Thoughts from London

Let Blair match anti-terror words with deeds
Bravo, bravo. The ranks of Tuscany and those other clichés that speak of doughty deeds done would ring in the corridors of power in The White House and No 10 Downing Street.

There was British Prime Minister Tony Blair telling the leaders gathered at the world summit how they should collectively fight the scourge of terrorism that is eating into the very vitals of civilised nations like a malignant cancer.

To Mr. Blair’s credit it must be said he is a good speaker. He is interesting and convincing even when he knows that what he says could be that much further from the truth. Never mind, he is worth listening to even when one begins to doubt the sincerity of his words.

Take, for instance, those speeches he made to the House of Commons and elsewhere on the imperatives that drove him to join hands with President Bush in invading Iraq.

Maybe he had convinced himself- perhaps it is his evangelical zeal like Bush’s born again Christianity- that there was an unmistakable nexus between terrorism and Islam and that terrorism could be defeated by toppling Saddam Hussein.

But when it came to the imminent danger to British interests such as in Cyprus (a Commonwealth country he is now ready to sacrifice for the sake of bringing Turkey in to the EU) and weapons of mass destruction that had long been destroyed, he surely knew that he was on highly dangerous ground. But he marched on, labouring to convince an increasingly dubious nation.

But his oratorical skills made it sound as though the WMDs were about to drop on our heads like the legendary apple that descended on the Newtonian dome.

Yet listening to him speak at the world summit on terrorism would not have left many listeners in doubt that he was sincere and he wanted to put an end to terrorism and terrorist threats wherever they occurred or were likely to occur.

President Bush might well have hoped that he was able to deliver the same message with the candour that his transatlantic partner in military adventures, displayed in New York.

Blair urged both the United Nations and member -states to pledge themselves to combat the incitement to terrorism or as Foreign Secretary Jack Straw would like to say, provoke to terrorism.

Many countries faced with terrorism and the growing fear of terrorism would no doubt have agreed with Blair and Bush that they should act individually and collectively to fight terrorism that is as globalised today as trade and investment.

Some of Blair’s words echo and re-echo. Perhaps the most telling among them was this particularly paragraph: “ There is not and never can be any justification, any excuse, any cause that accepts the random slaughter of the innocent. Wherever it happens, whoever is responsible we stand united in condemnation.”

Strong words indeed. But is condemnation enough?
Sadly had the western world uttered the same words and thoughts decades ago and taken decisive action to put those words into practice the world would not be in the sorry mess it is in today.
One curious thing about this world summit is that the powerful Security Council has backed a resolution by Britain calling on all member states to ban incitement to terrorism.

Yet the summit has failed to agree on a definition of terrorism. It is always intriguing to find out how member states would outlaw incitement to terrorism when there is no clear and accepted definition of terrorism.
While legal experts and academics have a field day trying to add to the confusion and hair splitting, the public surely know what terrorism means and what devastating effects it has had in parts of the world.

Some would say that the act of using terror or the threat of terror against civilian populations and non-combatants in the furtherance of political, religious or ideological goals would constitute terrorism. The bombing of civilians in buses, trains, aircraft, restaurants and other public places, the assassination of political figures and political opponents would constitute acts of terror.

No doubt some Third World intellectuals with a doctorate in divinity or closer links to the deities would be able to conjure up one or more definitions that should provide enough fodder for more doctoral theses.
While politicians and experts squabble, the peoples of this world, especially those faced with continuing or growing threats of terror, expect those who enthral listeners with their words of wisdom to put their sincerity on public display. Or, as the weathered phrase goes, put their money where their mouth is.

So the time has come, as the walrus told the carpenter, for those who speak of fighting terrorism and urge the world to join hands in so doing, to show by deed more than word what they themselves intend doing.
Tony Blair has implored the United Nations and its individual members to take the war to terrorism. Should he not then lead the way, show what could be done and he has done to minimise, if not end, the threat of terrorism.

When other countries faced with obvious acts of terror, such as bombing civilian aircraft resulting in the loss of foreign and local lives, appeal for international cooperation and understanding, the west makes desultory noises while harbouring within their amidst those who were acknowledged members or ardent supporters of organisations that countries such as Britain and Canada (at one time) had banned as foreign terrorist organisations.

It is only when the west suffers from acts of terror that they awake from their supine slumber and swing pendulum- like to suppress long cherished civil liberties.

The time has indeed come for Britain to prove that it is genuine, that there is not that large slip between the cup and the lip. If Blair’s words are to be taken seriously then as prime minister he must ensure his officials- the Whitehall mandarins and the foreign office stiff shirts- to act in a manner that proves to the world that he is genuine.

So far we have had much cant and little candour. Britain has over three months left of its presidency of the European Union. That leadership gives it an opportunity to show that it means what its prime minister says.
Britain must not shirk that duty. The EU’s External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferraro-Waldner was quoted in a news report as saying that individual member countries must decide whether to act against the LTTE or not.

Coming from a country that produced Hitler and endorsed fascism and even recently showed its ultra right-wing tendencies, I suppose it comes naturally not to act against an organisation that has been described by many as fascist.

But the political leaderships of member countries, if they are to be believed and if they are not to contribute to the internationalisation of terrorism and some day suffer from it, should act now.

Ferraro-Waldner reportedly said they should “keep all channels open.” While leaders are being assassinated and others arbitrarily killed and detained Ferraro-Waldner from Austria wants to keep channels open. Others before tried to do the same with Hitler. Alas history records what happened. It is not only the channels that are open. Her mouth is wide open too.

Back to Columns