Zbigniew Brzezinski: Terrorized by 'War on Terror'-How a Three-Word Mantra Has Undermined America

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301613.html?nav=hcmodule

Terrorized by 'War on Terror'
How a Three-Word Mantra Has Undermined America

By Zbigniew Brzezinski
Sunday, March 25, 2007; Page B01

The "war on terror" has created a culture of fear in America. The Bush administration's elevation of these three words into a national mantra since the horrific events of 9/11 has had a pernicious impact on American democracy, on America's psyche and on U.S. standing in the world. Using this phrase has actually undermined our ability to effectively confront the real challenges we face from fanatics who may use terrorism against us.

The damage these three words have done -- a classic self-inflicted wound -- is infinitely greater than any wild dreams entertained by the fanatical perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks when they were plotting against us in distant Afghan caves. The phrase itself is meaningless. It defines neither a geographic context nor our presumed enemies. Terrorism is not an enemy but a technique of warfare -- political intimidation through the killing of unarmed non-combatants.

But the little secret here may be that the vagueness of the phrase was deliberately (or instinctively) calculated by its sponsors. Constant reference to a "war on terror" did accomplish one major objective: It stimulated the emergence of a culture of fear. Fear obscures reason, intensifies emotions and makes it easier for demagogic politicians to mobilize the public on behalf of the policies they want to pursue. The war of choice in Iraq could never have gained the congressional support it got without the psychological linkage between the shock of 9/11 and the postulated existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Support for President Bush in the 2004 elections was also mobilized in part by the notion that "a nation at war" does not change its commander in chief in midstream. The sense of a pervasive but otherwise imprecise danger was thus channeled in a politically expedient direction by the mobilizing appeal of being "at war."

To justify the "war on terror," the administration has lately crafted a false historical narrative that could even become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By claiming that its war is similar to earlier U.S. struggles against Nazism and then Stalinism (while ignoring the fact that both Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were first-rate military powers, a status al-Qaeda neither has nor can achieve), the administration could be preparing the case for war with Iran. Such war would then plunge America into a protracted conflict spanning Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and perhaps also Pakistan.

The culture of fear is like a genie that has been let out of its bottle. It acquires a life of its own -- and can become demoralizing. America today is not the self-confident and determined nation that responded to Pearl Harbor; nor is it the America that heard from its leader, at another moment of crisis, the powerful words "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself"; nor is it the calm America that waged the Cold War with quiet persistence despite the knowledge that a real war could be initiated abruptly within minutes and prompt the death of 100 million Americans within just a few hours. We are now divided, uncertain and potentially very susceptible to panic in the event of another terrorist act in the United States itself.

more...

[PhilipShore]

1. Kick

:applause:

[moodforaday]

2. K&R

Brzezinski **hates** the neocons' guts. Interesting though - he says nothing we didn't already understand. That war on terror is a fraud, that Bush et al rule by fear... but it takes Brzezinski's piece in WaPo to maybe get some notice.

Webster Tarpley said after Brzezinski's recent bombshell re possible false flag operation blamed on Iran (Zbig didn't say "false flag", but did say "blamed on Iran") that things must be really bad if Brzezinski comes out and says the things he does.

[bleever]

3. Bravo.

For such an intelligent fellow, Mr. Brzezinski writes with surpising clarity.

Highly recommended.

[Theduckno2]

4. "...The true genius of the plan was the fear..." William Rookwood :V for Vendetta

I remember saying, upon hearing of The Global War On Terror, that I found it hard to envision U.S military involvment to quell any terrorism in Northern Ireland. I realized right away that the GWOT was highly subjective in its operation and goals.

I still view "V for Vendetta" from time to time and much of its dialogue resonates with me.

Bravo Mr. Brzezinski!

recommended

[ShortnFiery]

5. Outstanding! k&r n/t.

[PaulaFarrell]

6. Does he mention his own part on the genesis of the war on terror?

i.e. the support for the mujahadeen, supplying arms via Pakistan to any and every radical Muslim who would fight against the USSR? Well, what's more important, after all, the fall of the USSR or 'some stirred-up Muslims'?

Best description I've ever seen of him: In the middle Ages he would have been called Zbigniew the Terrible. He has blood on his hands.

[CRH]

7. Well I guess Zbigniew ...

the politics and use of the fear behind that phrase, 'War on Terror' really isn't much more than a means of accomplishing your foreign policy strategy presented in The Grand Chessboard, 1997.

The PNAC ... Building America's Defenses ... ripped off the sentiment of your statement on page 25 ... "The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor".

Your promotion of hegemonic foreign policy in this book was closely followed in attitude by the PNAC. The attitude as described in your very own words on page 40 ...

"In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to a more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep the tributaries pliant, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."

Though the PNAC was not as smooth in written documents, their hegemonic quest of controlling the resources and commerce of the rest of the world, closely mimicked your strategy. And to be fair, using a slightly less militaristic flair in language than the PNAC, but promoting the same economic hegemonic control, the DLC promoted PPI again simply expanded upon your themes as a basis of hegemonic geopolitical strategy.

That the recipient of these hegemonic foreign policies are corporations, and they derive their exclusive and coercive protections from the militarist nation state funded by taxpayers; It shouldn't be surprising the ultimate indoctrination of the money behind the military might and foreign policy, ultimately, will only be through fear or economic reward. It should also not surprise many, the neocons would choose fear rather than spreading the booty of imperialism, among the serfs.

It is hard to derive morality from from the initial flawed foundation of hegemonic imperialism, regardless of the party, or the particular means of acquiring these foreign policy ends.

edit: for word order for better clarity


'