The French military operation in Mali has brought to the fore the blatant
double standards in the approach of certain Western nations to the whole
question of terrorism. In the case of Mali, France, with the support of
Britain, Germany and the United States, has committed itself to combating
diehard militants who are determined to use violence to establish their
power and authority. Yet in Libya, these countries and their allies in West
Asia and North Africa (WANA) had no compunctions about colluding with
militant groups to oust Muammar Gaddafi in a bloody and brutal campaign
which killed tens of thousands of people in 2011.
Their hypocrisy becomes even starker in Syria. Western powers and groups
from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Turkey have been providing funds,
logistical support and sophisticated weapons to rebels within Syria and
mercenaries from a number of other countries, to overthrow the Bashar
al-Assad government. Many of these armed groups, like their counterparts in
Libya and Mali, justify their acts of terror and violence in the name of
Islam --- albeit a distorted and perverted interpretation of the religion.
Different armed groups in Iraq at different times in the course of the US
led occupation of that country have also, it is alleged, received material
assistance from countries in the region and the US. It is an established
fact that the US under Ronald Reagan gave enormous financial and military
aid to so-called 'jihadist' groups fighting the Soviet occupation of
Afghanistan. The US has often condoned acts of terror perpetrated by its
close ally, Israel, against Palestinians and other Arabs. Indeed, the US
itself is regarded in some circles as a 'terrorist state', given its record
of killing innocent civilians in various parts of the world, including
Latin America, West Asia and Southeast Asia.
What this shows is that there is terrorism that is condoned and terrorism
that is condemned by Western powers and other states. If violence serves
their interests, it is acceptable. If it doesn't, the militants are
targeted. In other words, there are 'good terrorists' and 'bad terrorists'.
One of the main reasons why the militants in Mali have to be defeated ---
from France's standpoint --- is because France imports huge amounts of
uranium from that country for its nuclear plants that generate 80% of its
electricity. It is not because France abhors violence or seeks to protect
human life! Besides, France wants to maintain its hegemonic grip upon West
Africa and parts of North Africa at a time when resource rich Africa is
becoming increasingly important to the global economy.
The ulterior motives for Western military action in Libya; for their covert
operations in Syria; for their hobnobbing with militant groups in Iraq; and
for their collusion with Jihadists in Afghanistan have been exposed in
numerous studies. There is no need to repeat them here. Suffice to note
that that they have very little to do with defending human rights or
upholding democracy. It is the overwhelming desire to perpetuate their
military, political, economic and cultural hegemony over the world which is
the real reason why the US and its allies seek to crush terrorism in one
instance and consort with it in another instance.
Why is it that this irrefutable truth about the attitude of the centres of
power in the West to terrorism is not widely known? Why is it that citizens
in Western democracies who are supposed to be informed and educated are not
ashamed of the double standards and the hypocrisy that surround the war on
terror? One of the primary reasons is because the media --- both the old
and the new --- does not want to tell the whole truth.
More often than not, the media regurgitates the propaganda put out by the
centres of power in the West. If it is the 'bad terrorists' that say French
troops are pursuing, the latter are projected in the media as heroes on a
noble mission, without any analysis of the root causes of the conflict or
what the motives are for launching the assault. If, on the other hand, it
is the 'good terrorists' sponsored by the West who are responsible for some
merciless slaughter somewhere, their barbarity is either played down by the
media or the whole incident is turned and twisted to present the adversary
as the perpetrator of the killing.
This has been happening in the case of Syria. In one of the most recent
episodes the 'good terrorists', the rebels, claimed that the horrendous
attack on Aleppo University on 15 January 2013 that killed 87 people, many
of them students, was the work of the Bashar government. This was the story
that most media carried though a number of newspapers and television
channels also reported the government's denial. However, when evidence
emerged that showed that the 'good terrorists' were the actual culprits and
independent journalists and student groups in Syria, apart from a number of
foreign governments, condemned the 'good terrorists' for their savagery,
very few media outlets gave any prominence to their remarks.
It is through distorted reporting and analysis of this sort that the media
conceals the double standards and hypocrisy of the centres of power in the
West. This is why we should on our own look for alternative sources of news
and analysis and use the information at our command to challenge the
powerful to be honest and consistent about the fight against terrorism.
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a
Just World (JUST). Malaysia.
Received on Sun Feb 03 2013 - 10:42:33 EST
