Holte's corner

The absurdity of fighting Terror with Terror

Last night I had the privelage of visiting the Argentine Embassy
with my wife on the anniversary of the events of March 23 1972 when
the Military staged a coup in Argentina and then proceeded to root
out "terrorists" and leftists.

The results of that coup were a more than ten year long reign of
terror that only ended after the Falklands war and whose
repercussions live on. At that time the "militars" sought to find
all the leftists in Argentine society. People would just disapear.
They'd be taken to any of 350 (approx) detention centers scattered around the
country, interrogated, and then eventually killed.

I went to the embassy, expecting a typical presentation with
speeches and experiences. But what happened was far different. We
arrived a little in advance of the start. We were ushered into a
reception area where my wife ran into colleagues. There was the
usual chitchat going on as we waited for people to arrive, when in
came the Ambassador, followed by 20 or more Senior Officers. They
were all Colonels, Generals or similar high ranking officers. We
basically formed a greeting line and each of these senior officers
shook our hands.

A few minutes later we filed into the adjoining chamber, where the
Ambassador gave a speach. The first two thirds of the speech was a
status report on Argentina's efforts to account for the victims of
the repression years. He recounted statistics on how many bodies
have been recovered, of the efforts to recover evidence, account for
the crimes and bring people to justice. In those days the motto
was "you must have done something wrong." If a woman was pregnant,
she'd be held until she gave birth, then killed and the child put up
for adoption. One of the efforts of the current government is to
find out who the real parents of these children are and to help them
regain their identity.

I confess I was a bit scared of these military men. I could sense
the fear coming from those who lived through these events who were
in the room. State Terrorism is even more fearful than the kind of
terrorism done by small time terrorists. The constant message of "we
are at war", and "don't say anything or else someone might hear you"
is far more frightening than anything that can come from Al Qaeda. I
felt a sense of terror from thinking of the parralels between what I
was hearing and what we (the US) are doing now.

One of the things holding up progress on healing the wounds and
improving life in Argentina is that the people in charge, the Dick
Cheney's and Rumsfield's of that era, were never brought to account.
They gave up power in a plea deal in which the successor government
gave them immunity from prosecution. Since then they have been doing
their best to disapear the records of their crimes. As a result, so
far only a fraction of the disappeared have been accounted for. One
of the efforts underway is to at least reverse the principle of
Impunity under which the Government operated in those days. Some of
those people were doubtless in the room with me.

The Ambassador didn't state the principle "No man is above the law"
in so many words, but he talked about the principle in English. I
could only think of the assertions of executive power and immunity
stated by the President. Of his "signing statement" that he wrote
when he signed the McCain anti-torture amendment that he'd ignore
the law and didn't consider it binding on him. I'm sorry, but I am
terrified that in 10-20 years we could look like Argentina looked in
the 70's.

Then he gave the last third of his address in Spanish. He told the
audience, obviously directing his comments towards the Generals in
the room, that the lesson Argentina should have learned is that one
cannot fight terrorism with terrorism. One must fight terrorism with
the tools of democracy. With hope, with economic and social freedom,
opportunity and progress. One must fight anti-democratic forces with
more democracy -- not less. Repressing people doesn't make society
less violent -- it simply increases the violence level and redirects
the violence into a society that is fearful, conformist, and self-
repressive. Of course that is what the people who use such methods
want. They want a docile populace. And when people are terrorized
enough they become docile. We can see that happening here. When
Belafonte accused Bush of being the worlds biggest terrorist he was
talking about State Terror. The kind where someone insists that he
is fighting a 'war' and that any means he uses, or end he pursues,
is justified by that war. The Argentine Military used the terror war
to hide their corruption and prevent it's exposure. Most autocratic
regimes are usually also Kleptocracies.

The purpose of terror is to create a situation in which people will
give up their freedoms for security. But it usually also results in
a condition in which those using the tools of fear, of appeals to
patriotism, of warfare, make mistakes and costly mis-steps.
Argentina's military eventually launched the Falkland's war with a
drunken triumphalist attitude that they'd take those Islands and
Britain would do nothing. Britain fought back and crushed the
Argentine military -- and the people finally saw how bankrupt,
corrupt and kleptocratic their military was. The Falklands war had
nothing to do with a war on terrorism. It was simply an effort to
control an area claimed by Argentina and that was rich in resources
that Argentina felt it needs. Their incompetance in planning and
fighting the war led to their general incompetance being exposed for
what it is.

Draw your own parrallels.

Chris

Posted by cholte at March 24, 2006 05:00 AM