To Our Readers
SEPT. 11's attack first triggered unanimous horror, unity and resolve. Two weeks later, opinion is splintering about what we should do about it, but Americans remain united in their concern. Citizens explore terrain
where policy and
practice collideFor example, on Wednesday evening more than 300 people -- students, retirees, business people, lawyers, academics and even a former ambassador -- squeezed into the 165-seat Wo International Center at Punahou to hear experts, convened by the Pacific and Asian Affairs Council, reflect on where we go from here.
Questions from the audience revealed widely shared distrust of United States policy:
>> After the perpetrators are brought to justice, will U.S. foreign policy also be brought to justice?
U.S. policy isn't perfect, answered Ambassador Alvin Adams, a State Department counter-terrorism expert. We have to do something about the Middle East, for example. At the same time, he said, U.S. policy seeks to be as perfect as possible within the context of what is politically possible.
"There's not much we need to be apologetic about."
>> The United States says other countries must support our war against terrorism or suffer the consequences, yet it bailed out of the U.N. conference on racism. How can those two positions be resolved?
The conference was a "get Israel" attempt, Adams said. However, he agreed that pulling out was probably a mistake, saying the United States has a history of racism and we all confront it every day. We can be proud of our laws and courts and what we're doing as a nation to combat racism.
>> We're losing the information war in the Middle East. The United States is no longer seen as the honest broker of peace. How do we get our side of the story out?
To repair the damage, we need to be more evenhanded in the Palestine-Israel conflict, said Ronald Montaperto of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. We need to look at our ideals and our actions and bring them together. "We've created a lot of monsters."
Professor Ibrahim Aoude of the University of Hawaii, agreed. The U.S. policy toward new Israeli settlements was first that they were illegal on Arab lands, then that they were "impediments to peace" and finally that they were OK.
"We can't compromise on fundamental beliefs," Aoude said. "The question is not if you and I agree. What's key is what the people fighting the Intifada believe."
>> There are many parallels between Afghanistan and our disastrous experience in Somalia -- where Mustafa Adid, like Osama bin Laden, was also "wanted dead or alive." Have our tactics and strategies improved enough to think we can do better in Afghanistan?
We can't get involved as deeply or as open-ended as we did in Somalia, Adams said. We need to use power surgically through air attacks and long-range reconnaissance. We need to neutralize the Taliban's air force and armor, but make no major, long-term commitment of forces.
>> How can we avoid the erosion of civil liberties in the United States?
Our Constitution spells out our rights, said Helen Gillmor, U.S. federal judge, although the Supreme Court reinterprets it from time to time. Despite our fears, our liberties won't be easily eroded. Cool heads will protect them, she said, examining every proposal and sniffing out unintended consequences.
Racial profiling, stereotyping and discrimination in the nation's airports trouble Aoude. "I'm heartened by the response from a significant number of American people against the practice." But we should just stop racial profiling, he said, not just talk about it.
"On my passport it says 'place of birth: Palestine.' If I try to get on a plane, how far do you think I'm going to get?"
John Flanagan is editor and publisher of the Star-Bulletin.
To reach him call 529-4748, fax to 529-4750, send
e-mail to publisher@starbulletin.com or write to
500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 7-500, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
