Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The temptation could be strong to assail America8217;s attacks on terrorist camps in Afghanistan and Sudan as more evidence of American hubris and unilateralism. It should be resisted. America8217;s action is a response to a genuine security threat to its nationals all over the world from international terrorist groups. Washington is justified in conveying the message that such acts will not be without reprisal. If proof were needed of the ominous reality of this threat, it has recently been forthcoming in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam. In a fiction-like subversion of the law, moreover, international restraint in the past has had the bizarre consequence of convicted terrorists living free lives while innocent citizens have been at their mercy. The fact of the matter is that every state subject to such threats would like to act in the way America did on Thursday. That only America can do so is because it has the power and the resources. But if its activism can help make the world an unsafe place for terrorists, theinternational community has no reason to complain.
It is best acknowledged at the outset that the American action would have acquired greater legitimacy if Washington had taken the trouble to seek an international mandate for its action. But it is easy to argue that the surprise element, and hence the effectiveness, of its action could thereby have been compromised. The United States in recent years has not exactly had great difficulty in getting the United Nations to rubber-stamp its unilateral initiatives. Strategic reasons rather than anticipation of resistance from the Security Council may well have guided it in not seeking its go-ahead.
