Article
from
The Boston Globe
Osama bin Laden, suspected architect of various terrorist attacks against
the United States, including last Tuesday''s horror, has repeatedly called
for Muslims worldwide to join in his holy. He is quoted as saying, ''''I''m
fighting so I can die a martyr and go to heaven to meet God. Our fight
now is against the Americans.''''
Ironically, the United States helped to create bin Laden and his followers.
We trained some of the mujahadeen who fought a holy war against Soviet
occupation of Afghanistan in the l980s. Other of bin Laden''s supporters
developed a deep resentment of the presence of US troops in
Saudia Arabia during and after the Gulf War a decade ago.
In their eyes, the American presence defiled the home of Islam''s holiest
shrines. Bin Laden has also appealed to those who have been radicalized
by the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians as recent photos
showed. For this implacable hard core, hatred of the United States is
deeply rooted.
But not everyone hates us, nor is bin Laden the only catalyst for terror.
The Aum Shinrikyo cult that spread chemical poisons in the Tokyo subway
system a few years ago was interested in fomenting a war between the
United States and Japan. And Timothy McVeigh was a homegrown
product.
The important question is whether such hard nuggets of hatred can
broaden their appeal beyond their narrow band. The answer to that
depends in part on what the United States represents and what it does.
For one thing, the United States is the most powerful country in the
world, and our military has a global reach unlike any other country. For
some, this makes us an important source of stability. Singapore''s Senior
Minister Lee Kuan Yew, for example, believes that the presence of
100,000 US troops in East Asia has helped to provide the local balance of
power that has been the security foundation for Asian economic growth.
For others (like Saddam Hussein) who want to upset the status quo in
their regions, the presence of American forces is a hindrance. Since they
cannot beat us, they are tempted to support terrorists who can try to
undermine our will at home. This form of hatred and source of terrorism
grows out of our role in thwarting the ambitions of local tyrants.
Others hate us because of our allies. American support for Israel, the only
democracy in the Middle East, has become a source of tension with
groups in countries like Libya, Syria, and Iran, which the State
Department lists as harboring terrorists.
Some Americans may be tempted to believe that we could reduce these
hatreds and our vulnerability if we would withdraw our troops, curtail our
alliances, and follow a more isolationist foreign policy. But they would be
mistaken. Fundamentalist groups would still resent the power of the
American economy and culture. American corporations and citizens
represent global capitalism, which is still anathema to them. It would make
no sense to give such groups free rein in their regions while at the same
time abandoning our allies.
Moreover, American popular culture has a global reach regardless of what
we do. Some critics even see globalization as Americanization. While such
views are too simplistic, there is no escaping the influence of Hollywood,
Harvard, and CNN. In general, our culture has a positive effect and
contributes to our attractive or ''''soft'''' power just as our military and
economic might contribute to our ''''hard'''' power. American movies and
television programs express freedom, individualism, and change (as well as
sex and violence ). American higher education attracts half a million
students from around the world every year. Unlike the classical empires of
Rome and Britain where the culture extended only as far as the armies,
American culture extends much further.
Generally, the global reach of American culture helps to enhance our
''''soft'''' power. But not for everyone. Individualism and liberties are
attractive to many people, but repulsive to some fundamentalists. One of
the suspected hijacker-pilots is reported to have said he did not like the
United States because it is ''''too lax. I can go anywhere I want to and
they can''t stop me.''''
Others are repelled by American feminism and the changing role of women.
Open sexuality and individual choices are profoundly subversive of
staunchly patriarchal societies. Such conflicts mean that American culture
can have both positive and negative effects in the same country. For
example, at the same time that conservative mullahs in Iran are
condemning the United States as the great Satan, some Iranian teenagers
are surreptitiously watching smuggled cassettes of Hollywood movies.
Indeed, for some conservatives the term '''' great Satan'''' refers less to our
Fifth Fleet than to MTV.
In short, some people will hate us because of our values of openness and
opportunity for change. But they are not likely to become a majority
unless we ourselves fail to practice and live up to our values. Some
tyrants and fundamentalists will always hate us, and we will have no
choice but to deal with them through more effective counter-terrorism
policies. But those hard nuggets of hate are unlikely to catalyze broad
hatred unless we abandon our values and pursue policies that let the
extremists appeal to the majority in the middle. And that is something we
should keep in mind as we fashion our policy responses to this tragedy.
Joseph S. Nye is dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard
and author of a forthcoming book on America''s global influence.
