American War Against Afghanistan: Ethics of the War on Terror, Essay Example

War is hostile and destructive…it depletes human behavior, human instincts and degrades the human machinery into contemplated psychological combatants. According to Howard Dean, “I supported the war in Afghanistan because 3000 of our people were murdered and I thought we had a right to defend the people of the United States.” So does it imply that terror needs to be dealt with war? Does it imply that thousands of people would be killed in lieu of hundreds already dead? Is war the punishment for terror? This paper will reflect on the ethical issues in the response of America against the 9/11 attacks and the rules which they showcased as the building blocks for their war in Afghanistan without demarcating between combatants and non-combatants. It was a rather hasty and childish decision on behalf of America. However my discussion would highlight the debate that how this war can be won under the present rules of engagement. My primary question would be about the American approach to Afghanistan… Is the war ethical and would the continued and escalated military action in Afghanistan lead to prevention of suffering and bloodshed. And will it end terrorism?

American War on Afghanistan is often quoted as being the weapon of revenge of 9/11 attacks…but does revenge outweigh the normal attributions of humanity, causality, death, horror, economic destruction, denial of civil and fundamental rights, apathy in the lives of innocent people…is America, the superpower so much blinded by childish vengeance that it skips it humanitarian extremes such to receive an applaud and the so called revenge of the people who had been killed during the attacks. Has America become so selfish that it forgets to compel and adhere to the notions of human suffering? Let us quote the clarification of President Obama on the escalation of American troops in Afghanistan. He claims that a lot of people within the United States as well as in other partner countries have put in much effort into this war conflict. However, all of them have merely one doubt as to the purpose of their intervention to Afghanistan. They have been asking about men and women fighting and dying there for no obvious reason. “So let me be clear: al Qaeda and its allies – the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks – are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the U.S. homeland from its safe-haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban – or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged – that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.” (Eisenhover, 2009)

But this is not simply an American problem – far from it. It is, instead, an international security challenge of the highest order. Terrorist attacks in London and Bali were tied to al Qaeda and its allies in Pakistan, as were attacks in North Africa and the Middle East, in Islamabad and Kabul. If there is a major attack on an Asian, European, or African city, it – too – is likely to have ties to al Qaeda’s leadership in Pakistan. The safety of people around the world is at stake.

“For the Afghan people, a return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance, international isolation, a paralyzed economy, and the denial of basic human rights to the Afghan people – especially women and girls. The return in force of al Qaeda terrorists who would accompany the core Taliban leadership would cast Afghanistan under the shadow of perpetual violence.”(Eisenhover, 2009)

What are the major justifications of America for fighting the war?

1. Self Defense: It is indeed a matter of concern when a state gives refuge to terrorists, and helps them in the planning and launching serious and deadly attacks on other states. They even account for being a safe haven for the extremist forces, whose actions results in death of two thousand civilians of other countries. So it is the duty of the country, which had been inflicted, to arrange for necessary physical combat to refrain and restrict in any other future attacks.
2. Safety of the people at stake: The Terrorists or the so called religious warriors have made this world a real unsafe place. Be it trains, buses or flight; or be it crowded areas; one single bomb or an open gunfire would immediately kill hundreds. Thus America thought that by fighting a war with Afghanistan would enable him to perturb the roots of Islamic violence and terror. They want to uproot terrorism from its roots and yet even after eight long years of struggle, they have their hands empty.
3. Give Taliban their freedom: Afghanistan had always been in contempt and war. Its staunch religious adherence, illiteracy, poverty and autocratic Taliban rule was anti humanitarian. So America sending its troops in Afghanistan was trying to build its economy by financial aid, providing security, better governance and was helping them to adapt and accept the new wave of technology and development. Thus America thinks that military intervention was a historical and social landmark in the lives of the Afghans.
4. Topple a regime that thrived on Al-Qaida support: The Taliban government operated in close nexus with the Al-Qaeda, and was used as breeding grounds for terrorism. The large terrain and the mystic forests were an ideal place for the refuge of the terrorists. Thus America thought it best to attack Afghanistan and topple the regime, so that it can have a free access to the region.
5. Eradicate camps, logical machinery and militants from Afghanistan: American intelligence had already informed about the large concentration of military activity in the area. By attacking and waging a war against Afghanistan, America would get complete control over its frontiers and can then break the terrorism network.

However, these are justifications that may be partially true and correct. But in the current context we would weigh these justifications in the spring balance of humanity and the ethics of war. Let us see whether American justifications are vague and indiscrete …whether they fall heavy on the human causality and plight? It is also a matter of interest to find out who wins…American prejudice or universal humanity? Moreover, the onus that America had taken to destruct militia from Afghan soil…could it prevent the countless terrorist attack in different parts of the world?

Military Intervention has increased casualties: After America had leaped in the war against Afghanistan there is an estimated loss of lives of over 9,000 people. The results show that there have been approximately 8,172 civilian death and 1,100 fatalities among the coalition military forces. Thus it has led to an extravagant account of loss of lives among civilians and military.

No effect on Terrorism: Starting from President Bush to Obama, both being the President of America at different stages of the war on Afghanistan…strongly believes in the sanctity of war as the weapon to curb extremism. America being the superpower and having the most intricate and technologically advanced artillery, failed to capture the main leaders of the 9/11. They are still searching through the vivid mountain and rocky plateau only to come back with empty hands. How can the terrorists evade the magnitude of America and its soldiers is still a question. It essentially proves that war cannot curb terrorism. Moreover, it assimilates and gathers the negative energy, and unites the traumatized people to fight against America. They motivate and alter the thinking pattern of the civilians and are successful in using them as human hurdles in the process of American perforation.

Thus the war in Afghanistan was more a disaster for Afghanistan as well as for America. However it seems to be in major violation of ethics in international law as it was waged against a non-combatant population. So now the question is under what rules and norms did US succumb to military invasion of Afghanistan?  America’s move to attack Afghanistan as a chain reaction to 9/11 does not necessarily comply to Article 51 (the right to self-defense) of International Law. Thus can the various actions of America were abided by law? Did America try negotiation with the Taliban to abandon Al Qaeda? Was war the only alternative to curb terrorism?

International law addresses the importance of territorial integrity, political sovereignty of the state and to resolve to peaceful means to resolve dispute.

The United Nations Charter 2 (3) declares: “All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice, shall not be compromised, thus the peaceful approach addresses arbitration, judicial settlement, negotiation, mediation, conciliation or settlement of the disputes through the UN and regional organizations”; for certain US had never thought of using the mediation technique post 9/11 with Afghanistan. Furthermore, Article 2 (4) “prohibits the unilateral use of force and obliges all members of the UN to: Refrain in their international relations from threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” US proved to be beyond the norms of UN and used “will of coalition partners”.

There is a strange complexity as to the real reasons for attacking Afganisthan like more than the naked eyes could see. They waged an unlawful war for capturing a terrorist, Osama Bin Laden. He had never been a sanctioned authority in the government, neither was he an authority… he was a terrorist who had no boundary or country limit. So America attacked a sovereign nation just to run behind a group of terrorists who had no factual attachment with the government or Afghanistan. Thus they jeopardized and disobeyed international law, to fight ‘unlawful combatants. But the question is, if link between Al Qaeda and Taliban was the potent reason to wage a war against the country, then America should have waged multiple wars with South America, Europe, Middle East and Africa… as they are also densely populated with terror cells of Al Qaeda militants. .again looking at the profile of the hijackers of 9/11, it shows that most of them were from Saudi Arabia and not Afghanistan and none of them were Afghan nationals.

Moreover in the pursuit of these terrorists, they subjected and inflicted war on the innocent civilian population, who had no voluntary or involuntary participation or involvement behind 9/11.  Thus was it not arbitrary and wrong for America to punish and attack a sovereign state, with the predisposed notion of changing the regime according to their whims and wishes. They coerced the population and the country even though they were not the state concerned or responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

Professor Richard Bonney in his ‘False Prophets’ maintains that “the war we fight today is more than a military conflict; it is decisive ideological struggle of 21st century”. He further believed that, ‘Most Islamic terrorists are, in some sense, Islamists, but most Islamists are not terrorists’. According to Professor Razia Musarrat, “today the world faces what might be called a ‘clash of emotions’, and the war goes beyond that to a “War of Resources”, being fought to preserve Western vested interests under the shadow of ideological conflicts.” Thus America was too submerged in grief to evaluate the pros and cons of the war …they defied the well established Western ideologies of sovereignty and non invasion of territories. They compromised on social and moral values to heal their wounded ego and prejudice…and the law makers became law breakers. Thus it lead to lost moral ascendancy…how could America gobble up between the Al Qaeda and the illiterate and vulnerable Pushtoons. If America had been patient and obeyed the UN and the strategies of peace talks and handing over of Bin Laden, then our world would have been different. We would not be emolliate at every step in lack of security and fear of terror. Thus the negligence of US in not involving UNSC and disregarding UN decisions had made America makes the biggest blunder…and the cause of innumerable death of its soldier and civilians. This further led to the multiplication of terror cells and activities. The impatient fury of America was proved to be too costly a proposition.

The war in Afghanistan has caused major civilian killings, suicide bombings and insurgency. The Afghan economy has shattered and it has transformed into a destroyed with broken remnants on all its way. The American attack captured a few terrorists, destroyed some terror camps… but after that? It seems that America has now realized their hypersensitivity and now in no way can redirect the direction of the Afghan phase and the war. Everyday America and its intent seems to evade in the oblivion  and the war seems to grow grim and dismay. The work of the coalition forces have become harder as the Taliban’s are apprehensive of their own welfare and have realized that they can save themselves only after America vacates their land. Malik Nasrullah stated speaking in North Waziristan, “if America doesn’t stop attacks in the tribal areas, we will prepare a lashkar (army) to attack US forces in Afghanistan… we will also seek support from tribal elders in Afghanistan to fight against America”. The American might have supersonic jets and we might have to fight with stones in our hands, but we will stand up”.

America has already done immense damage to itself and the world. As time progresses increased military intervention would further deepen the roots of organized terror and would make it impossible for the coalition to function properly and concentrate on the development of the country.

References

Eisenhover, D.D. (2009). Remarks by the President on a New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Retrieved November 16, 2009, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-on-a-New-Strategy-for-Afghanistan-and-Pakistan/

Helen Duffy, (2005), “The War on Terror and the Framework of International Law” United Nations Universal declaration of Human Rights, Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) (1994), Last retrieved on November 16, 2009 from http://www.un.org/events/humanrights/2007/hrphotos/declaration%20_eng.pdf.

Jim Reed, (2008.) “The Shocking Conclusion: My View- Our War In Afghanistan Is Unlawful”, Last retrieved on November 16, 2009 from http://www.americansc.org.uk/Online/Forum/Afghanlegality.htm

Samuel P. Huntington, (1993) “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs, Last retrieved on November 16, 2009 from http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19930601faessay5188/samuel-p-huntington/the-clash-of- civilizations.html.

Ibid Richard Bonney, “False Prophets”,

Nasim Zara,(2008) “Anatomy of FATA conflict”,

Dr. Ishtiaq Ahmad, (2008)“Why NATO Mission in Afghanistan is Failing?”, Journal, IPRI, Volume VIII, No. 1

Naqshbandi,(2008) “Strategic Depth concept vindicated”, DAWN