Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
David Miliband Expands on Criticism of 'War on Terror' Phrase
In speech in Mumbai, foreign secretary applies theme to India-Pakistan tensions
MUMBAI - The foreign secretary, David Miliband, today declared that the use of the phrase "war on terror" as a western rallying cry since the September 11 attacks had been a mistake that may have caused "more harm than good".
Foreign Secretary David Miliband, speaking at a press conference in Mumbai on Thursday, delivered a sharp critique of outgoing US President George W. Bush's foreign policy, declaring the concept of a "war on terror" was "mistaken." (AFP/Sajjad Hussain) In an article in today's Guardian, five days before the Bush administration leaves the White House, Miliband delivered a comprehensive critique of its defining mission, saying that the war on terror was misconceived and that the west cannot "kill its way" out of the threats it faces.
This morning in Mumbai he repeated that message in a speech delivered in the Taj Mahal hotel, one of the targets of the attacks in November that left more than 170 people dead.
Audio: Julian Borger on David Miliband Link to this audio
He applied his theme to regional tensions, urging further restraint from India in the wake of the attacks, which originated in Pakistan, according to British and Indian intelligence.
Miliband also defended himself and the British government from the accusation of political cowardice for not publicly airing deep policy differences with the Bush administration years ago.
Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrats' foreign affairs spokesman, said today: "If the British foreign secretary had said this to President Bush many months, if not years ago, then it would have deserved some credit. Mimicking President-elect Obama's lines days before his inauguration does not show leadership."
"Judge us by our actions as well as our words," Miliband said, claiming that British counter-terrorism strategy had been "consistent" and not guided by the "war on terror" mentality.
British officials said that the timing of the speech was dictated more by the Mumbai attacks than by George Bush's departure next week, but added that the fact that a transition in Washington was under way meant that the foreign secretary had been able to use stronger language than would have been the case while the Bush administration still held power in Washington.
British officials quietly stopped using the phrase "war on terror" in 2006, but this is the first time it has been comprehensively discarded, in the most outspoken remarks on US counter-terrorism strategy to date by a British minister.
Miliband described the "war on terror" approach as "misleading and mistaken".
"Historians will judge whether it has done more harm than good," he said, adding that, in his opinion, the whole strategy had been dangerously counterproductive, helping otherwise disparate groups find common cause against the west.
"The more we lump terrorist groups together and draw the battle lines as a simple binary struggle between moderates and extremists or good and evil, the more we play into the hands of those seeking to unify groups with little in common, and the more we magnify the sense of threat," Miliband argued, in a clear reference to the signature rhetoric of the Bush era. "We should expose their claim to a compelling and overarching explanation and narrative as the lie that it is."
The foreign secretary pointed to the statement on Gaza issued earlier this week by Osama bin Laden, which he portrayed as the al-Qaida leader's attempt to capitalise on the crisis, although he had not made much of the Palestinian issue when he began his terrorist career in the 1990s.
"Terrorism is a deadly tactic, not an institution or an ideology," Miliband said.
He argued that "the war on terror implied a belief that the correct response to the terrorist threat was primarily a military one: to track down and kill a hardcore of extremists". He quoted an American commander, General David Petraeus, who said that the western coalition in Iraq "could not kill its way out of the problems of insurgency and civil strife".
Miliband said that western solidarity "should not be based on who we are against but instead on the idea of who we are and the values we share".
To stay true to those values, "democracies must respond to terrorism by championing the rule of law, not subordinating it."
Miliband linked the argument with US detention policy. "That is surely the lesson of Guantánamo and it is why we welcome President-elect Obama's clear commitment to close it," he said, referring to the US detention camp in Cuba.
After the al-Qaida attacks of 11 September 2001, the Bush administration presented the threat of a global terrorist onslaught as justification for pre-emptive military action, long-term detention without trial and severe interrogation techniques widely denounced by human rights groups as torture.
A senior Bush administration official admitted this week for the first time that a Guantánamo detainee was tortured by the US military.
The incoming Obama administration is expected to avoid using the term "war on terror" and adopt a more multilateral and less military-focused approach to global threats.
British officials are signalling, in increasingly public ways, that they cannot wait for the new team to take office next Tuesday and wave goodbye to an eight-year administration with which they felt increasingly ill at ease, particularly following the departure of Tony Blair as prime minister in 2007.
Miliband said last night that the incoming administration's "instinctive multilateralism" and proposed use of "smart power" meshed with his arguments. "The new administration has a set of values that fit very well with the values and priorities I am talking about," he told the Guardian.
UK-US relations have been particular sour in recent days after Washington reneged on a pledge to back a largely British-drafted UN resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. The White House overruled US diplomats after a demand from the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, reports have claimed.
- Posted in
29 Comments so far
Show AllIt is amazing how "smart" many top officials of the US and the UK are suddenly becoming after eight years of silence, complicity, and turning their moral gaze the other way when it actually mattered. It is long past the time where top government officials of these two war-crime nations should have been making these speeches.
Don't forget that Tony Blair, after leaving office, has been the "Middle East Envoy" for the so-called Quartet (US, EU, Russia and the UN - as if the first three are not part of the UN - wtf!)
Highintel: Can we do better?
- The incoming Obama administration is expected to avoid using the term "war on terror" -
Will Mr. Obama sign an Executive Order to rescind E.O. 13289?
That's the E.O. that authorizes the US military to award the "Global War on Terrorism Service Medal".
Or does this author mean that the incoming administration will just do a better job of hiding the war from the American people ('avoid using the term'), while continuing to use the military aggressively? (doubling US forces in Afghanistan)
I found it ironic when an article here recently called for Mr. Obama to end the war on terror, and then -poof- a new bin Laden tape surfaced to remind us all to remain scared.
How can Mr. Obama ever declare victory over al-Qaeda? Without victory and with defeat unimaginable, the war continues (whether the American people pay attention or not) until the inevitable catastrophe. Hopefully the American people will notice the insanity of this war before then, as the Brits have, and about bloody time, too.
"They" want to make sure the dems don't destroy what they've worked so hard to advance since 9/11, so like they used to do with the orange alerts to keep us in line, I'm sure those bin Laden tapes will be surfacing at the appropriate times now. If that doesn't work, we'll without a doubt have another 9/11. Watched Cheney last night. He said Obama can't do anything differently from what they've put in place, and what the consequences will be if he tries.
I watched Obama's interview with Katie Couric, on a news video. She asked, "Are you still going to pursue Osama Bin Laden" His response was an uneasy smile with, "Whether he is alive or not, we must pursue those that follow in his ideology:" Or, something like that.
Did the FBI ever prove that Osama Bin Laden had anything to do with the planning of 9/11???....William Cooper, now dead, claimed, in June, 2001, that Osama Bin Laden, in an inerview, claimed that there would be some type of attacks in the United Staes and that he would blamed for them. Why did the CIA meet with Bin Laden before the attacks? (Andreas Von Bulow, "La CIA y 11 de Septiembre") I believe Osama Bin Laden was to be the CIA patsy as was Lee Harvey Oswald...(Start researching the Kennedy Assassination and watch the video of the Secret Service being ordered away from the Limousine before the shooting and the crowds lining the streets except by Dealy Plaza where Secret Service ordered people away.)CIA was linked to the Kennedy Assassination.("Deep Politics and the Death of JFK" by Peter Dale Scott and many more books)
No, if you research The Mumbai Attacks of November 2008, you will discover names like: Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, Dawood Ibrahim, Mukhtar Ahmed, Tauseff Rahmen,and others. Indians and Pakistanis working together to create chaos. But wait, many of them have links back to the CIA and their wonderful "Freedom Fighters, The Mujahedeen"....Dawood Ibrahim, allegedly, is a mobster who was running drugs for the CIA to help finance the Jihad in Afghanistan. Ibrahim's boat was used to transport the Mumbai terrorists. But wait, the U.S does not want Pakistan to release him to India, it could prove embarrassing. The U.S has so many terrorist groups that they seeded with; money, training, and arms and those terrorist groups are not Al Qaeda, they are independent and on their own missions......"Once you are CIA, you never stop being CIA."
"The War on Terror" is nothing more than the "Power Elite" maintaining a "Never Ending War" to enrich themselves and their followers like Dick and George.
Sioux Rose
HERBERT: You bring up interesting points, and I agree with your conclusion, but the MSM has the "case" so tied up with so many experts touting the same party lines that to bring up even factual evidence in contrast with their already-concluded commentary labels YOU the nut-job. People are very protective of their nationalistic instincts when the possibility that their own government played into 911 is even spoken. I have had intelligent people turn on me for suggesting as much. However, I believe it IS the case with much outside assistance.
Depends on what you mean.
Did the conservatives and the media lapdogs take full advantage of the opportunity 911 presented to work toward bringing the USA closer to a fascist state?
I completely agree. This was obvious to me within the first couple of weeks afterward when Bush made his famous "you are either with us or you are against us" line.
This event was exploited for all it was worth to full political advantage.
They were ready for it. Read Richard Perle's book from 1997, he talks about the project for a new American Century but laments that it cannot start without what he calls a "Pearl Harbour event"...the plan for the aftermath is all laid out.
Did they ignore the warnings? That's clear too, yes they did.
At this stage I begin to part ways with the conspiracy theorists.
Was that ignorance intentional? In other words, did BushCo know it was going to happen and then just let it so they could carry out their agenda from Perle's book?
This case can be argued but not easily given the rank and repeated incompetence at very nearly everything else exhibited by these idiots. I find it hard to believe that they could show such powerful competence here but be such disasters everywhere else except in short-term political gains. Still though all they would have to do is kind of 'let it happen'....no planning, no interference required.
Was the whole thing planned and executed in some way by BushCo (pick your favourite cabinet member). The answer to that is clearly 'no'. The reactions they all had...Cheney was positively terrified cowering away in the bunker....indicate complete surprise (note back to previous point). Furthermore their administration, despite all the intense secrecy surrounding them, couldn't keep the leaking from happening ANYWAY about anything else! Hell, they had to pardon Scooter Libby for a far lessor offense! The conspiracy network required to pull this off just in the manner we saw it is simply beyond belief....I mean come on. Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and GWB are actually NOT very smart guys, and Cheney is NOT a visionary. I know this because I have spoken to reporters and I have a couple of friends whom I trust that work on the Hill who have met these guys and they ALL say it is a mistake to over-estimate their intelligence. And most of the civil servants are NOT blind-faith conservatives (many may well be sympathetic, but as we have seen, when the dust FINALLY settles they talk...and often they talk before hand). The one guy who had a brain in that first cabinet was Karl Rove and he wasn't in charge of security, he was in charge of politics....and you've got to admit, they WERE good at THAT!
Then you get the even more crazy notions....that basically ignore the facts or violate scientific laws. Anything from 'controlled demolitions' to holograms of airplanes to one of the flights actually being escorted to 'Area 51' and all the people on board held prisoner since 911 (they are apparently STILL being held prisoner). Most of these are scientifically unsound and a few are just ridiculous.
I don't even justify those with 'debate', to paraphrase a greater man than I ...There's one born every minute.
lwhunt330 - you make a good point about the number of top officials becoming "smart," after eight years, but perhaps they felt they were being smart with their silence in the face of bush's "you're either with us or against us" mantra, and the brutal ruthlessness that has followed. I wonder how many ordinary U.S citizens remained silent in public for those eight years out of fear they might have their doors kicked in, their personal posesssions confiscated, and find themselves locked up simply because of a negative bush comment made? Look what happened to people in the public eye who did speak up.
"The more we lump terrorist groups together and draw the battle lines as a simple binary struggle between moderates and extremists or good and evil, the more we play into the hands of those seeking to unify groups with little in common"
This is the truth. Lets "deep six" the War on Terror slogan.
"claiming that British counter-terrorism strategy had been "consistent" and not guided by the "war on terror" mentality."
Really ?!!!!!
War on poverty. War on drugs. War on terrorism. They are all wars on people. With our Czars and Wars we have truly become an Oriental nation. Come to think of it, our Congress is beginning to resemble the Duma.
Crowsnest
"our Congress is beginning to resemble the Duma."
That was great!
The War on Terror is just a media campaign to transfer every last dollar from the Treasury to Defense Contractors.
When it's no longer effective they'll come up with some other malarky.
I bet it will be another "War".
And it has to be a war on a concept, not against any sort of true enemy.
Like that made-up "War on Christmas" the conservatives were all hot about a couple of years ago.
What could the next one be?
"War on the Easter Bunny"
"War on Immigrants"
"War on the Poor"
"War on Crime"
"War on Secular Humanism"
"War on Science"
"War on Education"
Can anyone from the Religious Right argue that these aren't good causes all?
I wouldn't trust Miliband as far as I could throw him. He aspires to leadership of The Labour Party in the UK and last week claimed that the EU economic ties with Israel help the Palestinians too. He claims to seek the two state solution but really has nothing different to say and is a disruptive force for GB punching above its weight in foreign affairs. He is staunchily pro Israeli and hasn't done other than spout the cowardly EU line about an immediate 'durable' ceasefire from all sides in the conflict. As with Lebanon the peacemakers in the British establishment are tied to the criminals engaging in War Crimes in Gaza now with a straight face and a stiff upper lip.
This is true.
For those Americans out there who have never heard of the guy....just think of the worst brown-nosing ass-kisser in the world and multiply by ten.
I find it positively hilarious how he was so strangely silent when such statements might have mattered. But he knew his star would rise hitched to Blair and Brown rather than to men of greater integrity like Robin Cook (I wish he hadn't died).
World leaders and sell-out intellectuals all have one thing in common.A real solid jaw grip on the money cock.They will do anything if it helps to advance a perception of their own grandeur .Millions die each year as these egoistic windbags bore us to death with the same old sorry tale of how complex the world is and how the next initiative will sort it all out.Suck if you will but quit pretending to give a fuck about anyone but yourselves .
The man (GWB) was a hysterical dunce-- one of many throughout the world but the only one in a position to do maximum damage.
Please don't compliment George like that!
please don't disparage dunces in this manner!
The "war on terror" has always been a serious misnomer. The so-called "war on terror" elevated the perpetrators of 9/11 from common criminals to the status of "warriors." These criminals committed not an act of war but a crime against humanity and should have been tried in the International Criminal Court or the World Court. Of course under Bush, the U.S. has not even participated in the ICC. I hope that Obama sees all this and will try to set it right.
Felix
Hello---911 Inside Job.
Such bull.
The 911 conspiracy theorists are only less worse than the climate change deniers because it doesn't really make any difference.
Perhaps you can explain Builing 7 to us all then. We're on the edge of our seats.
Building 7 was once my favorite indicator of something wrong with 9/11, as it was never adequately explained (though I thought the 'alternative' conspiracy theories to be out of the ball park). But the release of the NIST Report in Nov 2008 did help to explain that WTC7 could collapse the way that it did, without human intervention.
IMHO, I don't go for the conspiracy theories, though I do hold the Bush Regime 100% accountable because they were warned many times before the event, and were even handed actionable intelligence, and took no action.
The British government kissed Bush's ass for eight years. Now they are puckering up to kiss Obama's ass for the next four.
This is just a politician saying anything to get into power, had he made that statement some years ago it would have been worth something, today its about the same as saying.
"Burning women for witchcraft is wrong", its a statement which by now is in agreement with the general consensus and doesn't threaten anyone in power, but has no real worth since anyone (apart from idiots) can essentially state the obvious.
Britain dropped use of the label "war on terror" years ago.
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,159067,00.html
Possibly because the United Nations has failed to legally define terrorist being as in every scenerio the queen of the Security Council, America, falls under it herself.
"Learn some science fool"
physicscitizen try reading some reports from Architectural Engineers from all over the world that studied the 9/11 tapes.
Is it any wonder that the USA has lost all support from other nations in Iraq and Afghanistan wars. We here in the USA are the only people in the world that have not come to realize the truth about what happened 9/11.
If you are a science major of some sort physicscitizen , it must be with one those Toyz r Us home lab kits.
" After the al-Qaida attacks of 11 September 2001, the Bush administration presented the threat of a global terrorist onslaught as justification for pre-emptive military action, long-term detention without trial and severe interrogation techniques widely denounced by human rights groups as torture."
Don't forget Nationwide community watch stazi police spying by infragard and citizen corps ,FBI and IAFF.
We have not been told of this warrant less spying because congress and the senate all know about it. And that's why they did not impeach Bush/Cheney , because then they would all have to be held accountable for the nation wide gang stalking cointel pro torture being applied to innocent Americans by the Stazi ground patrols building their right wing spy networks.
BornFreeMen