End Abu Ghraib, Establish a World Counterterrorism Organization

But what do we do in the Global War on Terror (which the neo-cons refer to gleefully as GWOT), because today America, at least, is fighting a new type of enemy, +óGé¼+ôThe Man With No State,+óGé¼-¥ a newer version of the Man Without a Country, or, perhaps better, the man/woman who is  outside the system of nation states, i.e., the Terrorist. What good is it to bomb a country into the Stone Age when the bad guys pick up and move elsewhere, taking their organization with them?

America notoriously loves the lone rider, the righteous avenger, what Barnett calls +óGé¼+ôDirty Harry... the hard-nosed heroes (who) dispatch evildoers without remorse, going outside the law when necessary.+óGé¼-¥  The archtypical, not-innocent defender of innocence and good who does whatever is necessary to defeat evil, so that Justice may triumph. Said George Bush after 9/11 +óGé¼+ôI want justice.+óGé¼-¥  We knew what he meant: do whatever it takes, but do it. These emotions led directly to Abu Ghriab, don+óGé¼Gäót pretend otherwise, and now we find ourselves excusing police brutality, torture, warrantless wiretapping, and on and on, worse and worse.

To claw our way off this slippery slope the United States, says Barnett, +óGé¼+ôneeds to acknowledge that it is not above the law, and that it needs a new set of rules+óGé¼-¥ to deal with what he refers to as +óGé¼+ônonstate actors" like  "transnational terrorists.+óGé¼-¥ Replace +óGé¼+ôfrontier justice+óGé¼-¥ with a real justice system.  Who writes the rules of this new justice system?  The civilized core of the world economy: the countries in North America, Europe, Russia, the rising and established major economies of Asia and South America, the +óGé¼+ôconnected states,+óGé¼-¥ all of whom are vulnerable to terrorism and committed to combating it.  The new rules will 1) Define how the core nations cooperate to suppress terrorists within the core, using police methods. 2) Describe when and how the core countries+óGé¼Gäó militaries may go into the +óGé¼+ôunconnected regions+óGé¼-¥ of the world (which Barnett refers to as +óGé¼+ôthe gap,+óGé¼-¥ an area of weak, failed, or degenerate states) to kidnap and/kill suspected terrorists.

Such a project is not a job for a global legislative body like the U.N., Barnett claims.  It is a job for a new entity similar to the WTO (World Trade Organization).  Such an organization will set operating standards for networking among the police of the core nations, establish the rules for the process including prisoner handling, detention, and interrogation, and define how the core nation+óGé¼Gäós militaries will go into +óGé¼+ôthe gap.+óGé¼-¥ Call this new organization the World Counterterrorism Organization, the WCO, and it will realistically be invitation only, unlike Interpol... a sort of new-Age NATO for the new-age threats we face.

Barnett acknowledges it sounds somewhat paternalistic (some would say colonial) for the militaries of core nations to +óGé¼+ôsimply walk into gap states and do what they must,+óGé¼-¥ but in his view it would be only into the most disconnected societies.  Of course, such societies can grow up and out of the gap, he says, but it could be argued that  the core nations owe the inhabitants of such disconnected and weak governments some adult supervision.

First, the WCO would set legal guidelines for the handling and disposition of those +óGé¼+ôwho aren+óGé¼Gäót considered legal combatants+óGé¼-¥ as formally defined under the old rules of war, and establish detention areas+óGé¼GÇ¥ NOT Guantanamo, thank you.  The system will provide the prisoners with trials in the International Criminal Court, making the UN happy. 

Mistakes will inevitably be made along the way, but the main result will be that +óGé¼+ôterrorists will get dead.+óGé¼-¥  The United States will step back from the brink of descending to the same level of brutality as the enemy, and, hopefully, restore American constitutional rights and moral leadership of the world.  In other words, save civilization.  Maybe even save some money by replacing Shock and Awe with genuine multilateral police action under rational rules of engagement.  As I recall, when we went into Korea it was called a +óGé¼+ôpolice action+óGé¼-¥ at the time+óGé¼GÇ¥ the right idea, but not properly managed as a true police action, as it turned out.  But there you have the idea. The only stumbling block may well be our own self-aggrandizing George W. Bush, who fancies himself as a +óGé¼+ôwartime president,+óGé¼-¥ and so far has down-graded any international cooperation which might downsize his own ambitions.

Comments