New World, Old Agendas

Since September 11 we have told each other, over and over, that the world has changed, everything has changed.

We feel an intimation that the 21st century has ushered itself in with terrifying new vehemence. When it comes to describing the situation and deciding what to do, however, it is hard to shake old ways of thinking. The world may have changed, but our concepts haven’t. Old agendas are raising their heads. They are being reshaped to fit the situation, presented as new ways of thinking for the new world, taking advantage of today’s urgency, but they are not really new, just new ways of fighting old wars.

• Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson declare that moral failings, including new roles for women and acceptance for homosexuals, have brought on divine retribution. Clearly, not much innovative thinking is going on here, just an expression of old prejudice.

• Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft brings a list of dozens of ways law enforcement can be aided, sometimes to the detriment of civil liberties. It is not likely that this list was drawn up in response to the Sept. 11 attack; it sounds more like a law-enforcement wish-list that has been waiting for an opportunity. Sen. Leahy is right to be skeptical.

• Voices in the Defense Department call for an invasion of Iraq. But didn’t the terrorists originate in Afghanistan? Here is another old agenda harbored by those who wanted the Iraqi job "finished." There may not be much logic in invading Iraq right now—but there may be political opportunity.

• Critics of U.S. foreign policy in Palestine, and in other areas of the Muslim world, similarly find an opportunity to declare that they’ve been right all along. U. S. policy has been skewed, they say, through prejudice for Israel or deference to oil barons. But as Pulitzer-winner David Moats points out in the Rutland Herald, terror should be blamed on terrorists, not political grievances.

• Longtime critics of American policy and culture also find the opportunity to declare that we somehow got what we deserved, based on our supposed international and economic arrogance. Not much learning going on in this camp, either, just the old agenda restated for the new times.

So, if not old agendas, what do the new times demand? Domestically, careful vigilance and yes, new investigative techniques, but not the avoidance of scrutiny from a civil liberties point of view. Internationally, a massive new engagement in the world—better diplomacy, better intelligence, a reëvaluation of global policies of every kind, a new commitment to internationalism and humanitarian aid, a greater understanding of what America offers to the world.

No matter how we perform, we won’t lack for enemies; but we can learn how to understand who and where they are, and how to secure the loyalty of our friends.