OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Testing the Definition of "Terrorism": Luis Posada Carriles and the U.S.

After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush declared, "We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them."[16] Shortly thereafter, the U.S. waged a war against Afghanistan, overthrowing the Taliban regime for harboring Osama bin Laden, who as presumed to be responsible for the attacks. Following that, the Bush administration claim that Saddam Hussein harbored terrorists was one of the justifications used for the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

As a thought experiment, one might imagine the consequences if Nicaragua, Venezuela, or Cuba were to bomb Washington, D.C. on the grounds that the U.S. harbored terrorists responsible for terrorist acts resulting in the deaths of Nicaraguans, Venezuelans, or Cubans. Nicaragua's actual response to terrorism was to bring its case to the International Court of Justice. Similarly, neither Venezuela nor Cuba have bombed or threatened to bomb the U.S. if they don't hand over Posada or Bosch. They have rather pursued legal means to seek the extradition of suspected terrorists from the country harboring them.

Bush reiterated in August that "if you harbor terrorists, you are just as guilty as the terrorists."[17] Thus, as The New York Times observed in a headline from last year, "Cuban Exile Could Test US Definition of Terrorist."[18] That is, it will be a "test" to see whether the convention holds true or not that their terrorists are defined as "terrorists" while our terrorists are defined as something other. The dilemma was similarly noted by The Washington Post yesterday, in a headline which read, "In 30-Year-Old Terror Case, a Test for the U.S."[19]

As a further thought experiment, one might imagine the reaction from the U.S. if it was learned after September 11, 2001 that a terrorist who trained on Iraqi soil, with tacit Iraqi approval, was largely responsible for the terrorist attacks of that day. One might imagine further if it was then learned that Saddam Hussein's regime had learned of the plan by a terrorist operating within its borders to hijack planes and fly them into buildings but had done nothing to stop them or warn the U.S. government. As a footnote, we could contemplate the reaction if Iraq later employed this same terrorist in a war of state sponsored terrorism against one of its neighbors.

In contrast, the reaction in the U.S. to the U.S. having behaved exactly as the Iraq in our thought experiment is muted. The best the media can do is to point out the burden upon the Bush administration, faced with the choice of living up to its own rhetoric and extraditing Posada , or rejecting the same standards it demands of others for itself and harboring him, as the U.S. has long done with his partner in crime, Orlando Bosch.

Presumably, the U.S. would pass the "test" if it were to extradite Posada to either Venezuela or Cuba to be tried on charges of terrorism. But that, perhaps needless to say, isn't expected to happen.

__________

[1] Manuel Roig-Franzia, "In 30-Year-Old Terror Case, a Test for the U.S." The Washington Post, October 5, 2006; A20

[2] William Blum, "Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II (Updated Edition)", (Common Courage Press, Monroe, Maine, 2004), page 387

[3] Tim Weiner, "Cuban Exile Could Test US Definition of Terrorist", The New York Times, May 9, 2005

[4] Manuel Roig-Franzia

[5] Tim Weiner

[6] CIA file-search memo on "Luis Pozada", June 1966

[7] "[Excised] Cuba", FBI Memo, July 18, 1966

[8] "Traces on Persons Involved in 6 Oct 1976 Cubana Crash", FBI Retransmission of CIA Trace Report, October 16, 1976

[9] "Information Regarding Anti-Castro Figures Possibly Involved in Neutrality or Other Violations of Federal Law", FBI memo from Deputy Director for Operations to the Director, December 9, 1976

1 | 2 | 3