The Protracted Conflict: Assessing the Terrorism Tradeoff

In a page of “Notes on Terrorism” (NR, Oct. 13) I noted: “After each spectacular terrorist operation we are told that terrorism is ‘senseless’ and against the interests of ‘all mankind.’ Since ‘everyone is against it,’ everyone must get together to put an end to it. But in the event, everyone never succeeds in getting together.” The UN General Assembly reconfirmed this law a couple of weeks ago when the Communist-Arab-African nations mustered a large majority to shelve a U.S.- sponsored resolution to draw up an international antiterrorist treaty. Par for the course.

The day after this UN vote the editorial columns of the U.S. press exploded with indignation over the UN’s “irresponsible” behavior in the face of etc. De indignationibus non est disputandum, as the old saying goes. If I went in for indignation myself, it would more likely have been aroused by a little item that found an obscure spot in a few papers that same day. A group of dissident Cubans had hijacked a boat and sailed it to what they believed was going to be freedom on U.S. territory. On landing in Florida they were arrested by federal agents and locked up. Crew and boat were promptly sent back to Castro, and (the news item suggested) this was also to be the disposition of the defectors if all goes well with the Cuban-American negotiations currently under way for an antihijacking, antiterrorist pact. Castro had made clear that a ship antihijacking accord is his quid for the U.S.-desired quo of an aircraft antihijacking accord. And (the news item concluded) Washington did not want, by granting asylum to this group that had arrived at such a delicate moment, to “jeopardize” the negotiations.

JB

About the Author

James Burnham

Featured Tags

In a page of “Notes on Terrorism” (NR, Oct. 13) I noted: “After each spectacular terrorist operation we are told that terrorism is ‘senseless’ and against the interests of ‘all mankind.’ Since ‘everyone is against it,’ everyone must get together to put an end to it. But in the event, everyone never succeeds in getting together.” The UN General Assembly reconfirmed this law a couple of weeks ago when the Communist-Arab-African nations mustered a large majority to shelve a U.S.- sponsored resolution to draw up an international antiterrorist treaty. Par for the course.

The day after this UN vote the editorial columns of the U.S. press exploded with indignation over the UN’s “irresponsible” behavior in the face of etc. De indignationibus non est disputandum, as the old saying goes. If I went in for indignation myself, it would more likely have been aroused by a little item that found an obscure spot in a few papers that same day. A group of dissident Cubans had hijacked a boat and sailed it to what they believed was going to be freedom on U.S. territory. On landing in Florida they were arrested by federal agents and locked up. Crew and boat were promptly sent back to Castro, and (the news item suggested) this was also to be the disposition of the defectors if all goes well with the Cuban-American negotiations currently under way for an antihijacking, antiterrorist pact. Castro had made clear that a ship antihijacking accord is his quid for the U.S.-desired quo of an aircraft antihijacking accord. And (the news item concluded) Washington did not want, by granting asylum to this group that had arrived at such a delicate moment, to “jeopardize” the negotiations.