Debate on "Recent Developments in International Terrorism" |
My Lords, one of the perils which has come into focus since our last debate in this House is the wider impact that possible military action against Afghanistan might have on the already unstable situation in Central Asia as a whole.
I have a special responsibility for relations with orthodox Christians and this has resulted in travels over many years in the former Soviet Union and in the states which have emerged since the fall of communism. The five Central Asian states were already attempting to mobilise before September 11th against their own internal terrorist threat. They had even agreed to establish a joint anti-terrorist centre in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan. The region is also of course afflicted by the consequences of the drought as well as insurgencies of various kinds.
It seems clear that any coalition action in or from the region needs to be accompanied by long term efforts to stabilise Central Asia, politically and economically. Some kind of Marshall plan for the region is needed. But also in a recent statement, an Uzbek official cautioned that 'our Government will get full support from the West to fight against those our government declares terrorists. Since the West has little understanding or interest in distinguishing between devoted Muslims and extremists or terrorists, all opponents of the government will be easily jailed.' This is clearly a dangerous prospect. The danger is that we shall once again unwittingly create a Frankenstein.
The importance of supporting any action with a humanitarian relief programme has already, rightly, been stressed. The Scriptures say 'If your enemy is hungry, feed him.' This is controversial advice in conventional warfare but as we seek to deny to terrorists the achievement of their aim to spread fear and hatred, it is a strategy that is prudent as well as pious.
But analyses of the conflict which suggest that religion is simply a cover for economic discontents and the unequal development caused by globalisation are hangovers from the flatland Marxist interpretation of the world. Osama Bin Laden himself does not come from the ranks of the poor nor are his stated aims in his struggles with the US, moderate Arab governments, and the Shi'ite regime in Iran reducible to economic grievances. Aid and development may reduce the pool of those who sympathise with terrorists but will not solve the problem of apocalyptic terrorism which, like the gas attack on the Japanese underground, arises not from a clash between civilisations or between have and have nots but from profound anxiety within civilisations about the direction of secular materialism.
Terrorism cannot possibly be defended from any of the great spiritual traditions of the world but the religious dimension of our present crisis is not reducible to any other categories. In a world of divergent histories and beliefs it is vital that we reinvest in a long tradition of genuine tolerance and respect built on genuine though divergent belief. It is easy to point to Muslim civilisations in which this tolerance was a characteristic. The great Christian defender of the icon tradition of depictions of Christ and the saints, St John of Damascus, was free to write his book at a time when his views were persecuted in the Christian Empire, because he was Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Umayyad Caliph of Damascus. Faith based tolerance is a vital component of our response to the present emergency. I was glad to stand together with London Muslims last night in an event organised by the Muslim Council to demonstrate our many common values and to make new allies in combatting fear and hate.
My Most Reverend Brother, the Archbishop of Canterbury has issued an open invitation to prayer focussed on tomorrow Friday, October 5th. The invitation is to all Christians but also to all people of faith and already the response has been very encouraging, not in terms of great events, but of people committing themselves to pray in the workplace and at home for peace, justice and the reconciliation of faiths. And to demonstrate that we are fully part of the modern world there is a web site with suggestions and materials - www.invitationtoprayer.org.uk
Lastly My Lords, I wonder whether it would be wise to consider establishing an ad hoc Select Committee of the House to report on the changing nature of global conflict? Such a Committee would be able to embrace the role of religious and cultural factors as well as the more traditional diplomatic, economic and military tools for combatting the new threat and any necessary changes to domestic and international law. I know that your Lordship's House has a tradition of establishing such Select Committees on an ad hoc basis and remember in particular the success and the great influence of the Committee on Medical Ethics which set the agenda for the euthanasia debate in the 1990s.
The subject matter would not be the immediate response to the dreadful events of September 11th , but consideration of a longer term strategy for a conflict which will, I fear, haunt us for a long time to come.
