America Attacked, Security Still Worth Learning
Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 17 April 2013
by Zhiliang Kuang Cheng (link to original)
(China) on 17 April 2013
by Zhiliang Kuang Cheng (link to original)
Translated from
by Mollie Gossage.
Edited by Jane Lee.
According to the People’s Daily, at 3 p.m. local time on April 15, two explosions occurred near the finish line of America’s Boston Marathon. According to the latest news, the explosions resulted in at least three deaths and over 100 people were taken to hospitals for treatment. U.S. President Obama has vowed to investigate and find those responsible. Reports state that the police as well as the FBI have already launched an investigation of the bombings as terrorist attacks, and furthermore have fixed on a Saudi man as a suspect. U.S. police just announced, however, that at present the identity of the Boston bombing suspect is still uncertain.
As the dominant world power, the U.S. bullies the weak everywhere; how could it be unable to guarantee its own safety? The U.S. has the CIA, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and other first-class intelligence-gathering units, even up to the massive scale and super-high level of efficiency of the National Security Agency. With these kinds of first-class intelligence institutions, how could it still suffer such a major blow?
Why America Suffers “Terrorist Attacks”
Regardless of the kind of everyday criticisms we have of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, and disregarding any friction there may be between China and America, when it comes to this event we must have a proper view of right and wrong: This is a serious act of terrorism. Those harmed were mostly innocent athletes and common civilians, causing a huge panic in society and among the public. This kind of act must be condemned. China ought to join forces with every country — including America — to combat and contain such criminal activity that is targeted at mankind.
This series of Boston terrorist attacks can be considered the largest-scale terrorist event to take place on American soil since Sept. 11 — that is, in more than a decade. Previously, after 9/11, America had still experienced sporadic terrorist acts.
The scale of terrorism has developed up to today — its methods so merciless, its damage so tremendous — to be thoroughly astonishing. At present, it is still unknown who — what person, organization or kind of group in the background — contrived this event.
For nearly 10 years after 9/11, America’s national security strategy experienced a kind of transformation, emphasizing future global threats to U.S. national security as well as major threats to American lives. For terrorists and so-called “rogue states” and “potential challenges to the state,” the U.S. military accelerated its development of a global anti-missile system, according to its new strategic thought and in spite of rejection and criticism from the international community (including America’s allies).
I believe, from my judgment of this chain of bombings, the major threat to the U.S. people and U.S. security comes not primarily from countries like North Korea, Iran or “potential challenges to the state,” but from these genuine acts of terrorism. Americans really need to reflect for a moment, to consider from where exactly their own threats are coming. I also hope that through this terrorist attack, America’s leaders will re-examine the U.S. security strategy, adjust the direction of their resource allocation and ease their relations with a few nations — this will benefit both America and the entire world.
To speak again of terrorism, right now terrorism is rampant and expanding, primarily targeting such countries as America and Israel. These past few years, terrorists have bombed an embassy, bombed warships, bombed the U.S. Army, bombed a federal law enforcement building, even hijacked passenger planes and destroyed the World Trade Center; now their wicked objectives have targeted innocent athletes. People cannot help but ask: why?
I believe that America — the world’s only superpower also playing the role of “world police,” and furthermore in the whole of international affairs seeking to maintain its hegemony and its own national interests regardless of other nations’ interests — has implemented such practices as strategy since its founding as a nation. It is exactly this kind of strategy that creates many contradictions, problems and conflicts at the international level. In other words, the more powerful America becomes, the more enemies it will cultivate worldwide and the more isolated it will be. And perhaps some among those who are extremely anti-American will take advantage of this form of terrorism, launching terrorist attacks against America’s global interests as well as attacks on America’s own soil. This is just a phenomenon that reflects the current undemocratic, inequitable state of international relations.
Naturally, we believe that this phenomenon has led to the continuing occurrence of extreme terrorist acts. With the Obama administration, America recognizes this issue somewhat, especially regarding Obama’s adjustments to the Bush-era anti-terror campaign. Although he has made some significant changes, Obama still cannot change America’s pursuit of its own global interests, as well as its maintenance of its own hegemonic core values. Therefore, he cannot fundamentally change the nation’s conduct to be like that of other nations.
In a certain sense, it is necessarily related to the new world system and international order that the U.S. has brought about. Because the international political and economic order is neither just nor rational, it has caused and intensified increasingly widening disparities and contradictions, while placing a portion of the people in helpless, hopeless situations, possibly creating terrorism or other extreme mentalities and prompting reckless behavior enacted out of desperation. Terrorism is actually just a means for those at the world’s margins to stand up to what they call “oppressive states.” While this method admittedly ought to be condemned, on the other hand it proves that the existing international order and its North-South relations are unreasonable, that they require adjustment. More dialogue and consultation are required — not the unilateral and laissez-faire methods of superpowers employing power policy, clinging stubbornly to their own courses while bullying the weak. Perhaps Americans should use this event to earnestly question themselves on the deep underlying causes of international terrorism, and then make appropriate adjustments to their foreign policy.
Will “Acts of Terror” Again Become an Excuse for America’s Widespread Interventions?
We all know that so-called anti-terrorism is actually nothing more than an excuse for the U.S. to deploy armed forces worldwide. After suffering the 9/11 terror attacks, the U.S. spent a great amount of manpower, material and financial resources on counterterrorism; such a thing does not exactly prove that “more counterterrorism amounts to more terrorism.” In order to eliminate terrorist attacks against the U.S., it does not hesitate to unleash war upon another country.
In order to “destroy terrorists,” America adopted a pre-emptive strategy of bombing Afghanistan; in order to discover “weapons of mass destruction,” it again used a powerful military force to bomb Iraq, destroying Saddam; bin Laden was also killed by a team of U.S. Navy SEALs. Today, several years after destroying bin Laden and launching the Iraq War, the U.S. suffers again from this large terrorist attack. Why is that?
Because of its anti-terror campaign, America has already caused a great number of poor citizens’ deaths in other countries. As I see it, the result of America’s “anti-terror” campaign is this: the inevitable recurrence and suffering of even more terrorist attacks. Their reasoning is not to resolve conflicts, but rather to “use violence to curb violence,” to destroy “terrorists,” to force surrender by means of advanced weaponry, even to achieve their own aims in the name of “anti-terrorism.” Therefore, heedless of the lives of other countries’ innocent poor, and in their own best interests, they may trample the interests of people in other countries at will, without self-reflection. So in forcing others down, they proclaim themselves hegemon of the world through military might.
After 9/11, America said the attack was the work of bin Laden’s and Omar’s terrorist organization; consequently it went to fight in Afghanistan. Afterward, America said Iraq might have weapons of mass destruction that could fall into the hands of bin Laden, so they used weapons of mass destruction to get the WMD-less Saddam out of the way. Later, they set up a “no-fly” zone over Libya; every day after that their airplanes filled the sky, bombing, and Gadhafi finally disappeared from the world …
Today, there has been another act of terrorism and Obama vowed faithfully to capture the real killers. After a terrorist attack, America tends to soften so that its people can play the role of victim; then the government will bite indiscriminately — whoever doesn’t listen is a terrorist sympathizer. Then the military is deployed. Just think of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya …
So, on the one hand we condemn this shameless act of terrorism. We also want to observe whether or not America’s arm will extend to some places where it has never involved itself before.
America’s Security Is Worth Learning
Objectively speaking of the crowd’s and local government’s response following the occurrence of this Boston terrorist attack, I believe America’s level of security is indeed not low and is worth learning from.
Competitors and spectators at the bombing did not create a large-scale panic resulting in local unrest. Local police immediately began cooperative work with the state police and FBI. The response of rescue workers also showed a strong professionalism. The Boston bombings reflect the maturity of the United States in responding to emergencies. After experiencing the events of 9/11, the U.S. government established a universal anti-terrorism strategy. Thanks to a decade of practice with these strategic issues of recognizing threats to the American people and responding in the occurrence of a terrorist attack, one can say America is basically capable of responding to similar terrorist threats. And after the events of 9/11, the U.S. government has a large section of the White House website dedicated to educating people on how to do their utmost to preserve their own lives in the event of a terrorist attack and how to cooperate with law enforcement, intelligence and security agencies to quickly discover clues about a terrorist — these all bear a large relationship to America’s long-term anti-terror education program.
Furthermore, American police — including firefighters — often hold professional-level anti-terror drills, which makes them appear extremely well trained in the face of unexpected events. As we all know, our country’s national conditions as well as the threats we face are vastly different from America’s, but we may similarly face some unexpected events, whether these unexpected events be manmade or natural. We all should have appropriate emergency plans and frequently run drills so that as soon as there is an incident, we have the capability to carry out an orderly response. Therefore, I believe, in this aspect, China must learn from America.
As the dominant world power, the U.S. bullies the weak everywhere; how could it be unable to guarantee its own safety? The U.S. has the CIA, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and other first-class intelligence-gathering units, even up to the massive scale and super-high level of efficiency of the National Security Agency. With these kinds of first-class intelligence institutions, how could it still suffer such a major blow?
Why America Suffers “Terrorist Attacks”
Regardless of the kind of everyday criticisms we have of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, and disregarding any friction there may be between China and America, when it comes to this event we must have a proper view of right and wrong: This is a serious act of terrorism. Those harmed were mostly innocent athletes and common civilians, causing a huge panic in society and among the public. This kind of act must be condemned. China ought to join forces with every country — including America — to combat and contain such criminal activity that is targeted at mankind.
This series of Boston terrorist attacks can be considered the largest-scale terrorist event to take place on American soil since Sept. 11 — that is, in more than a decade. Previously, after 9/11, America had still experienced sporadic terrorist acts.
The scale of terrorism has developed up to today — its methods so merciless, its damage so tremendous — to be thoroughly astonishing. At present, it is still unknown who — what person, organization or kind of group in the background — contrived this event.
For nearly 10 years after 9/11, America’s national security strategy experienced a kind of transformation, emphasizing future global threats to U.S. national security as well as major threats to American lives. For terrorists and so-called “rogue states” and “potential challenges to the state,” the U.S. military accelerated its development of a global anti-missile system, according to its new strategic thought and in spite of rejection and criticism from the international community (including America’s allies).
I believe, from my judgment of this chain of bombings, the major threat to the U.S. people and U.S. security comes not primarily from countries like North Korea, Iran or “potential challenges to the state,” but from these genuine acts of terrorism. Americans really need to reflect for a moment, to consider from where exactly their own threats are coming. I also hope that through this terrorist attack, America’s leaders will re-examine the U.S. security strategy, adjust the direction of their resource allocation and ease their relations with a few nations — this will benefit both America and the entire world.
To speak again of terrorism, right now terrorism is rampant and expanding, primarily targeting such countries as America and Israel. These past few years, terrorists have bombed an embassy, bombed warships, bombed the U.S. Army, bombed a federal law enforcement building, even hijacked passenger planes and destroyed the World Trade Center; now their wicked objectives have targeted innocent athletes. People cannot help but ask: why?
I believe that America — the world’s only superpower also playing the role of “world police,” and furthermore in the whole of international affairs seeking to maintain its hegemony and its own national interests regardless of other nations’ interests — has implemented such practices as strategy since its founding as a nation. It is exactly this kind of strategy that creates many contradictions, problems and conflicts at the international level. In other words, the more powerful America becomes, the more enemies it will cultivate worldwide and the more isolated it will be. And perhaps some among those who are extremely anti-American will take advantage of this form of terrorism, launching terrorist attacks against America’s global interests as well as attacks on America’s own soil. This is just a phenomenon that reflects the current undemocratic, inequitable state of international relations.
Naturally, we believe that this phenomenon has led to the continuing occurrence of extreme terrorist acts. With the Obama administration, America recognizes this issue somewhat, especially regarding Obama’s adjustments to the Bush-era anti-terror campaign. Although he has made some significant changes, Obama still cannot change America’s pursuit of its own global interests, as well as its maintenance of its own hegemonic core values. Therefore, he cannot fundamentally change the nation’s conduct to be like that of other nations.
In a certain sense, it is necessarily related to the new world system and international order that the U.S. has brought about. Because the international political and economic order is neither just nor rational, it has caused and intensified increasingly widening disparities and contradictions, while placing a portion of the people in helpless, hopeless situations, possibly creating terrorism or other extreme mentalities and prompting reckless behavior enacted out of desperation. Terrorism is actually just a means for those at the world’s margins to stand up to what they call “oppressive states.” While this method admittedly ought to be condemned, on the other hand it proves that the existing international order and its North-South relations are unreasonable, that they require adjustment. More dialogue and consultation are required — not the unilateral and laissez-faire methods of superpowers employing power policy, clinging stubbornly to their own courses while bullying the weak. Perhaps Americans should use this event to earnestly question themselves on the deep underlying causes of international terrorism, and then make appropriate adjustments to their foreign policy.
Will “Acts of Terror” Again Become an Excuse for America’s Widespread Interventions?
We all know that so-called anti-terrorism is actually nothing more than an excuse for the U.S. to deploy armed forces worldwide. After suffering the 9/11 terror attacks, the U.S. spent a great amount of manpower, material and financial resources on counterterrorism; such a thing does not exactly prove that “more counterterrorism amounts to more terrorism.” In order to eliminate terrorist attacks against the U.S., it does not hesitate to unleash war upon another country.
In order to “destroy terrorists,” America adopted a pre-emptive strategy of bombing Afghanistan; in order to discover “weapons of mass destruction,” it again used a powerful military force to bomb Iraq, destroying Saddam; bin Laden was also killed by a team of U.S. Navy SEALs. Today, several years after destroying bin Laden and launching the Iraq War, the U.S. suffers again from this large terrorist attack. Why is that?
Because of its anti-terror campaign, America has already caused a great number of poor citizens’ deaths in other countries. As I see it, the result of America’s “anti-terror” campaign is this: the inevitable recurrence and suffering of even more terrorist attacks. Their reasoning is not to resolve conflicts, but rather to “use violence to curb violence,” to destroy “terrorists,” to force surrender by means of advanced weaponry, even to achieve their own aims in the name of “anti-terrorism.” Therefore, heedless of the lives of other countries’ innocent poor, and in their own best interests, they may trample the interests of people in other countries at will, without self-reflection. So in forcing others down, they proclaim themselves hegemon of the world through military might.
After 9/11, America said the attack was the work of bin Laden’s and Omar’s terrorist organization; consequently it went to fight in Afghanistan. Afterward, America said Iraq might have weapons of mass destruction that could fall into the hands of bin Laden, so they used weapons of mass destruction to get the WMD-less Saddam out of the way. Later, they set up a “no-fly” zone over Libya; every day after that their airplanes filled the sky, bombing, and Gadhafi finally disappeared from the world …
Today, there has been another act of terrorism and Obama vowed faithfully to capture the real killers. After a terrorist attack, America tends to soften so that its people can play the role of victim; then the government will bite indiscriminately — whoever doesn’t listen is a terrorist sympathizer. Then the military is deployed. Just think of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya …
So, on the one hand we condemn this shameless act of terrorism. We also want to observe whether or not America’s arm will extend to some places where it has never involved itself before.
America’s Security Is Worth Learning
Objectively speaking of the crowd’s and local government’s response following the occurrence of this Boston terrorist attack, I believe America’s level of security is indeed not low and is worth learning from.
Competitors and spectators at the bombing did not create a large-scale panic resulting in local unrest. Local police immediately began cooperative work with the state police and FBI. The response of rescue workers also showed a strong professionalism. The Boston bombings reflect the maturity of the United States in responding to emergencies. After experiencing the events of 9/11, the U.S. government established a universal anti-terrorism strategy. Thanks to a decade of practice with these strategic issues of recognizing threats to the American people and responding in the occurrence of a terrorist attack, one can say America is basically capable of responding to similar terrorist threats. And after the events of 9/11, the U.S. government has a large section of the White House website dedicated to educating people on how to do their utmost to preserve their own lives in the event of a terrorist attack and how to cooperate with law enforcement, intelligence and security agencies to quickly discover clues about a terrorist — these all bear a large relationship to America’s long-term anti-terror education program.
Furthermore, American police — including firefighters — often hold professional-level anti-terror drills, which makes them appear extremely well trained in the face of unexpected events. As we all know, our country’s national conditions as well as the threats we face are vastly different from America’s, but we may similarly face some unexpected events, whether these unexpected events be manmade or natural. We all should have appropriate emergency plans and frequently run drills so that as soon as there is an incident, we have the capability to carry out an orderly response. Therefore, I believe, in this aspect, China must learn from America.