Editorial in The Independent, Brighton, Ontario, September 4, 2002

E D I T O R I A L
Three little words, which hide a world of truth

News media often need short, catchy phrases to summarize big, complex developments. The phrase "war on terror" has been used by many journalists, in referring to any aspect of the Bush administration's response to the horrible crimes committed last September. But few journalistic practices have been less enlightening or less appropriate.

It's worth going back to basics. The Oxford English Dictionary defines "terror" as "intense fear, fright, dread …."

In a war, people on both sides experience terror. But those on the winning side may quickly return to feeling secure, while those on the losing side go on experiencing terror much longer, perhaps indefinitely.

That's pretty obvious. Who wouldn't feel terror, when waking up each day to face the very real possibility of being bombed by an almost unimaginably mighty superpower … or being tortured by state police for the slightest opposition to their rule … or knowing your children may succumb to malnutrition and common childhood diseases, because you lack the most basic necessities?

In other words, if we remember that people in other parts of the world have feelings too, then terror is a predictable consequence of US war efforts, now and before September 11, 2001. Terror is a predictable outcome of brutal dictatorships, which receive US military and economic backing because they support US foreign policy or promote the goals of mega-corporations. The terror that grows from abject poverty is, predictably, worsened by some aspects of US global strategy.

It has often been said that the perpetrators of the September 11 crime were motivated by a hatred of freedom. There may be a large measure of truth in that. Osama bin Laden and his cohorts clearly don't show much respect for human liberty. But it's also true that the US record in this regard is sadly mixed. In many cases US foreign policy has betrayed the values on which democracy is built. Ironically, part of the Bush administatration's response to 9/11 has been to deny centuries-old, and hard-won, rights encoded in democratic legal systems, such as the right of an accused to know the accusations, and the right to respond to accusations in a fair and open trial.

So if journalists need a few simple words to cover a complex reality, "terror vs. terror" will do the job much better than "war on terror." And if we want to truly honour those who died in last September's unforgivable crime, we should insist that the most powerful rulers of our world respect basic values of truth, justice and freedom.