacks, during his address to the joint session of the Congress on 20th September, 2001, nine days after the sad incident, and declared war against the organization very soon. In his emotional address, Bush emphasized upon the Americans’ curiosity, anxiety and deep concerns regarding the attacks on their country.  He emphatically blamed the Al Qaeda responsible for that all. The evidence we have gathered all points, Bush views, to a collection of loosely affiliated terrorist organizations known as al Qaeda.  They are the same murderers indicted for bombing American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and responsible for bombing the USS Cole. (2001: retrieved in the Whitehouse.gov) Al Qaeda is a Saudi Arabia based terrorist organization, consists of the extremist Sunni Muslims, which has launched a shameful fanatic campaign to present the religion of Islam as a terrorist religion striving against the Jewish community all over the world. Its leadership declares the organization as a reaction to the atrocities and cruelties committed by the Jews in Palestine, Kashmir, Philippines, Chechnya and other Muslim regions costing heavy losses in men and material. Started its nefarious designs from the Muslim state of Yemen in 1992, the organization had already accepted the responsibilities of the terrorist attacks on WTC in 1993 as well as on the US embassies in Tanzania and Sudan during late 1990s. The top leadership of the notorious organization had been staying under the fanatic Taliban-regime of Afghanistan, to which it regarded as its head-quarters to destroy the Jews, the Christians and even the brethren Shiite Muslims in different area of the globe. The USA, Israel, Iran and the UK were its special targets, where the enemies and rivals of this terrorist organization lived as major communities. At the eve of the terrorist attacks, the top leadership resided in Afghanistan, from where it applauded the sad incident by declaring it a brave and courageous steps in order to teach the anti-Islamic forces, communities and nations a remarkable lesson. Though the organization denied its involvement in the attacks on the WTC, yet unlike the entire Non-Islamic as well as Islamic world, it heartily applauded the attacks that resulted in the killing of innocent men, women, aged and children belonging to different countries, cultures and religions of the world. The Islamic states including Iran and Pakistan seriously condemned the sad incident by viewing it a cowardly step taking the lives of innocent people on the one hand, and jeopardizing the very peace and solidarity of the world on the other. Their reaction was reprehensible and shameful one that added fuel to the fire of the non-Muslims’ hatred for Muslims. The By means of this document we send a message to America and those behind it. We are coming, by the will of God Almighty, no matter what America does. It will never be safe from the fury of Muslims. America is the one who began the war, and it will lose the battle by the permission of God Almighty. (Al-Qaeda statement, April 24, 2002: quoted in Wiktorowicz and John Kaltner and retrieved in MEPC Journal 2003) As soon as the USA discovered the Al Qaeda’s hand in the terrorist plan of attacking on the WTC in September 2001, the American authorities asked the Taliban-regime of Afghanistan to expel the terrorists from their country and hand over Osama Bin Laden, the leader of the Al Qaeda, to the USA. The extremist Taliban regime and its ruler Mullah Omer not only refused to hand over the terrorists to the USA, but also reiterated to provide them unflinching support both morally and politically by giving them shelter and protection. Not only this, but also the Taliban government announced to fight against all the agencies and authorities that aimed to arrest or attack the Al Qaeda. Almost all the Islamic countries, especially neighboring Iran and Pakistan, forced the Taliban to comply with the US demand of handing over the war criminals to her, but the Taliban were as resolute and firm as ever in their decision to defend their so called guests and political refugees against any foreign threat and military campaign. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia tried their best to play the part of middleman and coordinator between the USA and Afghanistan, and briefed the Afghan ambassador regarding the consequent US invasion in the country in order to detect and arrest the terrorists had been rescued in Afghanistan, but all in vain. Instead of taking the whole situation in a modest and prudent way, the prejudiced Afghan regime started displaying their arrogance and stubbornness by destroying the statues of Buddha, declaring them the signs of idolatry and infidelity. It served as the last straw for the US patience, which had already made plan to attack Afghanistan to fight a decisive war against terrorism. Some of the theorists are of the view that the USA was already determined to have access in this strategically imperative part of the world, in order to keep an eye on the military advancements of her age-old political rival Russia on the one hand, and her growing economic competitor China. Hence, all the US military campaign against the so called terrorists was mere an eye-wash, as Bin Laden was raised, introduced and trained by the USA herself during the Reagan-government of 1980s. The USA had strong desire of capturing the permanent place in this region of the world, which is strategically very important. According to The Debate, America has wanted a new government in Afghanistan since at least 1998, three years before the attacks on 11 September 2001. The official report from a meeting of the U.S. Governments foreign policy committee on 12 February 1998, available on the U.S. Government website, confirms that the need for a West-friendly government was recognized long before the War on Terror that followed September 11th: "The U.S. Governments position is that we support multiple pipelines... The Unocal pipeline is among those pipelines that would receive our support under that policy. I would caution that while we do support the project, the U.S. Government has not at this point recognized any governing regime of the transit country, one of the transit countries, Afghanistan, through which that pipeline would be routed. But we do support the project." (U.S. House of Reps., "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998: retrieved in The Debate) Political and strategic analyst Gray (2003) has also refused to admit the US claim that the Al Qaeda is determined to push the world into the stone age of Paleolithic and Neolithic times. He is of the view that modern terrorism is not the product of contemporary times; rather, it maintains its roots in the past two centuries. Gray does not see eye to eye with the analyses and statements issued by the political thinkers and strategists in respect of estimating the activities of Al Qaeda and other warring groups with the colored spectacles set by the West on the eyes of the world. On the contrary, he suggests the acquisition of systematic knowledge of the conflict between groups and nations with a broad historical perspective. There was a lust to dominate over the world during eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, where Russia, England, France, Portugal, Spain, Germany and others remained at daggers drawn to capture the wealth as well as mineral and human resources of the poor countries. It gave birth to countless pressure groups in the captured societies, who raised revolts against imperialism and tyranny inflicted and exercised by the military giants of Europe. Al Qaeda is actually imitating the foot prints of imperialism instead of trying to show the world the path of destruction or backwardness. It maintains the lust for ruling over others by introducing its own culture, values, traditions and beliefs. Looking into the history of the world at large, it becomes evident that the whole Europe strived to play scramble for Africa on the one hand, and invaded south Asia, Far East and other parts of Asian countries on the other. Al Qaeda is also imitating the ignoble designs invented by Russian, Japan, Turkey, England, Germany and others for the sake of power. The West devised many schemes and laid the foundation of the UNO for its own purpose. The western countries have got a strong platform to rule over others. Any group or nation, opposing these schemes, including Iran, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Venezuela and other, is declared terrorist ones. It is therefore, it has become empirically true that though the foundation of the UNO was laid on the name of the safety and protection of human rights, yet the West always strived to exploit the term by giving way to its own culture, civilization, norms and values in the Third World so that the subjects follow and imitate the patterns of the west thinking them true, modern, advance and progressive. It is actually suppression of cultural values and freedom in the name of human rights and modernization. They are introducing violence of old imperialism by backing the social movements to fish in troubled waters. Anghie (2005) discusses the European colonial race in different parts of the world. He has defined the term “periphery”, where he means the boundary line of interests drawn between the Europeans and non-Europeans by the developed countries. The phrases like uncivilized, developing, poor, third world and like----all depict the Western concepts of peripheries for the non-European nations. There is division of civilized and uncivilized nations, where the west considers itself the civilized one. The USA’s campaign against terrorism is also the part of obtaining more sovereignty over the uncivilized societies of developing countries. Anghie declares his findings as ‘an alternative history of sovereignty.’ Al Qaeda is not a new threat to the imperialism, nor it is against any type of technological advancements or modernism; on the contrary it is anxious to capture the resources of the world at large in the name of ethnicity as well as religion. The Islamic Revolution of Iran (1979) was also appeared in the reaction of the exploitative Imperialistic political system prevailing under the monarchical rule of Muhammad Reza Shah Pehelvi (1941—1979) in the country. The revolution cracked Capitalistic nuisance from Iranian society by changing the very scenario of the country’s political and economic systems, and serves as the cresset to show the path of glory and light to the seekers of truthfulness and social justice. Being one of the most significant incidents of the second half of twentieth century, the Iranian revolution not only influenced the Iranian state by turning it from Monarchy into an Islamic Republic, but also left its indelible imprints on the international politics and strategies. Many of the Eastern and Western countries including the Middle East, the USSR, Europe and the USA had to revise their foreign policies and new friendships and rivalries came into existence in the wake of the great revolution. The psychology of a political leader is thought to be the spokesman of the people’s emotions. But it must be viewed with positivistic approach of empirical generalisation. Taking the example of Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the political insight of the leaders has been revealed that the people of America are seriously afraid of terrorist attacks. The situation was actually not the same. The theorists view the US government’s decision of Afghan invasion as the part of the Republican’s presidential campaign. They misused the media to scare the masses of the “coming” terrorist’s attacks from which Bush is the person to rescue their country from the monster. The media was instructed to place the news related to Al-Qaeda and its leaders, Lebanese political party Hezbollah and Palestinian liberation organization Al-Fatah prominently so that the minds of the masses could be moulded according to government’s own interests and desires. The significant percentage of the American public could be brain washed psychologically in such a way that the simple majority of the population re-elected the Republican candidates as they were in delusion that the Republican Party was their saviour to protect them from the terrorist threat. Man’s nature and mind can be assessed by the performances and the decisions behind these performances. We assume that statesmen think and act in terms of interest defined as power, Knopf observes, and the evidence of history bears that assumption out. That assumption allows us to retrace and anticipate, as it were, the steps a statesman--past, present, or future--has taken or will take on the political scene. Same is the case with US President George W. Bush, who looks far more adventurous than both his father and German leader Hitler. The entire globe arranged demonstration and millions of people stood against him not to involve in war, but his lust met not quench at all. He was quite unaware of the results of war in Iraq, though the USA had a poor but also shameful history of military failure in Vietnam and Afghanistan. His acts reveal his narrow sightedness and lack of intellect to look into the matters deeply. Now, the USA looks standing at the state of isolation at the issue of Afghanistan war. Hence, the political analysts consider US invasion on Afghanistan as part of the US ambitions to occupy the strategically important region of the globe that serves as a blunder on the part of the president. The inability of the US-led coalition, to search out Bin Laden even after over six years long campaign, along with the assistance of Afghan and Pakistani governments, is the sound proof of the nefarious designs of both George Bush and Bin Laden to drag the world into the awkward state of uncertainty, fire and blood costing thousands of precious human lives subsequently. REFERENCES John Gray,. Al Qaeda and what it means to be Modern ISBN 1565848055 2003. Louis Klarevas. Political Realism A Culprit for the 9/11 Attacks. Europe, Vol. 26 (3) - Fall 2004 Quintan Wiktorowicz & John Kaltner. Killing in the Name of Islam: Al-Qaedas Justification for September 11 Middle East Policy Council Journal Volume X, Summer 2003, Number 2. (Retrieved in http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol10/0306_wiktorowiczkaltner.asp) Robert O. Keohane & Joseph S. Nye. Power and Interdependence. 3d ed. New York: Addison-Wesley Longman 2001. President George Bush’s Address to the Joint Session of Congress (Quoted in http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html Defence Journal, "Afghanistan - not so great games", April 2002. Did The Planned Oil Pipeline Through Afghanistan Influence Americas Decision To Invade And Install A New Government There? (Quoted in Atchison Intelligence Group: retrieved in)http://www.thedebate.org/thedebate/afghanistan.asp) Read More

Started its nefarious designs from the Muslim state of Yemen in 1992, the organization had already accepted the responsibilities of the terrorist attacks on WTC in 1993 as well as on the US embassies in Tanzania and Sudan during late 1990s. The top leadership of the notorious organization had been staying under the fanatic Taliban-regime of Afghanistan, to which it regarded as its head-quarters to destroy the Jews, the Christians and even the brethren Shiite Muslims in different area of the globe.

The USA, Israel, Iran and the UK were its special targets, where the enemies and rivals of this terrorist organization lived as major communities. At the eve of the terrorist attacks, the top leadership resided in Afghanistan, from where it applauded the sad incident by declaring it a brave and courageous steps in order to teach the anti-Islamic forces, communities and nations a remarkable lesson. Though the organization denied its involvement in the attacks on the WTC, yet unlike the entire Non-Islamic as well as Islamic world, it heartily applauded the attacks that resulted in the killing of innocent men, women, aged and children belonging to different countries, cultures and religions of the world.

The Islamic states including Iran and Pakistan seriously condemned the sad incident by viewing it a cowardly step taking the lives of innocent people on the one hand, and jeopardizing the very peace and solidarity of the world on the other. Their reaction was reprehensible and shameful one that added fuel to the fire of the non-Muslims’ hatred for Muslims. The By means of this document we send a message to America and those behind it. We are coming, by the will of God Almighty, no matter what America does.

It will never be safe from the fury of Muslims. America is the one who began the war, and it will lose the battle by the permission of God Almighty. (Al-Qaeda statement, April 24, 2002: quoted in Wiktorowicz and John Kaltner and retrieved in MEPC Journal 2003) As soon as the USA discovered the Al Qaeda’s hand in the terrorist plan of attacking on the WTC in September 2001, the American authorities asked the Taliban-regime of Afghanistan to expel the terrorists from their country and hand over Osama Bin Laden, the leader of the Al Qaeda, to the USA.

The extremist Taliban regime and its ruler Mullah Omer not only refused to hand over the terrorists to the USA, but also reiterated to provide them unflinching support both morally and politically by giving them shelter and protection. Not only this, but also the Taliban government announced to fight against all the agencies and authorities that aimed to arrest or attack the Al Qaeda. Almost all the Islamic countries, especially neighboring Iran and Pakistan, forced the Taliban to comply with the US demand of handing over the war criminals to her, but the Taliban were as resolute and firm as ever in their decision to defend their so called guests and political refugees against any foreign threat and military campaign.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia tried their best to play the part of middleman and coordinator between the USA and Afghanistan, and briefed the Afghan ambassador regarding the consequent US invasion in the country in order to detect and arrest the terrorists had been rescued in Afghanistan, but all in vain. Instead of taking the whole situation in a modest and prudent way, the prejudiced Afghan regime started displaying their arrogance and stubbornness by destroying the statues of Buddha, declaring them the signs of idolatry and infidelity.

It served as the last straw for the US patience, which had already made plan to attack Afghanistan to fight a decisive war against terrorism. Some of the theorists are of the view that the USA was already determined to have access in this strategically imperative part of the world, in order to keep an eye on the military advancements of her age-old political rival Russia on the one hand, and her growing economic competitor China.

Read More