Daily Times

Driving from Walnut Creek to San Francisco on freeway 680 I could not help noticing hundreds of crosses in white on the slope of a hill near Lafayette train station. I was curious and wanted to know more. The Lafayette Hillside Memorial is a collection of crosses, accompanied by a large sign in Lafayette, California. The crosses are intended to serve as a memorial for US soldiers killed in the Iraq war, with the sign containing a running total of the death count. Prominently displayed was the figure 6,815 in December 2013. The disabled and injured are not included in this count. If the number of dead American soldiers in other conflicts like Afghanistan, Yemen and other places like Libya, Lebanon, Syria, etc are added, the toll could be staggering.

Death of dear ones leaves scars on the emotions, whether you are American or non-American. The disabled and injured continue to suffer for long. What happens to the dear ones after the departed soul is indeed painful and tragic. If those dead who fought the American soldiers or died in crossfire or friendly fire or in collateral damage are all added up, the figure may run into several thousand. As an example, the aftermath of American actions in Afghanistan and its fallout in Pakistan has left over 40,000 dead. These 40,000 also had families and loved ones. Equally tragic are the fractures in the fabric of society of these countries, which are unending. The byproduct: suicide bombings, the promotion of Salafism and extremists, Islamist emergence and so on. These tragic developments continue to take their toll in fracturing settled societies.

The hill overlooking State Route 24 in Contra Costa County is owned by 81-year-old Louise Clark, widow of Johnson Clark, a local developer and World War II veteran. Clark and Jeffrey Heaton, a long-running anti-war protestor, erected the monument in late 2006. It stands there inviting people to wonder if war is the only solution to human security! It questions the decision taken as a consequence of the 9/11 tragedy. The death toll of 9/11 was far less than the deaths caused in the name of securing American lives! Was it one of the worst decisions taken by politicians in the history of governance?

In the wake of 9/11, George W Bush, along with Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld, a true believer in full spectrum dominance, set out to liberate or pacify the Islamic world. The US followed Israel in assigning itself the prerogative of waging preventive war. Although depicting Saddam Hussein as an existential threat, the Bush administration also viewed Iraq as an opportunity. By destroying his regime and occupying his country, the US would signal to other recalcitrants the fate awaiting them should they mess with or defy Uncle Sam. On ground it meant you hit the other guy first, if possible. Failing that, whack him several times harder than he hit you; not just an ‘eye for an eye’ but both eyes, an ear, and several teeth, with a kick in the groin thrown in for good measure. The aim of these retribution operations was to send a message: screw with us and this will happen to you. This message Bush intended to convey when he ordered the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Unfortunately, Operation Iraq Freedom landed the US in a fix. The US occupation of Iraq triggered violent resistance in many areas of the Middle East. The insurgency in Iraq along with its Afghan sibling, gave the American army fits.

I am inclined to believe that a government of Democrats in USA would not have been carried away by the anger caused on 9/11. What could have been the underlying factors that forced the Republicans and their supporters to do what they did? Many analysts believe that it provided a cover for the desire to establish US hegemony over the world, particularly in the areas rich with oil resources and to have strategic advantages. George Bush made it worse by calling the retaliation a ‘Crusade’. He reminded the people that the war had a religious hang up to it. The US is a large country; it could have found alternate ways of protecting its people. The huge costs borne by the taxpayer could have been diverted to internal development and improving the lot of US citizens. It could have become a model of welfare and peace. Since the decision taken to enter wars, more than a decade has passed and the drain on US resources has very adversely affected its economy. Worst of all, the US has lost its goodwill in many parts of the world and created enemies for a long time. Even the good work done by the US in other countries is not earning the goodwill it should have. Pakistan is an example.

Pakistan has perhaps suffered no less than any other country. Pakistan’s problems started with Dictator Ziaul Haq’s decision to enter the war in Afghanistan in support of the US policy. That was a critical time. What course would history have taken if Pakistan had not involved itself in that war? Very likely the Soviets would have gone back. In any case the emergence of fundamentalism and the Taliban may not have occurred and Pakistan could have continued as a progressive and enlightened nation. After 9/11 Pakistan was left with hardly any choice.

History records the worst decisions as well as the best decisions by the people at the highest level of governance. Such decisions determine the course of history. At the dawn of another New Year, let us all take a reflective pause and learn from history. There is no better teacher for the people in governance. I pray that the leaders in Pakistan as well as the world over would realise the moral responsibility to try and make the world a better place for those living in it.

The writer is the former CEO Pakistan National Council of the Arts; chairman Fruit Processing Industries; chairman UNESCO Theatre Institute Pakistan and COO ICTV, USA. He is the author of Melluhas of the Indus Valley 8000 BC to 500 BC. He can be reached at naeemtahir37@gmail.com