Jewish World Review Jan. 29, 2003 / 26 Shevat, 5763
How not to win the war
In the briefcase I was carrying onto the plane was the Jan. 11 issue
of The Economist, with its cover illustration of a bound and hooded
prisoner and the stark question: "Is torture ever justified?" Inside
was an article exploring the fraught and uneasy suggestion that in
fighting terrorism, torture may sometimes be necessary to avert horrific
bloodshed. Can a democracy ever violate the taboo against using pain as
a tool of interrogation without violating its fundamental values? I was
interested in The Economist's take on the issue.
But first I had to run the airport security gantlet. I joined the
long line of passengers slowly inching forward and for around the 30th
time since 9/11, underwent the institutionalized delay and indignity
that is now routine at American airports.
Because a couple of overlooked coins in my pocket set off the metal
detector, I was led off to the side for a body scan. Shoes off,
please. Raise your leg, please. Now the other one. Stand up. Hold
out your arms. Turn this way, please. All right, you can go.
Wouldn't it have been more efficient and logical to just send me
(minus the coins) through the metal detector a second time? Yes, but
efficiency and logic are not the point of this grind. If it were,
toddlers and grandmothers wouldn't be subjected to pat-downs, G.I. Joe
action figures wouldn't be seized from their young owners, and
government agents wouldn't be treating fingernail scissors as
contraband. The point of all this wasted time, money, and effort is not
to ensure a reasonable level of airport security. It is to prevent
Mohammed Atta from getting on a plane with box cutters and doing it
Or if not Atta himself, then someone else -- maybe a 5-year-old girl
or an elderly man. And if not with box cutters, then with something
else -- maybe nail scissors or G.I. Joe's toy gun. America was attacked
by people who took things on planes, so now everyone who takes things on
a plane must be restricted, hassled, and occasionally embarrassed.
It is a classic case of fighting the last war. And how many
terrorists has it caught? To the best of my knowledge, none. The only
case of a passenger-terrorist since 9/11 is the convicted shoe bomber,
Richard Reid. He slipped through security because nobody was on the
lookout for explosive footwear. (It wasn't what the 9/11 hijackers had
used.) And if Reid had instead tried to blow himself up with explosive
eyeglasses? In that case, passengers who wear glasses would now have to
put them through the X-ray machine -- and screeners still wouldn't be
looking for explosive footwear.
I wrote last year that if on 9/11 Al Qaeda had destroyed four
crowded movie theaters, today we would have to reserve movie tickets in
advance and get to the cineplex (with photo ID) two hours early -- while
at the airport there would be no armed guards and a box cutter in your
carry-on wouldn't raise any eyebrows. We would still be as vulnerable
to a hijacking-massacre as we actually were on 9/11 -- but almost no one
would be thinking about that because the "last war" would have taken a
Of course security is important. But we cannot win the war against
international terror and its sponsors with elaborate schemes to keep
terrorists from repeating their last attack. Information is vital, too.
Yet even if we develop the best intelligence on the terrorists' future
plans, it too will be insufficient to win the war.
Which returns me to torture, and The Economist's thoughtful essay.
The civilized world condemns torture as irredeemably barbaric; one
of the strongest counts in the indictment against Saddam Hussein, for
example, is the use of torture in his prisons. But what if, in an
extreme case, torture is the only way to extract information that would
save thousands of lives? Abhorrent as it is, if torture can prevent
another 9/11 -- stop a "ticking bomb" before it goes off -- should it
sometimes be allowed? We face enemies prepared not only to murder
thousands of victims but to die while doing so. Don't we have to keep
torture available as a last and desperate option?
No. The way to win this war is not to adopt our enemies' evil
methods. Resort to torture could conceivably stave off a catastrophe.
But at what price to our self-respect? "The morale of the West in what
may be a long war against terrorism would be gravely set back," The
Economist rightly argues. "To stay strong, the liberal democracies need
to be certain that they are better than their enemies." We are in a war
of the decent against the indecent. We dare not cross the line that
separates the two.
Exasperating airport security and the torture of suspected
terrorists have nothing in common -- except this: At the end of the day,
neither will keep us safe from terrorism. The war will be won only when
our enemies' cause lies in ruins. And their cause will lie in ruins
when the terror masters are brought down.
Next: Changing regimes
Like this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Jeff Jacoby is a Boston Globe columnist. Comment by clicking here.
01/24/03: The UN's moral irrelevance
01/22/03: Musings, random and otherwise
01/17/03: The Sharpton hypocrisy
01/13/03: The fig leaf of 'diversity'
01/10/03: Israeli restraint makes terrorism more likely
01/02/03: The double standard on political hate speech
12/30/02: Good for the spirit, good for the body
12/23/02: The college president who owes a greater duty to a fugitive serial killer than the public or to the law
12/20/02: The death penalty by the numbers
12/16/02: Yes, Virginia, there is (still) a liberal media bias
12/03/02: On the brink of regime change --- in Iran
11/27/02: Light's victory over darkness
11/25/02: A 'Republican' lesson from a Democratic convention
11/22/02: The slippery senator
11/18/02: The campus 'diversity' fraud
11/14/02: MURDER AT A KIBBUTZ
11/01/02: Saddam's shop of horrors
10/24/02: Musings, random and otherwise
10/17/02: Jimma's ignoble prize
10/14/02: New Jersey's bigot laureate
10/11/02: Today it is libs who are most likely to demand the silencing of speech they disapprove of
10/04/02: Learning English from Day 1
09/30/02: The world will follow us to war
09/27/02: The face of antisemitism
09/20/02: Starving time in Zimbabwe
09/14/02: Against moral confusion / 9-12-2002
09/03/02: With 'eternal friends' like these
08/30/02: Enriching survivors was a costly mistake
08/26/02: John Kerry's absent passion
08/23/02: Bonnie, get your gun
08/19/02: A screenwriter's remorse
07/29/02: The real abortion extremists
07/26/02: Another round of Kemp-Roth
07/19/02: Jews among Arabs, Arabs among Jews
07/15/02: Musings, random and otherwise
07/12/02: The new civil rights champions
07/03/02: Riding the rails
07/01/02: The prerequisite to peace
06/24/02: Frisking AlGore
06/17/02: Offense, not defense, is the key to homeland security
06/14/02: Looking at the horror
06/07/02: The cost of a death-penalty moratorium
06/03/02: Executing 'children,' and other death-penalty myths
05/29/02: A real threat?
05/24/02: The message in Arafat's headdress
05/20/02: (Mis)playing the popularity card
05/10/02: Outspoken, Muslim -- and moderate
05/10/02: The heroes in Castro's jails
05/06/02: The disappearing history term paper
05/03/02: Musings, random and otherwise
04/29/02: The canary in Europe's mine
04/15/02: Powell's crazy mission
04/12/02: The slavery reparations hustle
04/08/02: Peace at any price = war
03/26/02: Decency matters most, Caleb
03/22/02: The U.S. embargo and Cuba's future
03/19/02: The keepers of Cuba's conscience
03/15/02: A walk in Havana
02/26/02: Buchanan's lament
02/12/02: What 'peace' means to Arafat
02/08/02: STEVEN EMERSON AND THE NPR BLACKLIST
02/05/02: Antismoking: Who pays?
02/01/02: Turn the Saudis
01/25/02: Making MLK cry
01/21/02: Ted to tax cut: Drop dead
01/18/02: Musings random and otherwise
01/14/02: An ultimatum to Saudi Arabia
01/11/02: Friendship, Saudi-style
01/07/02: Shakedown at Harvard
01/04/02: More guns, more safety
01/02/02: Smears and slanders from the Left
12/28/01: Congress gives to others -- and itself
12/24/01: The littlest peacemakers
12/20/01: How to condemn terror
12/18/01: Greenland once was
12/14/01: Parents who never said ''no''
12/11/01: Wit and (economic) wisdom
12/07/01: THE PALESTINIANS' MYTH
12/04/01: The war against Israel goes on
11/30/01: Tribunals, motorcycles -- and freedom
11/19/01: Friendship and the House of Saud
11/12/01: The Justice Department's unjust monopoly
11/09/01: Muslim, but not extremist
11/02/01: Too good for Oprah
10/29/01: Journalism and the 'neutrality fetish'
10/26/01: Derail these subsidies
10/22/01: Good and evil in the New York Times
10/15/01: Rush Limbaugh's ear
10/08/01: With allies like these
10/01/01: An unpardonable act
09/28/01: THE CENSORS ARE COMING! THE CENSORS ARE COMING!
09/25/01: Speaking out against terror
09/21/01: What the terrorists saw
09/17/01: Calling evil by its name
09/13/01: Our enemies mean what they say
09/04/01: The real bigots
08/31/01: Shrugging at genocide
08/28/01: Big Brother's privacy -- or ours?
08/24/01: The mufti's message of hate
08/21/01: Remembering the 'Wall of Shame'
08/16/01: If I were the editor ...
08/14/01: If I were the Transportation Czar ...
08/10/01: Import quotas 'steel' from us all
08/07/01: Is gay "marriage" a threat?
08/03/01: A colorblind nominee
07/27/01: Eminent-domain tortures
07/24/01: On protecting the flag ... and drivers ... and immigrants
07/20/01: Dying for better mileage
07/17/01: Why Americans would rather drive
07/13/01: Do these cabbies look like bigots?
07/10/01: 'Defeated in the bedroom'
07/06/01: Who's white? Who's Hispanic? Who cares?
07/02/01: Big(oted) man on campus
06/29/01: Still appeasing China's dictators
06/21/01: Cuban liberty: A test for Bush
06/19/01: The feeble 'arguments' against capital punishment
06/12/01: What energy crisis?
06/08/01: A jewel in the crown of self-government
05/31/01: The settlement myth
05/25/01: An award JFK would have liked
05/22/01: No Internet taxes? No problem
05/18/01: Heather has five mommies (and a daddy)
05/15/01: An execution, not a lynching
05/11/01: Losing the common tongue
05/08/01: Olympics 2008: Say no to Beijing
05/04/01: Do welfare mothers a kindness: Make them work
05/01/01: Another man's child
04/24/01: Sharon should have said no
04/02/01: The Inhumane Society
03/30/01: To have a friend, Caleb, be a friend
03/27/01: Is Chief Wahoo racist?
03/22/01: Ending the Clinton appeasement
03/20/01: They're coming for you
03/16/01: Kennedy v. Kennedy
03/13/01: We should see McVeigh die
03/09/01: The Taliban's wrecking job
03/07/01: The No. 1 reason to cut taxes
03/02/01: A Harvard candidate's silence on free speech
02/27/01: A lesson from Birmingham jail
02/20/01: How Jimmy Carter got his good name back
02/15/01: Cashing in on the presidency
02/09/01: The debt for slavery -- and for freedom
02/06/01: The reparations calculation
02/01/01: The freedom not to say 'amen'
01/29/01: Chavez's 'hypocrisy': Take a closer look
01/26/01: Good-bye, good riddance
01/23/01: When everything changed (mostly for the better)
01/19/01: The real zealots
01/16/01: Pardon Clinton?
01/11/01: The fanaticism of Linda Chavez
01/09/01: When Jerusalem was divided
01/05/01 THEY NEVER FORGOT THEE, O JERUSALEM
12/29/00 Liberal hate speech, 2000
12/15/00Does the Constitution expect poor children be condemned to lousy government schools?
12/08/00 Powell is wrong man to run State Department
12/05/00 The 'MCAS' teens give each other
12/01/00 Turning his back on the Vietnamese -- again
11/23/00 Why were the Pilgrims thankful?
11/21/00 The fruit of this 'peace process' is war
11/13/00 Unleashing the lawyers
11/17/00 Gore's mark on history
40 reasons to say NO to Gore
© 2002, Boston Globe