Our world will never be the same. Abstract ideas of thousands killed can distance us from reality, while vividly imagining just one person burning to death or dying slowly with a broken body buried under mountains of smouldering rubble can send chilling shivers down the spine and give one a tiny glimmer of the terror that was unleashed.
         As I write (September 14, 2001), the predominant cry heard in our media is for swift and determined retaliation. But who, exactly, is the enemy? I’m concerned that if we act only out of our fury and desire for retribution, we might kill many additional innocent people--perhaps many more than died in the initial attacks--without actually stopping the terrorists and ultimately only increasing the collective hatred that fuels their actions.
         I am concerned that the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon will be used as a justification for further gutting domestic spending programs that truly help people, and for pouring dramatically increased resources into the military, the CIA, the FBI, and the National Security Agency. But true security can never be enjoyed from behind the point of a gun. There are thousands of ways in which we could be attacked by terrorists--avenues of attack that could never all be anticipated and securely closed. If all possible modes of attack could somehow be plugged up, then we wouldn’t have much freedom left worth defending anyway.
         True security can only come through better understanding and better relations on the world stage. Even if we manage to identify and to kill or apprehend the surviving perpetrators, if we do not also act to improve our world relationships then other terrorists will arise to take their places, and they will find support and places to hide. But in an atmosphere of peace and increasing cooperation, any fanatics who continued to be bent on destruction and terror would find little support for continuing their vicious work. On September 11, I heard a Catholic priest on the radio who said that “wherever there is a lack of dialog, there is the potential for violence.”
         I also heard one Member of Congress who--amidst the clamor of calls for swift retribution--said that we need to “look in the mirror” and consider how our “one-sided policies” in the Middle East have helped create the very conditions that breed terrorists. Jesus himself said to first remove the log from thine own eye, in order to see clearly enough to remove the obstruction from thy brother’s eye. Unfortunately, in our major media I see virtually no such self-reflection in our initial response to the tragedy, but rather an emotionally driven call for blood. I’m concerned that if the true perpetrators cannot be quickly found, then someone else’s blood will be poured out to assuage our anger.
         Jesus also said to “love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.” That’s a tall order, which few in our Christian nation are able to fulfill. Loving our enemies does not mean agreeing with them or supporting them or condoning their atrocities, but it might mean trying to understand them. If--as is currently believed--the terrorists were indeed from an extreme faction of Islamic fundamentalists, then perhaps they fervently believed that the United States is an evil and corrupting influence and that they were doing God’s will and were morally obligated to carry out the attacks. I think that’s a distorted and malicious philosophy, but possibly that’s what they thought. Considering the world from their point of view, however briefly, might help guide our response with more intelligence and with more purpose toward the results we say we seek--namely peace and security.
         We are selective in our invocation of the sanctity of life. The agonizing deaths at the Pentagon and the World Trade Center are an enormous tragedy, but how many human souls now routinely suffer a painful slow death from poverty and starvation? Do our economic policies perpetuate that ongoing nightmare? Where is the outrage about that? How many innocent people suffer and die each day under brutal politico-military regimes that we support and keep in place because they “create a favorable climate for investment”? And are we in fact guilty, directly or indirectly, of killing thousands of innocent Muslims, as many Arab voices--both reasonable and extremist--would claim? Are we courageous enough to look honestly at our own culture and into our own souls for the roots of violence?
         Regarding the potential for a military “response” in the absence of real knowledge about who and where our enemy is, I am concerned that if people live far away, if they look and dress differently, and if they have exotic-sounding names, then their lives don’t count for much in the eyes of some Americans. I am also concerned about a racist backlash against Arab-Americans here in the United States. I believe that each soul has equal value in the eyes of God.
         In addition to murdering thousands of people, the September 11 attacks targeted key symbols of U.S. economic might and military power. I am concerned that a response to these attacks might serve as a pretext in a blatant grab for dramatically increased world domination and a further expansion of the global corporate empire.
         Our world will never be the same. Our geographic isolation and our wealth have enabled us to live our daily lives in a bubble, insulated from the rest of the world. That bubble has been burst. We might now dig in our heels and through sheer muscle and wealth and thick high walls seek to remain comfortably insulated and isolated, but we will not forever be able to maintain such illusions. Our security is inextricably tied up with the security of everyone else on the planet. We’re all together on a small living ball flying through the black void of space. The human world is loaded with nuclear and biological weapons, and with the knowledge of how to release them. If we don’t get our act together and figure out how to get along, our days as kings and queens of the earth may soon come to an end.
 
 
 

        Here is a follow-up article, written one week later: Planning for War.