IMMEDIATELY after Sept. 11, individuals of all political persuasions spoke of the need for unity. But it didn't last long before the finger pointing started. Currently it has become fashionable to blame former President Clinton and his administration.
Looking for constructive solutions is one thing, but political pundits have gone overboard in foreign policy. Blaming past administrations for our terrorist problems are inaccurate, cynical attempts to gain politically from catastrophe.
The calls for bipartisanship in the wake of Sept. 11 could not, and should not, have lasted forever. Loyal opposition always has a place in the political system. Unity of purpose - ensuring national security - is not the same as unity of opinion.
Unity of opinion is not always a good thing, particularly when politicians try to silence principled opposition with appeals to bipartisanship. Even during World War II, when we faced the prospect of invasion, differences of opinion existed within the government, and we still won the war.
Having said that, however, there is a big difference between disagreeing on how to implement future policies and engaging in a pointless blame game for political gain. The rash of finger-pointing over the last two months is a prime example of the latter.
The fact that terrorists orchestrated a previous attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, and most likely subsequent attacks on U.S. embassies, has led conservative pundits to paint the Clinton administration as soft on terrorism and crime in general. According to this line of thinking, the administration failed to track down terrorists, and so Clinton is personally responsible for the deaths of 7,000 people (www.snopes2.com/rumors/clinton).
However, the Clinton administration pursued suspects the best it could in a different environment. After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, four men were captured, convicted and sentenced to 240 years in prison each. Here, justice was done. We also conveniently forget that after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the FBI assembled a mountain of evidence against Timothy McVeigh and secured the death penalty against him.
|
It is true that the public did not receive satisfaction in the Saudi Arabian bombings, the embassy bombings and the bombing of the USS Cole. These did not happen, however, because the Clinton Justice Department, the CIA or anybody else sat on their rear ends.
Only one of these cases, the Cole, lacks indicted suspects. In this case, however, Yemeni officials have refused to allow U.S. officials access to suspects in custody. In one Saudi Arabian bombing, the Saudi government executed the suspects before Americans could speak with them, and in the other, the Saudi government will not let U.S. officials speak with suspects in custody. There is no extradition treaty between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia ("Freeh Criticizes Saudis on Bomb Probe," The Washington Post, Jan. 23, 1997).
Essentially, these difficulties revolve around relationships with foreign governments, particularly the Saudis. Conservatives particularly have blamed Clinton for not adopting Bush's policy that regimes harboring terrorism will be treated like terrorists. However, one argument bears considering: "such a policy ... was not plausible before politics the world over became transformed by one of history's most lethal acts" ("Conservatives Sound Refrain: It's Clinton's Fault," The Washington Post, Oct. 7).
Our bizarre relationship with the Saudis goes back before the Clinton administration. Missteps have been made over the years in policy to the point that no one administration or party can be blamed for the situation that current President Bush inherited.
It's unfortunate, but true, that most countries wouldn't have supported us in a campaign against terror until thousands of our citizens were butchered. We still don't have as much support as we'd like - many of our new "alliances" are shaky - but the environment for chasing terrorists has never been better. Politicians should seize the opportunity to make reasoned policy changes, not engage in backbiting.
Even domestic support for counterterrorism was weak before Sept. 11. When Clinton tried to kill Osama bin Laden with missile strikes in 1998, many labeled it an attempt to distract from Monica.
Benefiting politically at Clinton's expense may make Republicans feel better, but it won't bring the dead back, and it won't prevent new disasters. The country has enough current policy questions to debate - military tribunals, for one - without dragging in ex-presidents.
(Elizabeth Managan's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at emanagan@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PARTING SHOT: No man is an island
By Ava MacBlane | 3 days agoRetirement, as you can tell, has been treating me well. When people ask me now if I miss it, I laugh and tell them some things I definitely don't miss. But I don't always get to tell them about the things I really do miss.
PARTING SHOT: You never know unless you try
By Lexi Baker | 3 days agoMy time at the University was shaped by the people who showed me grace and kindness and by those who had confidence in me, even when I struggled to have it in myself.
PARTING SHOT: A love letter to Cav Daily and Connection
By Ava Proehl | 4 days agoMy time here taught me to look for the genuine, human connection in every moment.
