The ‘War on Terror’ [WOT] does not appear to have any end in sight. This lack of time-frames or clearly defined goals has also not assisted the international community to determine whether any substantive progress can be measured and recorded.
Since the rhetoric associated with WOT has remained subjectively emotive from its initial declaration by US President Bush to the more recent utterances by British Premier Blair, it has been impossible to construe WOT as anything other than an imperialist roller-coaster ride.
Between these two heads of state and their respective bureaucracies much has been made of "defending our civilisations". Repeated assertions in this vein has led to a discourse emanating from the architects of WOT which insist that the defence of western values necessitates the elimination of opposing values.
This explains the phrase "with us or against us". But more importantly, it also lends credence to the understanding that WOT will remain an intrinsic feature of policy frameworks of most countries.
WOT’s shifting sands notwithstanding, it is amazing how effectively its bulldozing approach has largely remained unchallenged except by those whom it regards as enemy: the "terrorists"!
Most countries have readily conceded to America’s neo-conservative demands on a variety of questionable issues. These include positioning their generals into commanding powerful global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and within the structures of the United Nations.
The WOT juggernaut rumbles on with no end in sight. Civil liberties have become a casualty in the capitals of America, Britain and most western states on the pretext of ‘sacrifice’, while personal security of the ‘other’ – who in most cases happens to be adherents of Islam – remains in perpetual jeopardy.
Ironically, even westernised elites of the ‘other’ who subscribe to WOT have been humiliated through profiling which is nothing less than discriminatory and therefore racist. Yet some of them continue to mimick Donald Rumsfeld and swagger along in true cowboy-style to justify the trigger-happy policies of WOT architects.
Hence, we are told, nay preached by ‘Brown-sahibs’ such as the self-confessed apostate Salman Rushdie, to ‘reform’ Islam. In his haste to further ingratiate himself with child-killers, he feels no moral compunction to emphasise that unless ‘reformation’ within Islam occurs, WOT will continue.
So while the architects of WOT remain equally blunt and abrasive, their stated objectives to privatise the sources of energy [oil and gas] through regime-changes wherever necessary will remain a destructive exercise.
So while the greed of WOT enthusiasts remains unsatiable, opposition to their destructive policies will determine whether they continue persuing the plunder of sovereign states.
When will WOT end?