As proud union
leaders and members, we know you will join with your fellow citizens to
demonstrate the solidarity of the American people and express sympathy for
those Americans whose lives were taken on Sept. 11 -- a day which we all
will never forget.
This morning’s
New York Times editorial addresses the harsh realities that all Americans
will face as we wage the war against terrorism. We have lost the first
battle, but if we can win the war, the United States and the world will be
much safer place than it was yesterday.
The
National Defense
As
the nation assays the horrific human and physical losses of yesterday's
brutally efficient terrorist attacks, it must also begin the urgent work
of determining how an open and democratic society can better defend itself
against a threat that conventional armies and weapons cannot defeat.
Terrorism
is not new, but the scale and audacity of the attacks in New York and
Washington make it obvious that familiar defensive strategies are
inadequate and that the fight against terror must move from the periphery
to the center of American national security planning and operations. An
unconventional and frightening assault on the American homeland has
commenced. The American people and their leaders must mobilize the
resources to meet it.
This
cannot be just another moment when the president declares that the United
States is unbreakable, when American military forces strike back
ineffectually and when airport security is tightened for a month or two.
It must be the occasion for a fundamental reassessment of intelligence and
defense activities. There must be an exacting examination of how the
country can face this threat without sacrificing its liberties.
The
best defense against terrorism is good, timely intelligence. The Central
Intelligence Agency and other organizations have enjoyed some quiet
victories, but much more must be done to try to infiltrate terrorist
groups and to track their activities and communications. No one suggests
this is easy or inexpensive work, but for the nearly $30 billion that
Washington spends on spying, the nation should know more about terror
networks and their plots. If more money can be usefully invested in these
efforts, it can be provided by Congress.
When
retaliation is warranted, as it will be in this case once the organizers
have been identified, Washington needs light but lethal weapons to attack
terrorist compounds in remote locations. Cruise missiles can be effective,
but even more accurate weapons may be needed that can be used in
coordination with enhanced intelligence information.
When
Washington has prepared to act in the past it has often been stymied by
faint-hearted allies. Some of America's closest friends have found it more
useful to do business with countries that have either supported terrorists
on their soil, been indifferent to them or been too afraid to go after
them. America must let its economic partners and allies know that they can
no longer stay on the sidelines of this global conflict.
While
the United States must retain its conventional and nuclear war-fighting
machinery, the government needs to consider a reallocation of resources to
homeland defenses against unorthodox threats. That was the largely ignored
recommendation of a national commission headed by former Senators Gary
Hart and Warren Rudman that early this year noted that the relative
invulnerability of the nation to catastrophic attack could soon end
because of terrorist threats.
When
all that suicidal terrorists need to crumble the twin towers of the World
Trade center are airplane tickets from Boston to Los Angeles, it seems
reasonable to wonder again why a missile shield should be Washington's
highest priority.
Tightened
airport security seems such a painfully obvious way to enhance homeland
security after yesterday's strikes, all of which used hijacked commercial
airliners as deadly weapons. A nation with the resources and technological
skills of the United States can develop detection systems that are far
more sophisticated than those normally in use today. Indeed, there are
already machines that can detect plastic explosives and other non-metallic
devices, but they have been installed in only a few airports because they
are expensive and deemed an inconvenience.
Americans
must rethink how to safeguard the country without bartering away the
rights and privileges of the free society that we are defending. The
temptation will be great in the days ahead to write draconian new laws
that give law enforcement agencies — or even military forces — a right
to undermine the civil liberties that shape the character of the United
States. President Bush and Congress must carefully balance the need for
heightened security with the need to protect the constitutional rights of
Americans. That includes Americans of Islamic descent, who could now
easily became the target for another period of American xenophobia and
ethnic discrimination.
Terrorism
is a global threat. Part of the challenge for the United States is to
recognize that the roots of terrorism lie in economic and political
problems in large parts of the world. The end of the cold war has brought
a resurgence of ethnic hatreds that were often stilled by the superpower
conflicts between East and West.
The
United States must therefore be adroit as well as strong. It will not be
easy to address religious fanaticism or the anger among those left behind
by globalization. The distaste of Western civilization and cultural values
that fuels terrorism is difficult to overcome.
Americans
have long known that these resentments existed. The nation must now
recognize and address the fact that hatred has turned into a malignant
threat that can destabilize the underpinnings of the world economy and
civil society. The World Trade Center was not just a symbol of American
prosperity. It was an economic nerve center.
As
horrible as it is to imagine, the United States must also consider a
future in which the assaults carried out yesterday may be overshadowed by
even more lethal nuclear, biological or chemical attacks by terrorists. We
have long known that these dangers could be part of our future. It is now
clear they may be nearer than most people thought. A concerted national
effort to remake the nation's defenses must begin immediately.
The New York Times, Editorials / Letters, Wednesday, September 12,
2001
[top]
