A terrorist state

August 26, 1998
Issue 

A terrorist state

At 7.15pm on August 20, without warning, a series of massive blasts destroyed the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory in the heavily populated northern suburbs of Khartoum, capital of Sudan. The factory's janitor and his family are missing, feared dead. Several others were injured. The factory, surrounded by the mud huts of its workers, produced most of Sudan's medicines; its main products were antibiotics and drugs to treat malaria and TB, as well as veterinary vaccines.

That same night, huge blasts ripped through at least six sites near the Afghan cities of Khost and Jalalabad, where at least 600 people were known by the attackers to be present. At least 27 died.

The Macquarie Dictionary defines "terrorism" as "the use of terrorising methods, especially violence, to achieve political ends". That accurately describes US President Bill Clinton's cold-blooded decision to launch at least 75 cruise missiles into Sudan and Afghanistan. The deaths of Afghan and Sudanese civilians that may have resulted are no more than "collateral damage" in the callous calculations the world's warlord.

Clinton said the missile strikes were directed at the exiled Saudi religious fanatic and tycoon Osama bin Laden, now resident in Afghanistan. Clinton claimed that the US had "convincing evidence" that bin Laden and his followers played a "key role" in the terrible bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7, which killed 257 people and injured thousands. The factory in Sudan, Clinton asserted, was "chemical weapons-related".

However, the veracity of this "convincing evidence" is called into question by the fact that — just 24 hours before the order to blast Sudan and Afghanistan — US officials refused to place this "evidence" before the ruling Taliban faction in Kabul.

"If you call someone a terrorist, you must have proof. If there is proof, we will certainly sit down and talk to the US", offered Taliban spokesperson Wakil Ahmed Mutawakil, quoted in the August 20 New York Times. US officials told the NYT that, while bin Laden was their "leading suspect", "no charges have yet been brought" against him.

"United States officials reacted cautiously to Mutawakil's statement, saying they were not yet ready to open talks with the Taliban concerning bin Laden", reported the NYT. Yet, the US was ready to rain missiles on the people of Sudan and Afghanistan without even the pretence of respect for diplomatic norms or national sovereignty. Not satisfied with being the world's cop, Washington also wants to be its judge, jury and executioner.

Lack of credible evidence has not prevented US terrorist attacks in the past. On April 15, 1986, US warplanes bombed the Libyan cities of Tripoli and Benghazi, killing 100 people, including Libyan President Qadhafi's adopted daughter. The raid was supposedly in retaliation for the bombing of a German disco, in which a US GI was killed. The US offered no proof, and the theory that Libya was behind the bombing has since been discredited.

Without evidence, the US insists that Iraq retains the capacity to build nuclear and biological weapons. Washington threatens to repeat the 1991 horror blitzkrieg against Iraq in which 200,000 civilians and conscripts were slaughtered. The US refuses to allow crippling sanctions to be lifted. This indiscriminate terrorist weapon has caused the preventable deaths of at least 1.5 million Iraqis.

If bin Laden and his Taliban protectors are responsible for the African anti-US attacks, it is surely a case of the chickens coming home to roost.

Between 1979 and 1992, the US, in league with Pakistan's secret service, funded the anti-Soviet, fundamentalist Afghan contras to the tune of $3 billion. Washington turned a blind eye to the contras' massive opium trade. Heroin left Afghanistan in the same CIA trucks and aircraft that delivered sophisticated weaponry. Osama bin Laden was a US ally.

When the ultra-reactionary Taliban — backed and funded by US allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia — emerged in 1994, Washington gave it tacit approval because of its anti-Iranian stance. Bin Laden is closely allied to the Taliban, and since 1996 has been sheltered by it.

The latest act of US terrorism is a warning that US policy in the region remains that of ensuring no country can determine its course without US permission. It is also a warning that no challenge to US dominance will be tolerated, nor will threats to Washington's closest allies, most importantly Israel, Egypt and the dictatorial sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf. The oil of central Asian republics, near Afghanistan, is a new factor in the equation.

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.