 |
|
|
|
||
|
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
Version |
|
November
21, 2002, 9:00 a.m. |
|
he
unveiling of the
new design for 7 World Trade Center, a 750-foot glass-and-steel office
tower that bears a mild resemblance to the 110-story buildings that collapsed
on 9/11 and took its 47-story predecessor down eight hours later, is an
important milestone in the ongoing national recovery from the opening
act in the war on terror. The event brought to mind an idea I wrote about
last December. I appended one
of my articles — on the need to deal swiftly with Iraq no less
(time flies) — with the following paragraph:
I have always admired the fact the Victoria Cross was originally manufactured from metal taken from Russian artillery pieces captured during the Crimean War, from which the decoration originated. In that spirit I would like to propose something similar - that all campaign medallions awarded for service during the War on Terror be cast from metal from the World Trade Center towers. Currently the salvaged beams are being cut up and sold for scrap in Asia. One long beam would supply enough metal for thousands of medals. And I think it would make the decorations that much more meaningful to the men and women who earn them, as well as let the survivors know that a small piece of the buildings in which their loved ones perished has been put to a noble use.
I got a lot of e-mail on that suggestion, far more than on the article itself. The idea struck a chord. Most readers appreciated its simplicity, and the special sort of symbolism, the physical linkage of event to event, of place to place. It is comparable to the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt loosing its first sorties against Afghanistan while flying the flag the three firemen raised in the rubble of the World Trade Towers, or Marines seizing the Kandahar airport and unfurling another Ground Zero flag, covered with the names of the fallen and messages from survivors. ("They took 23 good cops. Pay back time.") These moments merge events with power and elegance. Crafting medals from the debris of the buildings destroyed by our enemies — and let's also include the Pentagon — would ennoble the awards in a manner that reaches beyond the valorous service they recognize. A medal struck from tower beams would be more than an acknowledgment; it would be a tangible connection, an unduplicatable fusion of time, space, and memory.
To date, no campaign medal has been authorized for Operation Enduring Freedom (which includes actions in Afghanistan, the Philippines, and elsewhere in the global war on terror). As far as I have been able to find out, the matter is not even being discussed. The National Defense Service Medal has been authorized for those on active duty, and the Southwest Asia Service Medal could well be given the Afghan War vets. Nevertheless, it would be incredible if Enduring Freedom did not receive distinct recognition. Last summer Canada devised a medal for its contribution to the war on terror, Operation Apollo. The design came under fire for not differentiating sufficiently between those who served in combat and those who were in support positions. Nevertheless, the Canadians honored their troops. Around the same time, Australia announced that there would be no separate medal but only a badge for Afghanistan service — yet, this may change after the Bali bombing.
Debates over medals can be contentious. Every possible issue is raised, from the device on the medal to the color of the ribbon, its placement in order of precedence, and of course, whether it is even warranted. One would not like to see ribbons awarded for everything our troops do — it is not our tradition to load up the fruit salad until our uniforms look like a Soviet marshal's. In fact, before 1900 there were hardly any commendations available — they were seen as European inventions unsuited to our democratic republic. But since then our thinking has clearly evolved on the issue, and it is hard to see why our current war would not qualify for special recognition. After all, even Kosovo did.
Senator Daniel Inouye (D., Ha.) raised the issue at a March 6, 2002 hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee. He stated, "I have yet to see a ribbon. In all wars, if you went to Korea, there was a Korean ribbon, a Vietnam ribbon. I have not seen one for this conflict, nor have I heard of any unit receiving a unit citation. I see enough on CNN and other news media suggesting the heroics of our men, but somehow they are not recognized. …I think it is very important that due recognition be made, not just by word but by awards and declarations. And, similarly, I think these awards and decorations would have a salutary impact, not on the GIs but among the people — their parents, their brothers and sisters. They want to know that their loved ones are involved and doing their gung-ho work." The senator, a World War II Medal of Honor winner, knows something of the importance of recognizing service to the country. Medals for heroism have, of course, been awarded in this war, but the prospective campaign ribbon to which Senator Inouye referred has yet to be approved.
As the last steel beams are broken down and shipped to Asia for purposes mundane, would it be too much to ask that one or two be set aside for this purpose before the opportunity eludes us? And who can take the action necessary to encourage the Defense Department to authorize creation of the medals? Are any members of Congress at all concerned, apart from Senator Inouye? Could the commander in chief motivate this effort by Executive Order, and bring a sense of reverence to what could otherwise be a stuffy bureaucratic process? Surely too much is at stake to let this matter escape us. What veteran of this conflict, years hence, would not look with special thoughtfulness at such an award, knowing its hallowed provenance? And who would not bring it forth to show to generations now unborn, to let them feel its weight in their young hands, to tell the story of the fateful day, to renew the pride in service well performed, and to remember?
— James S. Robbins is a national-security analyst & NRO contributor.