Era of Unease: Renewed Terrorist Attacks?

Era of Unease: Renewed Terrorist Attacks?
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 14, 2012

Summary: The September 11 Attacks were indeed masterminded by Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. But not every Muslim is a terrorist. Radical Islam is a product of the late 20th century. This is something we must be clear about. Naturally we condemn the cruelty of genuine terrorist attacks carried out in the name of religion. But the response of some Americans is also questionable. The film "Innocence of the Muslim" was obviously a low budget video made by Americans ignorant about Islam.

Full Text below:

On the 11th anniversary of the September 11 Attacks, the U.S. Ambassador to Libya was attacked and killed by an assassin in the US Consulate in Benghazi, the largest city in the eastern part of the country. Three other U.S. diplomats also lost their lives. Angry mobs in Egypt gathered outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. The American flag was being flown at half mast in memory of 9/11. The mob climbed over the fence, tore down the flag, and set it ablaze. Demonstrations broke out in front of the U.S. embassies in Yemen, Morocco, Sudan, and Tunisia. This series of events shocked the world. They feared a renewed wave of terrorist attacks.

Back in the US, the presidential election was entering its final stage. The two presidential candidates initially suspended campaign activities out of respect for the victims of 9/11. The candidates hoped that with Osama bin Laden's death, the nation could emerge from the shadow of the terrorist attacks. But these incidents forced them to respond. The American people feel that 9/11 is not something that will easily fade from memory. As election season approaches, politicians find it hard not to be swayed by public sentiment. Especially Obama, who has long been suspected of being a Muslim. His overreaction to events in Libya have increased public concerns.

The cause of these anti-American sentiments was a low budget, low quality American film slandering Muhammad and Islam. Just how should we view this tragedy?

First we offer our condolences to the US for US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens. Ambassador Stevens graduated from the University of California, Berkeley. He joined the Peace Corps and served in Morocco. He formed a bond with North Africa. During the Libyan Civil War he was a special envoy stationed in Benghazi. His actions led to US and UN intervention in Libya. They led to the eventual collapse of the 24 year regime of strongman Muammar Gaddafi. Because Stevens supported the rebels, the public in Benghazi waved the American flag. They considered Special Envoy Stevens a hero. This US diplomat helped the Benghazi rebels make a comeback. Alas, he lost his life in this city.

As representatives of a global hegemon, US embassies and US diplomats often become the target of terrorist attacks. They are often surrounded by angry mobs. In 1979, the U.S. Embassy in Iran was occupied by students and militants involved in the Iranian Revolution. Fifty-two Americans were held hostage for 444 days. They were released only after President Reagan took office in 1981. On August 7, 1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were targets of simultaneous bomb attacks. A truck loaded with explosives was driven into the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi. The explosion killed 213 people. Twelve of them were Americans. The rest were Kenyans who worked at the embassy or nearby residents. In addition, 4000 people were injured. An attack on Dar es Salaam, Tanzania killed 12 people and injured nearly 100. These brutal events forced the United States to increase security for its diplomatic facilities and personnel. But the isolation also created a negative impression of the United States among the public. It undermined the efforts of U.S. diplomats in the region. According to various reports, Stevens and the United States Consulate were highly vulnerable. Libya was not yet stable. This is an oversight that must be addressed.

The “Innocence of Muslims” is a film that Muslims feel desecrates their faith. Americans may consider the making of such a film an expression of freedom of speech. But it was disseminated by people with an agenda. This led to an highly emotional backlash. It became an excuse to attack the United States. This may have been the actions of an isolated individual. But the U.S. government and US diplomats must bear the consequences. This is a turbulent era. Those involved should think twice about what they are doing.

In recent years, the United States has repeatedly clashed with Islam. In 2005, U.S. troops at Guantanamo Naval Base, Cuba, flushed a copy of the Koran down the toilet. This of course was a desecration of Islam. But doubts have arisen concerning the authenticity of this incident. In 2010, a pastor in Florida named Terry Jones, announced a "Koran Burning Day" to commemorate 9/11. This aroused fierce protests in many parts of the Muslim world. Shortly after he held his 2010 Koran burning ceremony, an Afghan mob broke into the local office of the United Nations. This resulted in many deaths. In February this year, U.S. troops tried to prevent prisoners in Afghanistan from passing messages in loaned copies of the Koran. They piled copies of the Koran on the ground and set them ablaze. When news of the Koran burning broke, riots erupted and over 10 people were killed.

The September 11 Attacks were indeed masterminded by Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. But not every Muslim is a terrorist. Radical Islam is a product of the late 20th century. This is something we must be clear about. Naturally we condemn the cruelty of genuine terrorist attacks carried out in the name of religion. But the response of some Americans is also questionable. The film "Innocence of the Muslim" was obviously a low budget video made by Americans ignorant about Islam. But the religious law message it disseminated did not come from the U.S. government. It came from individuals. We hope the Islamic world will make the proper distinctions, and not exact indiscriminate retribution. We hope they will not provide terrorists with a pretext for attacks, and make the entire world uneasy.

這令人不安的年代啊...恐怖攻擊再起？
    2012-09-14
    中國時報

　「九一一」十一周年，美國駐利比亞大使在該國東部第一大城的班加西領事館遭該國暴徒攻擊遇害，另有三名美國外交官亦不幸喪生，而美國在開羅大使館外亦有憤怒的埃及群眾集結，爬上圍牆，將為紀念九一一而降半旗的美國國旗扯下，點火焚燒；此外，美國駐葉門、摩洛哥、蘇丹和突尼西亞等國大使館外也陸續爆發示威行動。連串事件引發世人的震驚，擔心是否新一波的恐怖攻擊再起。

　在美國本土，儘管正進入總統大選的衝刺階段，但兩黨候選人原先為了表達對九一一受難者的尊重而暫停競選活動，並希望能夠在賓拉登遭擊斃後，逐漸走出恐怖攻擊的陰影，但如今已被迫要做出回應，而美國民眾則感受到九一一將不會輕易淡去；在此大選前，政治人物總是很難不受到國內民意情緒的牽動；尤其歐巴馬是否會為了撇清之前一直被認為是穆斯林的質疑，對利比亞事件做出過激反應，更加讓人關注。

　造成這兩處反美情緒的導火線，是一個低成本、低品質、污衊穆罕默德和伊斯蘭的美國製影片，究竟我們該如何看待這悲劇？

　首先，我們對美國駐利比亞大使史蒂文斯的罹難，致上哀悼之意。史蒂文斯大使在美國加州大學柏克萊分校畢業後，就加入和平團在摩洛哥服務，從此和北非結上不解之緣。在利比亞內戰期間，他是美國派駐班加西的特使，並促成美國及聯合國的干預行動，最終讓強人格達費四十二年的政權垮台。因為他對叛軍的支持，班加西的民眾當時還曾揮舞著美國國旗，視史蒂文斯特使為英雄，然而這位讓班加西叛軍起死回生的美國外交官，卻不幸在這個城市喪生，讓人不勝唏噓。

　其次，身為全球強權的代表，美國駐外使館和外交官不只一次成為恐怖攻擊的目標，或是憤怒群眾包圍的對象。一九七九年美國駐伊朗大使館遭參與革命的學生和好戰分子占領，五十二名美國人遭挾持長達四百四十四天，在一九八一年雷根總統上台後才被釋放。一九九八年八月七日美國在東非肯亞和坦尚尼亞的大使館同時遭到炸彈攻擊，一輛載滿炸藥的卡車衝進奈洛比的美國大使館，引爆後造成兩百一十三人死亡，其中十二名為美國人，其餘則是在使館工作的肯亞人和附近民眾，另外有四千多人受傷。坦尚尼亞三蘭港的攻擊，則是造成十二人死亡，近百人受傷。這些殘酷的歷史事件，迫使美國必需加強駐外設施和人員的安全，但層層隔離也影響了群眾對美國的印象，衝擊到美國外交官在當地的工作。根據各方報導，史蒂文斯和美國領事館的安全確實出現極大的漏洞，特別是在一個尚位完全穩定的利比亞，這是必需檢討的疏失。

　再者，從伊斯蘭教的角度來看，《無知的穆斯林》確實是一部會讓穆斯林認為褻瀆他們信仰的影片，或許拍這影片的美國人自認是言論自由的表達，但一旦被有心人士散佈，很容易引發情緒反彈，它也就成為攻擊美國的藉口。儘管這僅是個人的行為，但美國的政府和外交官卻必需承擔不幸的後果；在此敏感動盪的年代，相關行為者實在必須三思。

　近年來，美國和伊斯蘭教衝突的事件已有多起，二○○五年美軍在古巴關達那摩基地將《古蘭經》沖入馬桶，當然是褻瀆伊斯蘭教的行為，不過這起事件的真實性存疑。二○一○年美國佛州牧師瓊斯宣布要舉行「焚燒《古蘭經》日」，來紀念九一一，引起許多地方穆斯林的激烈抗議，在他於二○一一年真的舉行焚燒儀式後，阿富汗的暴民衝入聯合國在當地的辦公室，造成多人死亡。今年二月，美軍為了防止在阿富汗的囚犯利用借閱的《古蘭經》傳遞訊息，因此將其放在垃圾堆燒毀，事件曝光後，又造成暴動和十多人死亡。

　九一一的恐怖攻擊確實是信奉伊斯蘭教的賓拉登和蓋達組織所為，但是並非每一位穆斯林都是恐怖分子，激進的伊斯蘭教是二十世紀後期的產物，這是必須先釐清的。我們對那些以宗教之名進行恐怖攻擊之實的殘忍行為當然要給予譴責，但部分美國人選擇的回應方式也值得商榷。《無知的穆斯林》顯然是對伊斯蘭教無知的美國人所製作的劣質影片，但其中所散播的褻瀆訊息畢竟不是來自美國政府，而是個人，期盼伊斯蘭世界有所區分，不要冤冤相報，為恐怖攻擊提供藉口，讓全球陷入不安。