user preferences

New Events

Ireland / Britain

no event posted in the last week

London bombing: Pro-war brigade want it both ways

category ireland / britain | imperialism / war | opinion / analysis author Thursday July 21, 2005 22:26author by Anarcho Report this post to the editors

Anarchists should be the first to condemn such tactics as they mirror those of the state

They declared a war on terrorism and explode bombs in other people's countries. They then turn round and denounce this as "barbaric" when terrorists do the same here. Do they expect war to be a case of we bomb them and they put up with it? So it does turn the stomach to hear Blair call the bombings "barbaric" when he himself is responsible for the UK-US invasion of Iraq which has killed tens of thousands.

Against Terrorism! Against Imperialism!


The barbaric attacks in London on July 7th should be condemned by all sane people. Nothing justifies attacking innocent civilians or the use of the tools of terror. It was fundamentally a cowardly attack. If the terrorists had been brave, they would have fought British troops in Iraq, not blown up innocent women, children and men on a tube or bus. This was not an attack on the rulers of the world, the warmongers who have killed tens of thousands in two wars, but on working class Londoners going about their everyday lives.

Anarchists should be the first to condemn such tactics as they are mirror those of the state. For the terrorist, like the state, those who were killed are considered collateral damage in pursuit of a greater goal. While the state denounces the terrorist for undermining the state's monopoly of violence (as the Iraq war shows it is okay for the state to terrorise and kill civilians, not for others), anarchists condemn all forms of terrorism, state terrorism included. For anarchists, individuals and their freedom are the greatest goal and, consequently, cannot be scarified. We do not, however, equate the violence of the oppressor (against the oppressed) with the violence of the oppressed (against the oppressor). Terrorism is an evil tactic not due to the violence, as such, but because the violence is directed at the general public (the oppressed) by a self-appointed elite who share many of the same perspectives as the current elite.

Yet as much as the attacks, like imperialist war, must be condemned they must also be understood.

While the politicians and (most of) the media, are at pains to downplay any link with the current imperialist debacle in Iraq, the links are obvious. This is a catastrophic blowback from Blair's foreign policy. Londoners are paying the terrible price for a policy that they did not plan nor implement and, in the main, did not support. We will never know how many of the victims opposed the war their rulers were happy to lie to produce nor how many took to the streets along with millions of others across on February 15th. We will never know how many opposed the occupation of Iraq and the senseless killing of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. The terrorists, like Blair, did not give their opinions much thought.

It has been argued, in reply, that 9/11 happened before the Iraq war. Jack Straw can always be relied upon to talk nonsense and he did, stating that 9/11 had not been in response to a Western attack and that atrocity had helped produce the Iraq War. The former claim is partly true, the latter is not. 9/11 obviously predated the Iraq war but American intervention in Muslim countries predated 9/11 by decades. Even the September 11th Commission report noted that al-Qaeda conceived that attack in part as a punishment on the US for supporting Israel's policies toward the Palestinians. Not to mention the previous Iraq war, following its 1990 invasion of Kuwait, and the accompanying UN sanctions. All these are put into the memory hole and 9/11 is treated as year zero. As for Straw's second claim, he should remember that Blair, unlike Bush, never stated that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11. That atrocity did not cause the Iraq war for that was planned long before it (for example, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil reported that the very first Bush cabinet meeting he attended, in late January 2001, was "all about Iraq").

So no one is arguing that all forms of terrorism are the product of the debacle in Iraq, just that these specific terrorist attacks are the result of that war. To deny that is to deny reality. Yet this is what Blair has done, purposely confusing numerous terrorist attacks on different countries into the general category "terrorism" to deflect attention away from the obvious. At least he stressed that Muslims as a whole were blameless (although that did not stop the brain-dead attacking Mosques and Muslims).

Blair, of course, is simply repeated Bush's claim that al-Qaeda strikes out at the west because of hatred for "our" values (although Bush's far-right Christian supporters share more in common with the Taliban than with "liberal" values). The statement claiming responsibility for the attacks, while probably false, significantly said no such thing. The attack, it said, was an act of sacred revenge for British "massacres" in "Afghanistan and Iraq," and a punishment of the United Kingdom for its "Zionism" (i.e., support of Israel). That is probably the motivation for the home grown bombers, as it is for others across the world. Blair and Bush, in other words, have increased terrorism and the causes for terrorism for some time to come.

This is a specific attack on London as a result of Bush's "war on terror" that Blair has tied us to. If it was a case that they hate our way of life and values, then why have the bombs targeted those nations which have participated in the war in Iraq? If they hate freedom, why have they not struck Sweden as Osama bin Laden asked just before the US Presidential election? He has also said that "If you bomb our cities, we will bomb yours." As soon as the bombs started dropping on Iraq, London became a target.

The pro-war brigade seems to want it both ways. They declared a war on terrorism and explode bombs in other people's countries. They then turn round and denounce this as "barbaric" when terrorists do the same here. Do they expect war to be a case of we bomb them and they put up with it? So it does turn the stomach to hear Blair call the bombings "barbaric" when he himself is responsible for the UK-US invasion of Iraq which has killed tens of thousands. As Robert Fisk suciently put it, "When they die, it is 'collateral damage'; when 'we' die it is 'barbaric terrorism.'"

Rest assured that those who do link the bombings with imperialism in Iraq will be condemned for "politicising" those horrific attacks. Yet these will be the same people who will use those exact same bombings to justify their own agenda of increased state power and imperialist adventures abroad. As they repeatedly used September 11th to do the same.

And those politicians who are now saying that the bombs will not "change our way of life" will be the first to use them to do just that with a raft of draconian laws. Britain will be unrecognisable after Blair has finished passing laws to stop terrorists changing it. The process has already started, he has reduced the freedom to demonstrate; he detains people on suspicion; he is eroding trial by jury. He will use 7/7 to force through a central identity card database on which large amounts of information will be kept on each of us. He will use it to limit freedom of speech.

The state now has the perfect opportunity to increase its powers and control. Blair will happily go along, as he seems addicted to more state control over the "sovereign" people. He takes every opportunity to erode freedom, and this will be no exception. Less than a week after the attacks, he informed the world that if the security services ask for even more powers that would be considered. He also rejected the call for an independent enquiry, suggesting that the state bureaucracy can start printing out its wish list now (the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act, anyone?). Any parliamentary opposition will, of course, be smothered by the cross-party consensus that this attack had nothing to do with Iraq. How that consensus lasts will be influenced by pressure from below, from the attitude of the British people. Sadly, we have not seen the mass protests of Spain. Have we become so atomised that such protests are unlikely?

Of course, the bombs have changed how we life in other ways too. If you oppose Blair and the occupation of Iraq, you will be called an appeaser to continue to speak your mind on matters. The dead will be used to bolster the power and authority of a Prime Minister who knowingly made the world a less safe place (as early as February 2003 the joint intelligence committee reported that al-Qaeda and associated groups continued to represent "by far the greatest terrorist threat to western interests, and that that threat would be heightened by military action against Iraq"). A PM who decisions have killed tens of thousands. A PM who lied to start a war of choice. A PM who will use the suffering of 7/7 to remain in power pursuing policies which cause these kinds of atrocities and train those who carry them out. To point this out will produce such flack that many will be silenced and dissent hindered.

And what of the secret Home Office/Foreign Office joint report entitled, "Young Muslims and Extremism" leaked to the Sunday Times? This discussed why young Muslims in Britain were becoming more and more inclined to support and perhaps to participate in terrorist actions both in Britain and abroad. One of its conclusions was that the Iraq war was a key cause, stating that it "seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment among Muslims, including young Muslims, is a perceived double standard in the foreign policy of western governments, in particular Britain and U.S." The report went on: "The perception is that passive oppression, as demonstrated in British foreign policy, e.g., non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way to active oppression, the war on terror and in Iraq and Afghanistan, are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been acts against Islam." Thus British foreign policy, not "an ideology of evil", was a key factor. Blair received that report last year. Not only is he not listening to the public, he is ignoring his own government's reports.

If Blair really did believe his own rhetoric and aimed to give the terrorists no credibility then he should stop constructing the foundations of a police state and roll back what he has already done. He should stop waging imperialist wars. He should say that Britain is strong enough to handle the words of a few hate-filled extremists (Muslim or not). But that will not happen. He will surely use these bombs as an excuse for more attacks on our civil liberties. And terrorists across the world, if Blair believes his own rhetoric, will dance for joy. A key al-Qaeda goal is to topple Western democracies by pushing them into fascism. This is to punish the West for having supported authoritarian regimes in the Muslim world. Blair's rush to increase state powers is playing straight into that agenda.

The media, in general, fell in line with the government's line (as expected). By repeating the self-serving position that this was an irrational, random act by people who want to destroy our way of life they helped increased the terror many felt. What could be worse than a bunch of nutters who have no aim but destruction loose on the streets? The coverage was also significant. Unlike the Iraq war, in which pictures of the destruction and wounded were avoided as too distressing, the carnage in London was plastered across the papers. The consequences of our state's actions are hidden, so making 7/7 even less comprehensive. For those who have seen the unedited results of US-UK bombing (i.e. the Arab world) the pictures of 7/7 will be all too sadly familiar. Perhaps if the media presented our war crimes in such detail, people would be less willing to support them in the first place? Perhaps it would explain, but not justify, why some people hate us so much they would plant bombs on crowded tubes?

Some have argued that we live in a democratic country and, consequently, there is no need for such extreme measures. The terrorists could speak out, march and protest. That, of course, is the line usually spouted against direct action (strikes, occupations, protests, etc.) rather than terrorism. Have such people been asleep for the last three years? First over a million then, repeatedly, tens of thousands marched and were ignored. People spoke out against the war, the lies, the killing, the destruction. Blair said it was good leadership for the representatives of the people to be unrepresentative. At the election, the choice was between two pro-war parties and other parties which would never get into office (and, if they did, would probably betray their commitment to withdrawal in the face of reasons of state just as the Iraqi politicians did). That does not suggest that terrorism is justified, it is not. It simply indicates the limitations of what passes for democracy in the UK and the need for genuine, radical, alternatives which give hope.

That alternative is currently pretty small. The tragedy is that the anti-war movement, dominated as it was by the SWP, failed to provide any effective direct action based strategy to stop the war and instead limited itself to marching from A to B and electioneering. The aim of any serious anarchist movement must be to involve as many people as possible in effective social struggle and, consequently, show that there is a viable alternative to the dead ends of apathy, electioneering and terror.

Then there are the usual double-standards. This follows on from World War Two. The Blitz was an evil act that strengthened the resolve of Londoners; the terror bombing of German cities by the Allies were legitimate acts of war that demoralised the enemy. The same today, where the terrorist acts in London will not deter us from occupying Iraq while US-UK levelling of Fallujah will break the terrorist insurgency. The implicit xenophobia and racism is clear, as is the fact that their dead are not as important as ours.

According to Bush, the US and UK "are fighting these terrorists with our military in Afghanistan and Iraq and beyond so we do not have to face them in the streets of our own cities." The London bombs exposed the stupidity of that plan (we can only wonder what the troops in Iraq think about their mission being redefined to serve as bait for terrorists and the thoughts of Iraqis who are being killed to save Americans from that fate). If Blair really believed that by "fighting terrorism" in Iraq (the terrorism his invasion produced!) we would protect Britain, this argument is no longer valid.

Blair did say something semi-sensible: "I think this type of terrorism has very deep roots. As well as dealing with the consequences of this - trying to protect ourselves as much as any civil society can - you have to try to pull it up by its roots." Yet he has been providing that terrorism with fertiliser by his actions. Even the Bush Junta's CIA director has admitted the Iraq War is helping the terrorists. If we aim to reduce terrorism, we should do two things in the short term. Firstly, do not allow our states to practice it. Secondly, do not wage imperialist wars which are garanteed to increase it. That means fighting the flawed policies of Bush and Blair along with the domestic economic and political interests which favour them.

It also means that getting rid of Blair and Bush, as enjoyable as that may be, is not enough. They are the figureheads of a system and not the system itself. In the long term, the solution of the problem of terrorism is the same as that of the other problems we face, ending a social system in which the many are oppressed by the few -- whether its name is capitalism or theocracy.


More articles by Anarcho

author by U.S. Anti-imperialistpublication date Sat Jul 30, 2005 05:26Report this post to the editors

Anarcho writes:
"It [the London bombings] was fundamentally a cowardly attack. If the terrorists had been brave, they would have fought British troops in Iraq, not blown up innocent women, children and men on a tube or bus."

First of all, raising the question of "brave" vs. "cowardly" attacks is just macho posturing. It has nothing to do with class politics.

Secondly, "[fighting] British [and, presumably, U.S.] troops in Iraq" is not the only or best armed alternative to "[blowing] up innocent women, children and men on a tube or bus"! This alternative would mean that only the lesser warmakers -- the mostly working-class dupes in the ranks of the imperialist military -- will be killed or maimed, and that the Iraqi people -- the main victims of this imperialist war -- will continue to be the "collateral damage". Iraqis fighting the invader pretty much have to do it in Iraq, but the rest of us, especially in the imperialist countries, have far better alternatives.

Anarcho continues:
"This was not an attack on the rulers of the world, the warmongers who have killed tens of thousands in two wars, but on working class Londoners going about their everyday lives."

Yes! And those who wish to confront ("bravely" or otherwise!) the imperialist warmongers in the U.S., Britain, etc., will be aware that these capitalists and politicians don't ride public transportation but they do have names and addresses!

 

This page has not been translated into Čeština yet.

This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Deutsch
E

Ireland / Britain | Imperialism / War | en

Tue 22 Jul, 23:42

browse text browse image

Image:The Old Ruler, New Rulers Class War Continues.. banner being prepared the evening before the protest imageBritish Queen's Dublin Castle banquet protested by a few hundred as Garda harass activists 22:16 Fri 20 May by Andrew 0 comments

About 250 people took part in the éirígí organised march on the banquet for the British Queen staged in Dublin castle Wedensday night. WSM members joined the demonstration but Garda had intercepted the person transporting our flags and banner to the protest leaving us somewhat invisible. This was part of a pattern of suppression of visible protest that occurred throughout the visit of the British Queen despite Garda claims that they would "facilitate protest" in advance of the visit [Italiano]

article00c143e5900000578109_468x313.jpg imageWhy we don't welcome the visit of the British Queen 06:40 Fri 20 May by WSM 0 comments

The British Queen - An enemy of the working class, an enemy of the poor, head of the imperialist British state, symbol of privilege, inequality and oppression.

blairprotest.jpg imageHundreds protest war-criminal Tony Blair in Dublin 21:09 Mon 06 Sep by Julian & Andrew 0 comments

At 9:30 Saturday morning, people gathered on O'Connell Street In Dublin to protest against the presence of war criminal and ex British prime-minister Tony Blair. Blair arrived at Easons at around 10am for the book-signing of his recent autobiography, escorted and protected by a sizable gardai presence. Despite the heavy rain, hundreds of protestors took part.  At least one protester managed to get past the heavy security to try to make a citizens arrest of Blair for his war crimes. It is reported that Blair is now considering cancelling his London appearance.

e988dfebd315da.jpg imagePublic Meetings in Ireland - Haiti: Catastrophe and the legacy of imperialism 22:45 Wed 03 Feb by WSM PRO 0 comments

Public meetings to be held in Cork and Dublin this week will pose the question of how the legacy of U.S. imperialism has impacted on the catastrophe visited on Haiti in the recent earthquake.

notolisbon.jpg imageLisbon treaty and Democracy - Do We Really Have a Say? 18:21 Fri 04 Sep by James O'Brien 0 comments

It’s the time of year where we plebs get a chance to rectify our impertinence in rejecting the Lisbon Treaty. In itself, rerunning the referendum is hardly an affront to democracy. After all, people are simply being asked to confirm the decision made.

berlusconi.jpg imageNo to Lisbon - A Treaty for the Rich 17:41 Thu 03 Sep by WSM 2 comments

The WSM is calling for a No vote in the 2nd Lisbon referendum on the grounds that people in Ireland can do a lot better than a choice between the clowns in the Dáil or those in Brussels. We oppose the EU's policies of privatisation, militarisation and attacks on workers' conditions but don’t insult people’s intelligence by saying that our current society in Ireland with its severe recession, diabolical public services and corruption is anything better. The major lack of democracy in our lives is not between us and the EU but between the Irish government and us.

May 17th, Limerick. early days in the campaign imageWSM Vote No campaign on Munster's streets - 17th May to 7th June 18:45 Thu 12 Jun by Ray 1 comments

A photo-review of WSM activities in Munster cities during the Lisbon referendum campaign. The Cork WSM branch, with the help of other comrades from Limerick and Dublin, did 4 info stalls on the streets of Cork, Limerick and Waterford as part of our campaign activities. Each was blessed with good sunny weather and a public mood in some sympathy with our anarchist vote No message. We gave out thousands of leaflets, and made new contacts across the cities. It was also good to see what other campaigns were active on the ground across Munster.

250_0___20_0_0_0_0_0_20050723191234.jpg imageSinn Fein Vote To Back PSNI 20:16 Mon 29 Jan by W. 3 comments

On Sunday Sinn Fein voted to support the Police Service of Northern Ireland at their extraordinary ard fheis which was attended by approximately 1,000 delegates.

Red & black flags of the anti-war anarchist block imageAnarchist Block on anti-war demonstration in Britain 17:55 Fri 29 Sep by Northern Anarchist 0 comments

The anti-war demonstration in Manchester on September 23rd (taking place the weekend before the Labour party annual conference) was supported by a colourful and vocal 'anarchist block' with attendance from anarchist organisations and non-aligned anarchists from Manchester and across the country, at least 40 bodies in all. The block was called by the Anarchist Federation and Solidarity Federation, two of the class struggle anarchist organisations in Britain with international links (read the jointly produced leaflet 'Why We Haven't Stopped the War Yet'). The day started with an IWW picket of Starbucks in support of union workers in the USA, followed by the anti-war march.

textNot Guilty - Shannon Five war resisters acquitted on all charges 22:25 Thu 17 Aug by Sovietpop and others 0 comments

Just before the start of the war against Iraq in 2003 five Plougshares activists gained access to Shannon airport where US war planes were being refuelled. Using hammers and axes they damaged one of these planes. Loyal to George Bush the Irish government has been dragging these activists through the courts but late last month a jury ruled that the actions of the defendents were justifiable as they acted to preserve life in Iraq. These are reports and statements from the WSM on the trial.

more >>

imageInto the Shadows - Britain’s dirty war in Ireland Dec 28 by Sean Matthews 0 comments

The recent BBC documentary 'Panorama: Britain's Secret Terror Force' may have once again put a spotlight on the extent of British state-sponsored terrorism in the North and the activities of its various shadowy forces; but the level of orchestration, impunity, collusion and cover up is yet to be truly uncovered.

imageInternment, parading and the politics of class Aug 28 by Sean Matthews 0 comments

The eruption of conflict and intense rioting in Belfast over the last couple of months is a clear illustration that, no matter what lengths Stormont and the media circus go to to disguise the ugly reality of the ‘peace process’, the scars of the past and frequent eruption of sectarian conflict refuse to go away as political parties play the sectarian card to get one over on their rivals.

imageNuclear weapons and Scottish independence May 21 by Eric Chester 0 comments

The Scottish National Party has insisted that an independent Scotland would be free of nuclear weapons, says Eric Chester. This position reflects the fact that Scottish popular opinion is overwhelmingly opposed to the stationing of the Trident submarine system at Faslane. These subs, a leftover from the Cold War days, are nuclear powered and carry ballistic missiles armed with nuclear weapons. The SNP campaign to rid Scotland of nuclear weapons has provided one of the few salient arguments for independence. [Italiano]

imageWorking Class Unity, Not Sectarian Diversions Dec 24 by Workers Solidarity Movement 0 comments

Once again violence has flared across Belfast and other parts of the north as protests continue around the flags issue. The latest disturbances come as Stormont Assembly leaders, Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness meet to discuss another wave of street protests, and their concerns about the damaging effect it is having on the economy leading up to the busiest shopping period of the calendar. But as each issued a separate statement calling for protests to come to an end, loyalist gangs flexed their muscles, blocking off streets and hijacking cars.

imagePat Finucane murder - British state sweeps the dirt under the carpet Dec 19 by Sean Matthews 0 comments

The publishing of the De Silva’s report into the murder of Pat Finucane may have exposed a bit of dirt from under the carpet of the British states secret war in Ireland but the scars and flames of the past have not gone away - they continue to shape policing in the 21st century. As Geraldine Finucane articulated, ’’The dirt has been swept under the carpet without any serious attempt to lift the lid on what really happened to Pat and so many others.’’

more >>

imageWhy we don't welcome the visit of the British Queen May 20 Cork Branch 0 comments

The British Queen - An enemy of the working class, an enemy of the poor, head of the imperialist British state, symbol of privilege, inequality and oppression.

imagePublic Meetings in Ireland - Haiti: Catastrophe and the legacy of imperialism Feb 03 0 comments

Public meetings to be held in Cork and Dublin this week will pose the question of how the legacy of U.S. imperialism has impacted on the catastrophe visited on Haiti in the recent earthquake.

imageWSM Supports Direct Action Against RAYTHEON in Derry Aug 16 WSM 0 comments

The Workers Solidarity Movement supports the actions of the anti-war protestors who occupied and sabotaged American arms manufacturer Raytheon's Derry offices

imageAnti-War Action-Baldonnel Sunday,April 16th Apr 04 4 comments

On April 16th the Irish state is conducting a military style parade of its forces through Dublin city centre in commemoration of the 1916 insurrection and those who lost their lives in it.
Approximately 2,500 personnel representing all branches of the Defence Forces together
with representatives of ex-service personnel and veterans of UN service will be included
as will a large number of the Garda Síochána,
This celebration of resistance to British Imperialism is being funded by the Irish taxpayers, t
he same people who are paying for the murderous forces of the U.S military to use Baldonnel
and Shannon airports for the purposes of war.and imperialist domination in the Middle East.

textSouthern African anarchists condemn apparent Terrorist blasts in London Jul 08 ZACF 0 comments

We, the Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Federation (ZACF) of southern Africa, stand foursquare with the working and poor people who were apparently the targets of the craven July 7th bus and train bombings in London.

more >>
© 2005-2014 Anarkismo.net. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Anarkismo.net. [ Disclaimer | Privacy ]