9-11, by Noam Chomsky: on War & Peace

Noam Chomsky: Humanitarian intervention in Kosovo is euphemism for war

A: The bombing of Serbia was called a "humanitarian intervention", by no means a novel usage. That was a standard description of European imperialist ventures in the 19th century. To cite some more recent examples, the major recent scholarly work on "humanitarian intervention" in the immediate pre-WWII period: Japan's invasion of Manchuria, Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia, and Hitler's takeover of the Sudetenland. The author is not suggesting that the term is apt; rather, that the crimes were masked as "humanitarian."

Whether the Kosovo intervention indeed was "humanitarian," possibly the first such case in history, is a matter of fact: passionate declaration does not suffice, if only because virtually every use of force is justified in these terms. It is quite extraordinary how weak the arguments are to justify the claim of humanitarian intent in the Kosovo case; more accurately, they scarcely exist.

Noam Chomsky: CIA trained Islamist fundamentalists in Afghanistan

A: This attack was surely an enormous shock and surprise to the intelligence services of the West, including those of the US. The CIA did have a role, a major one in fact, but that was in the 1980s, when it joined Pakistani intelligence and others (Saudi Arabia, Britain, etc.) in recruiting, training, and arming the most extreme Islamic fundamentalists it could find to fight a "Holy War" against the Russian invaders of Afghanistan.

There is now, predictably, an effort under way to clean up the record and pretend that the US was an innocent bystander. After that war was over, the "Afghans" (many, like bin Laden, not Afghans), turned their attention elsewhere: for example, to Chechnya and Bosnia, where they may have received at least tacit US support. Not surprisingly, they were welcomed by the governments; in Bosnia, many Islamic volunteers were granted citizenship in gratitude for their military services.

Noam Chomsky: Fight terrorism by arresting criminals, not bombing Mideast

A: When a federal building was blown up in Oklahoma City, there were calls for bombing the Middle East, and it probably would have happened if the source turned out to be there. When it was found to be domestic, with links to the ultra-right militias, there was no call to obliterate Montana and Idaho. Rather, there was a search for the perpetrator, who was found, brought to court, and sentenced, and there were efforts to understand the grievances that lie behind such crimes and to address the problems. Just about every crime--whether a robbery in the streets or colossal atrocities--has reasons, and commonly we find that some of them are serious and should be addressed.

Noam Chomsky: Use international court system & UN for grievances, not war

That is the course one follows if the intention is to reduce the probability of further atrocities. There is another course: react with extreme violence, and expect to escalate the cycle of violence, leading to still further atrocities such as the one that is inciting the call for revenge. The dynamic is very familiar

Noam Chomsky: US's low-level conflict is indistinguishable from terrorism

Terrorism, according to the official definitions, is simply part of state action, official doctrine, and not just that of the US, of course. It is not, as is often claimed, "the weapon of the weak."

Furthermore, all of these things should be well known. It's shameful that they're not. These are things people need to know if they want to understand anything about themselves. They are known by the victims, of course, but the perpetrators prefer to look elsewhere.

Noam Chomsky: Bin Laden's goal: Drive westerners out of Muslim lands

"Blowback" from the radical Islamic forces organized, armed, and trained by the US, Egypt, France, Pakistan, and others began almost at once, with the 1981 assassination of President Sadat of Egypt.

Noam Chomsky: 9-11 is indirect consequence of US building Islamist army

A: The attacks are not "consequences" of US policies in any direct sense. But indirectly, of course there are consequences. There seems little doubt that the perpetrator come from the terrorist network that has its roots in the mercenary armies that were organized, trained, and armed by the CIA, Egypt, Pakistan, French intelligence, Saudi Arabian funding, and others. The backgrounds of all of this remain somewhat murky.

The US, along with its allies, assembled a huge mercenary army, maybe 100,000 or more, and they drew from the most militant sectors they could find, which happened to be radical Islamists, what are called here Islamic fundamentalists, from all over, most of them not from Afghanistan. They're called "Afghanis," but like bin Laden, many come from elsewhere.

Bin Laden joined sometime in the 1980s. He was involved in the funding networks. They fought a holy war against the Russian occupiers.

Noam Chomsky: US pressured allies to join in war against Nicaragua