Bush's 'war on terror' phrase helps terrorists, minister warns

Hilary Benn has set the cat amongst the pigeons by saying that George Bush's use of the phrase War on Terror actually strengthens terrorist groups by helping them to create a shared identity.

A view that one can only surmise that the British government shares as the British Foreign Office actually asked politicians and diplomats to stop using the phrase last year.

"In the UK, we do not use the phrase 'war on terror' because we can't win by military means alone, and because this isn't us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives," he told a meeting in New York organised by the Centre on International Cooperation.

"It is the vast majority of the people in the world - of all nationalities and faiths - against a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups who have relatively little in common apart from their identification with others who share their distorted view of the world and their idea of being part of something bigger. What these groups want is to force their individual and narrow values on others without dialogue, without debate, through violence. And by letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength."

He said "hard power" was not enough: "It can certainly win the battle, but without soft power we cannot win the war that will deliver better governance, sustainable peace and lasting prosperity."

Perhaps the term has different connotations in the US, but it has always struck me as a bizarre one. It is ridiculously vague and open ended as a war aim and has no definable moment - like the planting of a British flag at Port Stanley - when one can declare that the war has been won, which is what I always assumed was it's actual purpose. I have always thought that it gave the neo-cons the right to pursue anyone they wanted by simply labelling them an enemy in The War on a Noun.

And there's no denying that the vagueness of it's purpose certainly helped when Bush decided to stop chasing bin Laden, the man he says was behind 9-11, and divert all his resources towards Iraq, which had bugger all to do with 9-11. Only a war that was defined in such vague terms could have allowed that kind of U-turn.

Interestingly enough, Tony Blair didn't exactly bat Benn down for what he said. Indeed, his spokesman was at pains to point out that Blair rarely uses the phrase:

Tony Blair's spokesman said he was unsure when the prime minister had last used the term, adding: "We all use our own phraseology." He said Mr Blair believed that "in fighting terrorism you should both use military means where necessary but also political means as well".

Even the American spokesman was careful not to disagree with Benn's statement:

David Johnson, deputy chief of mission at the US embassy, told Radio 4's PM programme: "Mr Benn makes an important point we not only do not disagree on, but embrace: the solution will come not just with military force but development and working with other governments."

I notice that whilst they were all eager to say how much that they agreed that we needed political as well as military solutions, that they managed to avoid addressing Benn's other point, that the phrase War on Terror actually aides the enemy.

Strange that...

Click title for full article.

Tags: Hilary Benn, Tony Blair, George Bush, War on terror