| |
|
|
Interview with Amb. Edward Walker |
|
|
|
|
Written by Said Samir
|
|
Sunday, 15 May 2005 |
 "Our
country has been struggling with the definition of terrorism for long
time and has not worked out a unified definition. But in general I can
say that terrorism is the illegitimate act of killing innocent people
for a political cause. If one goes to a restaurant and blows up a bunch
of innocent women and children for any political cause, that is
terrorism." Edward Walker
The role of the United Nations:
We did not take the issue of our military campaign against Al-Qaeda in
Afghanistan to the United Nations because it is self-defense. But if we
took the issue to the UN, I think the nine votes of the Security
Council are not a problem, but what could hinder us is a Chinese veto
against our campaign.
The UN is a very difficult organization to manipulate, I mean to run,
because it represents so many different states. It is hard to get a
consensus out of the UN because it has a great structural problem that
it has to overcome to be really efficient in terms of reacting quickly
to timely issues. The UN can play an enormously important role in
international conflicts. I believe we have to be doing more to make the
UN effective and use it for many issues that are troubling the world.
Now, we should not expect the UN to do things that it cannot do without
enough power and authority.
The United Nations vs. the United States:
There are different American opinions concerning the UN. There are
people who think that the UN is a threat to the sovereign state
concept, and a substantial number would prefer if we were not even a
member of it. But also there are others who think that we should turn
much of our sovereignty over to the UN. I personally believe that we
should be using the UN more effectively.
What changes Sept. 11 made:
I think Sept. 11 can have a profound effect on the way we do our
business. It has marked that the United States is vulnerable to
terrorism. We used to feel very immune from attacks of such a
destructive nature. I think that myth has been shattered now. Most
people realized that they have to give attention to what is going on in
places elsewhere.
Basically the U.S. used to have a very isolationist kind of view. We
have taken part in wars that are occurring elsewhere, but the U.S.
itself was never attacked. But now we cannot assume this anymore.
That will mean a greater attention to the Palestinian problem and more
efforts to resolve it, more concern to the Iraqi situation. It will
also mean a massive increase of the interest of normal American people
in what is going on outside the U.S.; that was not happening much. I
hope we will be able to educate our people about what is going on the
outside world, and then they will be less likely to accept policies
that tend to create or increase tension and confrontation between the
U.S. and other nations.
Negative aspects:
There are some influential American people who have an unrealistic view
of the power of the U.S., and they can harm America if they push it too
far in confrontations with the outside world. They don’t understand
what the limitations in our military power are. Our generals do know
the limitations, but unfortunately sometimes politicians cannot see
them.
Concerning the degradation of human rights after Sept. 11, our society
has a great capacity for self-correction, and if reactions go too far
in one direction, there are always people to push them back the other
way. There are organizations that have already been very active to
protect the rights of those who have been arrested without charges, for
example. There are some areas in which we need to tighten our control,
of course, and I believe the dynamics of our society will protect it.
The real terrifying problem is for countries with low records of human
rights and lacking powerful organizations that can protect the rights
of the civil society. We have to be very careful about what we are
doing and what our allies are doing. Violations of human rights are
already happening. The Israeli government assassinating people without
trials is wrong, and vice-versa is also wrong. For instance, I don’t
believe that we should be trying to assassinate Osama Bin Laden. If we
kill him, it is a murder, because he must be captured and sent to
trial.
Are the Americans arrogant?
I think the better definition is ignorance, not arrogance. I don’t
believe people tend to be arrogant, but because they are ignorant, they
misunderstand the situation and seem to be arrogant. I am not saying
that there are no arrogant people in the U.S., but I don’t believe they
are the majority.
If people have knowledge about the outside world, their attitude will
change significantly. I bet you that 99 percent of the American people
have no idea what a Palestinian goes through when crossing from point A
to point B that is three miles away or how he is disgraced in front of
his family by the Israeli soldiers. The kinds of harassment the
Palestinians face are not thought about by Americans, because they just
don’t even know about it.
Therefore America needs a long course of education about the different
situations outside the U.S., and the role of the media is very
important here. Not only the American media, but all different media
from all over the world. In the example I gave, it is certainly a
failure of Arab media, not only because of the lack of its presence but
also the lack of credibility. There should be more proper
communication, because otherwise when there is some sort of
communication it creates more problems and misunderstanding. Arab
people and media should give much more attention to the American public
if they are keen to seek its support.
The Egyptian warning to the U.S.:
Unfortunately, we did not take that warning with adequate seriousness.
We should have worked with Egypt and other countries to build
international cooperation against terrorism. It is a mistake that I
hope we will learn from. But I don’t think Egypt should make human
rights pay the price of terrorism. It is not acceptable that when a
police squad captures a suspect, he gets shot in the head rather than
going to a proper trial. There should be limits on the power of the
state. Every representative of the state should respect those limits. I
would simply say that harsh tactics do not work.
Former American Ambassador Edward Walker has
served extensively in the Middle East since his entry into the Foreign
Service in 1967. In the course of his career he served as the American
Ambassador to Egypt and later to Israel. He had tours of duty in Syria,
Lebanon, and Tunisia. He also served as deputy chief of mission at the
U.S. Embassy in Saudi Arabia. His Washington, DC, assignments included
two years as special assistant to the president’s special
representative for the Middle East peace negotiations from 1979 to
1981, and two years as executive assistant to the deputy secretary of
state from 1982 to 1984. In 1988, he was appointed deputy assistant
secretary in the Near East Bureau of the Department of State. Now Mr.
Walker is the president of the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC.
Ambassador Walker was born in Abington, Pennsylvania. He received an
A.B. degree from Hamilton College and an A.M. degree from Boston
University. In 1962, he enlisted in the United States Army, serving 3
years in Heidelberg, Germany. Later, in 1985, he attended the Royal
College of Defense Studies in London. Ambassador Walker is fluent in
French, Hebrew, and Arabic.
|
|
Last Updated ( Sunday, 24 July 2005 )
|
|
|
|
|
|
