News Release Archive - 2001

As Bombing Proceeds: Now What?

Share

JIM JENNINGS
President of Conscience International, a humanitarian aid organization, Jennings was in Afghani refugee camps in Pakistan this May. He has been involved in humanitarian work for the past 20 years around the world. Jennings said today: “The conditions of the Afghan refugee camps in Pakistan earlier this year were the worst I have ever seen — and I have seen a lot. The camps inside Afghanistan are in even worse shape; for example in Herat there are 600,000 people on the verge of starvation. Food drops from high altitudes alone absolutely cannot provide sufficient and effective relief that is urgently necessary to prevent mass starvation. If you provide one pound of food per day, the minimum for bare survival, it would take 500 planeloads a month to supply the one camp in Herat alone, and Afghanistan is the size of Texas. The administration has stated that two aircraft are being used for food relief so far — for all of Afghanistan. Three weeks ago the head of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) in Islamabad said that the food would run out — in three weeks.” [In response to the U.S./U.K. attacks, the World Food Program today suspended food convoys to Afghanistan.]

AS’AD ABUKHALIL
Author of the forthcoming book Bin Laden and Taliban: The New American War Against Terrorism and associate professor of political science at California State University at Stanislaus, AbuKhalil is a fellow at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of California at Berkeley. He said today: “Both Bin Laden and Bush say that you are either with them or against them; yet much of the Middle East stands in opposition to both. Al Jazeera is showing demonstrations in Oman against the U.S. strikes, which is very rare — protests are illegal there. Bin Ladin clearly is attempting to reach out to an audience well beyond a small community of followers.”
More Information

STEPHEN ZUNES
Associate professor of politics at the University of San Francisco, Zunes is senior policy analyst and Middle East editor at the Foreign Policy in Focus Project and author of the articles “U.S. Policy Toward Political Islam” and “International Terrorism.” He said today: “The use of heavy bombers against a country with few hard targets raises serious doubts about the Bush Administration’s claim that the attacks are not against the people of Afghanistan. The Taliban has allowed Bin Laden and his followers sanctuary, but there is little evidence that they have provided the kind of direct financial or military support that can be crippled through air strikes.”
More Information

JOHN QUIGLEY
Professor of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley said: “We have to ask, ‘Will this protect the U.S. from further attacks?’…. Military action should have been done through the Security Council at the United Nations. As it is — a U.S. and U.K. military action — it is illegal under international law.”

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Bombing Afghanistan

Share

JOHN QUIGLEY
Professor of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley said today: “We have to ask, ‘Will this protect the U.S. from further attacks?’…. Military action should have been done through the Security Council at the United Nations. As it is — a U.S. and U.K. military action — it is illegal under international law.”
More Information

RAHUL MAHAJAN
National board member of Peace Action and a specialist on South and Central Asian affairs, Mahajan said today: “The Taliban have recently shown willingness to negotiate — just releasing a British journalist and, within the last 24 hours, offering to try bin Laden before an Islamic court. Instead of making a reasonable counteroffer, the Bush and Blair governments started bombing.”
More Information
More Information

LAMIS ANDONI
An independent journalist and analyst, Andoni has covered the Mideast for over two decades. She said today: “The Arab people are obviously opposed to the Sept. 11 attacks, but the U.S. is again proving that the only way it deals with the region is coercion, extortion and violence. Once again the U.S. is perpetuating the conditions of injustice in the region, which will feed the extremists.”
More Information

ANITA WEISS
Weiss was in Pakistan on Sept. 11. She is co-editor of Power and Civil Society in Pakistan (Oxford University Press, 2001) and professor of international studies at the University of Oregon.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL
Associate professor of political science at California State University at Stanislaus and a fellow at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of California at Berkeley, AbuKhalil is author of the article “Islam and the Study of Central Asia.”

RANIA MASRI
A national board member of Peace Action, Masri is at a peace vigil Sunday in North Carolina.

KEVIN DANAHER
Co-founder of Global Exchange and author of Globalize This, Danaher wrote a recent Washington Post op-ed article titled “Justice, Not War.”
More Information

BEAU GROSSCUP
Author of the book The Newest Explosions of Terrorism, Grosscup is a professor of international relations at the California State University in Chico.

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

First Casualties of War

Share

ROGER NORMAND
Executive director of the Center for Economic and Social Rights, which has recently put out several fact sheets on Afghanistan, Normand said today: “Afghanistan was one of the world’s poorest and most devastated countries even before this crisis. The UN has abandoned its relief operations, and all neighboring countries have sealed their borders. More than 1 million Afghans have so far fled their homes in panic. The $320 million aid package that Bush promised Thursday will help the refugees. But there is also the danger that food will be used to attract millions of desperate people to the border to serve as a proxy army for unscrupulous opposition leaders — part of a policy that Rumsfeld calls ‘draining the swamp.’ Throughout history — and recently in Rwanda, Cambodia and Nicaragua — refugee populations have been manipulated to serve political and military ends. And what of the 20 million Afghans left behind? Will they be condemned to starvation as part of the U.S. policy to isolate and kill the estimated 50,000 Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters? Will there be any TV cameras to record their fate? With UN agency heads warning that the population faces a ‘catastrophe of stunning proportions,’ it is critical that the U.S. government live up to its rhetoric of targeting only the perpetrators of terrorism and not civilians in general. This is not only the right thing to do, it is our obligation under human rights and international law.”
More Information

JOEL CAMPAGNA
Following a meeting Wednesday in Washington, D.C., with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Qatari ruler Sheikh Hamad al-Thani acknowledged that U.S. officials had asked him to use his influence to rein in the influential Al-Jazeera’s news coverage. Al-Jazeera is currently one of the very few media outlets still reporting from Taliban-controlled areas of Afghanistan. Campagna is the program coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa at the Committee to Protect Journalists. He said today: “The U.S. administration is in effect calling on the Qatari government to interfere in what has been until now an independent news station. Over the years various Arab governments have tried to influence Al-Jazeera — the most widely-watched news channel in the Arab world — through diplomatic and other pressures and these have gained widespread attention. We are disheartened that U.S. officials are adopting similar tactics.”
More Information
More Information

GREG PALAST
Columnist for the British Observer newspaper, Palast said today: “Americans should take no comfort in Blair’s bomb-’em-now speech. It was given at the Labour Party Conference, his party’s convention, and he was speaking to a dark side of the British psyche: the need to justify empire. Afghanistan broke the back of the Soviet Empire — and the British Empire’s expansion before that. The British, unlike the Dutch and Spanish, have never accepted their loss of imperial authority….”
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Foreign Policy and Terrorism

Share

ZIEBA SHORISH-SHAMLEY
Founder and director of the Women’s Alliance for Peace and Human Rights in Afghanistan, Shorish-Shamley said today: “It is unfortunate that it took a tragedy of this magnitude for the world to take notice of the ongoing tragedy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Several years ago, I quit my position as a university professor to try to bring attention to the predicament of women in Afghanistan. Unfortunately, until now, we have been largely ignored. The world community must address the question of women’s rights seriously and not let various parties with their own agendas use it when it suits their geopolitical goals and drop it when it does not…. The U.S. had a policy for Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan when U.S. officials permitted a large percentage of the military assistance to be channeled to the most reactionary elements of the mujahideen…. This time around, the men and women of Afghanistan must be allowed to determine their own future.”
More Information

ANITA WEISS
Weiss was in Pakistan on September 11. She is co-editor of Power and Civil Society in Pakistan (Oxford University Press, 2001) and professor of international studies at the University of Oregon. She said today: “It should be noted that none of those named [as the terrorists] thus far are from Afghanistan, yet many Americans are supportive of the U.S. taking military action against Afghanistan. U.S. action, which would kill innocents, is going to lend credence to the sentiment held by some in Muslim countries that the U.S. is out to hurt Muslims, citing U.S. policies toward Chechnya, Israel and especially Kashmir. Dismissing the deaths of innocent Afghans as just ‘collateral damage’ would buttress the feelings held by many Pakistanis who see the U.S. as the biggest supporter of state-sponsored terrorism.”

LINDA PANETTA
Regional director of the School of the Americas Watch, Panetta was one of five acquitted yesterday of charges stemming from protests aimed at closing the School of the Americas during the Republican convention last year. Municipal Court Judge Felice Stack, just before throwing out the charges, said that what she learned about the SOA was “very enlightening and somewhat shocking.” Panetta said today: “If George W. Bush really wants to stop terrorism, he should close the School of the Americas. Millions of our tax dollars are supporting the SOA, which is training human rights abusers for Latin American militaries that are terrorizing the poor. I’ve just returned from Colombia, where I met impoverished farmers who told us about how their loved ones had been taken, tortured, even had their bodies dismembered because they spoke out against human rights abuses and environmental degradation from the U.S.-sponsored fumigation campaign.” SOA, based in Georgia, recently changed its name to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Opponents of Terrorism and War

Share

THOMAS GUMBLETON
A Catholic Bishop from Detroit, Gumbleton said today: “The Pope has called for ‘peaceful negotiations and dialogue’ in the current crisis…. Some have rushed to portray us who are opposed to the Bush administration’s plans as naïve and lacking realism. But if you look at the facts, it is clear that it is we who are the realists and those who would rush to war and escalate the cycle of violence are completely out of touch with reality and with lessons of history. Our administration is warning us that the next attack might be in the form of germ warfare. What kind of insanity is it to pursue a course of action that might escalate into biological warfare? The only way to peace is to talk, to negotiate and to build understanding. Yet, President Bush has flatly ruled out the possibility of negotiations and dialogue. What does he hope to gain by issuing ultimatum after ultimatum and refusing to negotiate?”

KEVIN DANAHER
This weekend, Danaher, co-founder of Global Exchange and author of Globalize This, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed article: “As citizens, we cannot sit back and assume that our current policies and our current leaders will rectify the problem. We are now in uncharted waters, and the ship of state is being steered by some of the same people who got us into this mess in the first place.” Danaher, who is in Washington, D.C. until Thursday, said today: “We should demand that everyone who is involved in aiding and abetting acts of terrorism should be put on trial before the public. We should demand the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Such a course of action would receive widespread global support and would make it impossible for any country to shelter perpetrators of mass violence.”
More Information
More Information

RAHUL MAHAJAN
National board member of Peace Action and a specialist on South and Central Asian affairs, Mahajan said today: “Declaring an unlimited war on an ill-defined enemy is going to produce neither justice nor peace. Rather than promising a war to end all wars, President Bush seems to be promising perpetual war. The refusal to negotiate or provide evidence violates international law, especially since the administration is claiming the right to engage in actions that will result in civilian deaths. Indeed, civilians are likely already dying in Afghanistan as a result of U.S. threats. This approach has already destabilized Pakistan, with a real danger of political collapse. Though the effects have been less severe in India, there is a resurgence of religious hatred within the country and saber-rattling across the border. Since both states have nuclear arms, the potential effects are incalculable, especially given the volatility in Kashmir. The only wise and legitimate course is for the United States to submit its evidence to a competent body like the International Court of Justice at The Hague.”
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Preventing Further Disaster

Share

HARVEY WASSERMAN
A specialist in nuclear issues, Wasserman warns of the possibility of a terrorist attack on a nuclear facility.
More Information

CHRIS TOENSING
Toensing is editor of Middle East Report.
More Information

PERVEZ HOODBHOY
Hoodbhoy is a professor at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, Pakistan.
More Information

REV. GRAYLAN S. HAGLER
Pastor at the Plymouth Congregational Church UCC, Hagler will be speaking at demonstrations this weekend in Washington, D.C.

LAMIS ANDONI
President Bush met today with King Abdullah of Jordan. An independent journalist and analyst, Andoni has been banned in Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and was blacklisted in Jordan during the 1980s. She said today: “King Abdullah is taking a big risk by joining Bush’s ‘war on terrorism.’ Over the last year, the Jordanian government has banned public protests in support of the year-long Palestinian uprising and has imposed press restrictions — the biggest setbacks for freedom in Jordan since it lifted martial law in 1991.”
More Information

KAMRAN ALI
Assistant professor of anthropology and Middle East studies at the University of Texas at Austin, Ali is author of the current article “Pakistan’s Dilemma.” He said: “By accepting the U.S. demands in exchange for fresh promises of international largess, the Pakistani military may be saving its own skin from the wrath of a U.S.-led coalition. But in the process, the regime may be plunging Pakistan into an uncharted future. Among most Pakistanis and Afghanis, the promise of U.S. assistance in exchange for strategic support falls on deaf ears. These people remember a series of broken Western promises, most recently when the U.S. and its allies did not provide much-needed development assistance in the early 1990s.”
More Information

HIRAM RUIZ
Senior policy analyst for the U.S. Committee for Refugees, Ruiz co-wrote the recent article “Afghanistan’s Refugee Crisis.” He said today: “As the threat of U.S. military action against Afghanistan becomes more acute, a new refugee exodus from Afghanistan is adding to an already acute humanitarian disaster. Even before the current crisis, Afghanistan was reported to have the world’s highest infant, child and maternal mortality rates and the lowest levels of per capita food availability….”
More Information
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

“Not in Our Names”

Share

Some family members of the victims killed in the September 11 attacks are speaking out in opposition to the administration’s apparent military plans. Judy Keane, who lost her husband Richard, said: “Bombing Afghanistan is just going to create more widows, more homeless, fatherless children.” [CNN, 9/25] Jill Gartenberg, whose husband Jim was killed, said that “we don’t win by killing other people.” [Fox, 9/24] Amber Amundson lost her husband, Craig, in the Pentagon. She wrote in the Chicago Tribune [9/25] “If you choose to respond to this incomprehensible brutality by perpetuating violence against other innocent human beings, you may not do so in the name of justice for my husband.” Gavin Cushny’s brother Rupert Eales-White stated, “If military action results in the deaths of innocent Afghans then 100 more Bin Ladens will rise from the grave.” [The Independent, 9/22] The parents of Deora Bodley have spoken out. Her mother Deborah Borza said: “Let this passing be the start of a new conversation … that provides a future for all mankind to live in harmony and respect.” [San Francisco Chronicle, 9/22]

The following family members are available for limited interviews:
More Information
More Information
More Information

PHYLLIS and ORLANDO RODRIGUEZ
They said: “Our son Greg is among the many missing from the World Trade Center attack. We cannot pay attention to the daily flow of news about this disaster. But we read enough of the news to sense that our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands dying, suffering, and nursing further grievances against us. It is not the way to go. It will not avenge our son’s death. Not in our son’s name. Our son died a victim of an inhuman ideology. Our actions should not serve the same purpose. Let us grieve. Let us reflect and pray. Let us think about a rational response that brings real peace and justice to our world.”
More Information
More Information

MATTHEW LASAR
In his speech at the National Cathedral memorial service, President Bush praised an unnamed man “who could have saved himself” but instead “stayed until the end and at the side of his quadriplegic friend.” Lasar said today: “That man was my uncle, Abe Zelmanowitz. When the first airplane struck, Abe could not bear to abandon his wheelchair-using colleague, and called his family to say so. Despite their pleading, he insisted that he would stay. They have been missing ever since. My mother, who lives 20 minutes from the WTC, is in a state of shock. I mourn the death of my uncle, and I want his murderers brought to justice. But I am not making this statement to demand bloody vengeance. A senator from my state, Dianne Feinstein, said: ‘U.S. must spare no effort to uncover, ferret out and destroy those: who commit acts of terrorism; who provide training camps; who shelter; who finance; and who support terrorists. Whether that entity is a state or an organization, those who harbor them, arm them, train them and permit them must, in my view, be destroyed.’ How does one destroy states? Through the covert subversion of their societies? Through carpet bombing? Afghanistan has more than a million homeless refugees. A U.S. military intervention could result in the starvation of tens of thousands of people. What I see coming are actions and policies that will cost many more innocent lives, and breed more terrorism, not less. I do not feel that my uncle’s compassionate, heroic sacrifice will be honored by what the U.S. appears poised to do.”
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Legal Issues: * Where’s the Evidence? * Civil Liberties

Share

On Monday, President Bush said: “We’re acting based on clear evidence, much of which is classified, so it will not be disclosed.” Today, Attorney General Ashcroft testified in favor of granting the government new powers. The following legal analysts are available for interviews:

JOHN QUIGLEY
Professor of international law at Ohio State University, Quigley said today: “It is general international practice that you provide some proof before you demand the surrender of someone wanted on criminal charges. So it’s not unreasonable of the Taliban to want to see the evidence. Even if the Taliban are aware of camps, that does not indicate the criminal responsibility of Bin Laden for any particular act.”

MICHAEL RATNER
Vice president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and an expert on war powers, Ratner said today: “The United States has yet to present convincing proof that Bin Laden was involved in the attacks on September 11. Without such proof it is unlikely Afghanistan will ever agree to his extradition and it will be more difficult to get other nations to cooperate in a coalition. Certainly before force is used that evidence should be revealed publicly and the facts subject to scrutiny by the UN Security Council. Otherwise, the U.S. may launch military attacks with no basis, much like it apparently did in bombing a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan.” [Ratner, an attorney, is also knowledgeable on civil liberties issues.] More Information

FRANCIS BOYLE
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law.
More Information
More Information

ANN FAGAN GINGER
Professor of human rights and peace law at San Francisco State University and executive director of the Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute, Ginger said today: “A major question is the responsibility of the U.S. government to obey the law. It cannot proceed the way it is going because this violates the U.S. Constitution and the UN Charter…. We must also note that a service person who discovers that he or she is a conscientious objector to war in any form based on religious training and belief — or a strong parallel belief — has a right to information on what he or she can do to exercise this belief.”

DAVID COLE
Professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, Cole testified yesterday before Congress on civil liberties issues.

ABDEEN JABARA
Jabara is a civil rights attorney in New York City.

KIT GAGE
Gage is national coordinator for the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom.

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

The Economy: Now What?

Share

ROBERT POLLIN
Professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Pollin wrote “Economic Slide Makes Spending Respectable” in today’s Los Angeles Times. He said today: “U.S. economic policymakers have failed for almost a year to respond adequately to the looming global recession. As the stock market plunge makes clear, the calamitous events of September 11 certainly strengthen the recessionary forces, and therefore the likelihood that unemployment, poverty and social despair will spread. But the solution to the recession post September 11 is now also obvious: large-scale injections of government spending, even if the federal surplus evaporates. The perennial issue with government spending is whether the funds will be used effectively. One standard appropriate to the September 11 tragedy would seem clear: to use government funds to protect innocent people everywhere from further terrorist attacks as well as self-defeating cycles of violent reprisals.”

RICHARD B. Du BOFF
Professor emeritus of economics at Bryn Mawr College and author of Accumulation and Power: An Economic History of the United States, Du Boff wrote in Friday’s Philadelphia Inquirer: “George W. Bush stated last fall, and repeats as president, that when you look at taxes or the government surplus, ‘It’s not the government’s money. It’s your money.’ And yet the Bush administration plans a multibillion-dollar bailout for our airlines, already in financial trouble even before September 11. So it’s not your money — it’s the airlines’ money? America’s airlines do need help — but if the national government can step in and help a private industry and its shareholders at a moment’s notice, why is it wrong, or wasteful or a threat to ‘freedom,’ for government to provide increasing and long-term support for our economic and social infrastructure?” Du Boff said today: “U.S. military spending was already running at an annual rate of about $350 billion — which is 70 percent more than the next five combined (Russia, Japan, the UK, France, China). More military spending is not going to make us safer…. The grotesquely expensive ‘missile defense system’ is worthless for our defense; even if successful, it would not protect us against any real threats that terrorists pose. Right now, there is essentially only one party in Congress; the Democrats have abandoned their role in debating, or even analyzing, the administration’s plans to escalate military spending.”
More Information

ARTHUR MacEWAN
Professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts at Boston and the author of Neo-Liberalism or Democracy?, MacEwan said today: “The administration seems to be using this tragedy to continue its policy of transferring wealth to corporations and ignoring the plight of working people. For example, the Senate just restored $1.3 billion back to the so-called ‘missile defense system’ — even though the events of September 11 have shown it to be irrelevant to our security. Spending this much money for this project is a huge boondoggle. The administration has moved very rapidly for a large bailout of the airlines, yet we see no similar concern for the tens of thousands of workers who were laid off by the airline industry. In the past, war rhetoric has been used to suppress workers’ demands for a fair share of the economy and unfortunately we may see such a turn of events again. When corporations were making super-profits, there were no initiatives or calls to share the wealth with the working people, but as soon as things take a downturn we hear calls for sharing the burden. Also, let us not forget that a recession was already developing before September 11 so we may be bailing out corporations whose troubles did not originate with the tragedy of September 11.”
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Critical Voices

Share

PHYLLIS BENNIS
Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and co-editor of Beyond the Storm: A Gulf Crisis Reader, Bennis said today: “In Bush’s speech we got no doctrine, no strategy, no evidence. What we did get was a lot of Wild West rhetoric — dead or alive material. In Afghanistan, 25 percent of the people were already dependent solely on foreign-aid food, and all international workers have left because of the U.S. threats. Today, the process of starvation begins. Bush said he would use everything at the U.S.’s disposal, but apparently that doesn’t include Washington’s formidable arsenal of diplomacy — instead he outright rejected negotiations or discussions. While condemning ‘self-appointed rulers,’ Bush rallied to the defense of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt — all examples of absolute monarchies or self-perpetuating regimes.”
More Information

G. SIMON HARAK
A Jesuit priest with the West Side Jesuit Community in New York City, Harak said today: “If we in our turn plan on militarism, vengeance, and retaliation, if we steel our spirits against the suffering which such pursuits always cause to the innocent, in short, if we turn to the tools of death, then whatever hollow triumph we may trumpet, it will have been Death alone which has won.” Harak has visited the Mideast many times, he added: “When I’ve spoken to families in Iraq who have suffered from the economic sanctions and bombings; or with Palestinian fathers and sons tortured by an Israeli government which we back — they asked me the same question people have been asking: ‘Why does America hate us?'”

ELEIZA BRAUN
A junior at George Washington University, Braun said today: “Thousands of students across the U.S. held vigils, teach-ins and rallies on Thursday as part of a national day of peace and solidarity. We are shocked and saddened by the events of last week — and are dedicated to working towards policies that do not visit such tragedy upon others throughout the world via military action.”
More Information

MICHAEL RATNER
Vice president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and an expert on war powers, Ratner said today: “The United States should deal with the events of September 11 as criminal acts, investigate and prosecute those guilty and do so with the backing of the United Nations Security Council.”
More Information

FRANCIS BOYLE
Professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, Boyle said today: “The United States is under an absolute obligation to resolve this dispute with Afghanistan in a peaceful manner as required by UN Charter Article 2(3) and Article 33…. Accordingly, this dispute must be resolved by invoking the 1971 Montreal Sabotage Convention and the 1997 UN International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings. Furthermore, the United States should offer to submit this entire dispute with Afghanistan to the International Court of Justice in The Hague (the so-called World Court).”

BEAU GROSSCUP
Author of The Newest Explosions of Terrorism and professor of international relations at California State University in Chico, Grosscup said today: “The Israeli model is not only ineffective in dealing with terrorism, as the track record of anti-Israeli violence shows, but is also bankrupt both politically and morally…”

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167