The Militant - November 19, 2001 -- Wall of bipartisan support for imperialist war

Vol.65/No.44 November 19, 2001

Wall of bipartisan support for imperialist war

BY JACK WILLEY
A solid wall of bipartisan support in Congress marks the U.S.-led war against Afghanistan and the course pursued by the Bush administration, with no alternative being put forward by liberal bourgeois forces. For example, a November 2 New York Times editorial, "Getting Ready for the Ground War," urged Washington to "step up preparations for what is almost sure to be the next phase of the conflict, an intensified ground campaign." The liberal capitalist daily called the carpet bombing by B-52s of "Taliban front lines outside of Kabul" to be "useful steps in that direction."

A week earlier Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, raised some tactical differences with the administration, but was quickly admonished for his statement.

Biden had said he did not know how much longer Bush's "honeymoon" or "unquestioning period of unabashed support for the president's policy will continue." He raised that a long U.S. bombing campaign in Afghanistan "plays into every stereotypical criticism of us [that] we're this high-tech bully that thinks from the air we can do whatever we want to do, and it builds the case for those who want to make the case against us that all we're doing is indiscriminately bombing innocents, which is not the truth."

House Speaker Dennis Hastert called Biden's comments "completely irresponsible." He added, "The last thing our country needs right now is Sen. Joe Biden calling our armed forces 'a high-tech bully.' The American people expect their representatives and senators to support these operations and to support our men and women in uniform."

Rep. Thomas Davis, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, called Biden's remarks "outrageous and negligent." It is irresponsible "to suggest to the world that our bipartisan resolve is waning," he said.

A momentary stir was also raised by The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund, which sent a letter to The Times of London objecting to the use of cluster bombs by the U.S. and British forces. A recent report by the fund on the impact of cluster bombs states that 35,000 unexploded bomblets were left on the ground in Kosova and are still killing one person a week there. A Pentagon official speaking on condition of anonymity told the Associated Press the U.S. military does not get involved in clearing unexploded weapons, and did not do so in Kosova.

Cluster bombs are "being used on front-line al-Qaeda and Taliban troops to try to kill them, [that's] why we're using them, to be perfectly blunt," U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld told the press November 2, in response to criticisms by some food aid groups that the antipersonnel bombs are killing civilians in Afghanistan.

Each cluster bomb contains 200 bright yellow bomblets that on detonation spray out shrapnel and set fire to any combustible material nearby. They are the same color as tens of thousands of food packages Washington has dropped over Afghanistan.

In a measure that tries to cover up the mounting human toll from cluster bombs, Washington's radio broadcasts into Afghanistan have added a "safety warning" about how to distinguish between the food-drop packages and unexploded bombs.

According to an October 29 article from Reuters, the announcement says, "The rations are square-shaped and are packaged in plastic.... Although it is unlikely, it is possible that not every bomb will explode on impact. These bombs are a yellow color and are can-shaped.... Exercise caution when approaching unidentified yellow objects in areas that have been recently bombed."

Muslim groups state opposition
As the war deepens and the civilian toll grows from the daily bombing campaign by U.S. and British forces, some Arab-American and Muslim organizations in the United States are beginning to speak out against the war effort, while others continue to support the assault.

"The bombing victimizes the innocents, exacerbates the humanitarian disaster, and creates widespread resentment across the Muslim world," reads an October 27 statement by a group of 15 Muslim organizations, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA).

"We also express our opposition to the extension of bombing to other countries. Such attacks will aggravate an already explosive and destabilizing situation," the statement said, adding that the organizations "express our concern about the possibility of unconstitutional measures in new antiterrorism legislation, which may curtail civil liberties in the name of security."

Naim Baig, general secretary of ICNA, told the New York Times that ICNA originally supported bombing Afghanistan, until reports of civilian casualties kept coming in.

Aslam Abdullah, editor of The Minaret, North America's top selling Muslim magazine, said the publication had "kept quiet" on the war in the initial stages, "not wanting to be seen as insensitive or political opportunists." But the November issue of the magazine will point to Washington's reactionary role in the Middle East and how it fuels anti-American sentiment.

The New York Times reported that one organization, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, started running advertisements on a Los Angeles radio station in mid-October saying that U.S. intervention in the Middle East has inflamed anti-American sentiment in the region. The Council pulled the ads after they and the radio station received numerous angry phone calls.

Reflecting the class divisions among Muslim organizations, some rejected the statement issued by the 15 organizations and continued their call for full support for the imperialist war. "There are issues of concern for our community, and we will get to them," Aly Abuzaakouk, director of the American Muslim Council, said. "But for now, the country is in crisis, and we need to show our loyalty to it by standing by the administration."

Wall of bipartisan support
A solid wall of bipartisan support in Congress marks the U.S.-led war against Afghanistan and the course pursued by the Bush administration, with no alternative being put forward by liberal bourgeois forces. For example, a November 2 New York Times editorial, "Getting Ready for the Ground War," urged Washington to "step up preparations for what is almost sure to be the next phase of the conflict, an intensified ground campaign." The liberal capitalist daily called the carpet bombing by B-52s of "Taliban front lines outside of Kabul" to be "useful steps in that direction."

A week early Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, raise some tactical differences with the administration, but was quickly admonished for his statement.