Dear Critical Geographers,
It seems that over the past week we have been witnessing the hardening of
a comprehensive geopolitical script that could replace the old 'Cold War'
one more comfortably than 'Clash of Civilisations' or 'failed states' has
done, namely, a 'war against terrorism.' It is remarkable, and alarming,
how swiftly journalists and politicians have begun talking about 'THE war
against terrorism' in discussing overseas military escapades, domestic
clampdowns on civil liberties, even moves against asylum seekers. A
pundit on Radio 4 yesterday said that every state had to decide whether to
cross over the threshold and join 'us' in this war. This is a very
complicated and amorphous phenomenon, potentially leading to great shifts
in international alliances and treaties: neutral states such as
Switzerland and Ireland have already either 'signed up' to it or come
under pressure to make significant changes to domestic and foreign policy,
and states such as Pakistan are being openly threatened with attack if
they do not. Extraordinary to see on the TV news yesterday scenes of
Iranians chanting not 'death to America' but 'down with terrorism.' New
alignments could benefit Britain vs the IRA, Sri Lanka vs the Tamil Tigers
etc.
Speculation apart, I wanted to ask how new this actually is? For example,
the UK government introduced its own Terrorism Act earlier this year
(listing certain organisations as 'terrorist' but specifically exempting
crown agents from prosecution under the act). Was this in response to
moves in other countries? Is 'the war against terrorism' as we are
seeing it developing at the moment a sudden reaction drawing together a
number of concerns from different quarters, or has it been a carefully
nurtured script?
Nick Megoran,
Ph.D student, Cambridge University.
|