Let's learn the lessons of Spain's tragedy

The horrific series of subway bombings that took some 200 lives in Madrid also delivered what the perpetrators will surely see as a political knockout punch to that country’s erstwhile ruling party. It’s not that simple, but if Osama bin Laden’s followers --- who almost certainly are the ones responsible for the attacks --- come away from the attack thinking that this sort of thing can work on another election eve elsewhere, then the prospects for further such appalling bloodshed taking place this year are unfortunately excellent.

But let us first understand the religious, political and military implications of what happened.

Do we score it the “Jihadis’” one --- or seven or 200 --- to the “Crusaders’” zip? That’s how Osama’s boys are playing it in their propaganda.

However, the Prophet Muhammad was also a military commander, and he never allowed his troops to attack non-combatant civilians. It is popular in some Western circles to reject Islam in its totality without even understanding what is being rejected, and to maladroitly wage the contest for the hearts and souls of the world’s billion Muslims by offering them shallow secular American-style consumerism in exchange for their revered traditions. As the result of such banal and bigoted thinking, we once again have an atrocity against innocents in the name of Allah, and once again George W. Bush, his followers and the shallow US-based corporate news media are once again missing the chance to point out that the attack was a violation not only of Spanish and international law, but also Islam’s Sharia law.

Intellectual laziness on one side is reflected by comparable sloppy thinking on the other. Does a spectacular attack just before an election embarrass the party in power and thus help its opposition? That notion is simplistic to the point of being foolish, but al-Qaeda can now point to Spain to “prove” that its attacks “worked.”

Actually, such attacks usually help the party in power at election times, because the norm is that nations sensibly rally behind their leaders to confront the peril. What happened in Spain was an exception, with its own particular explanation.

Let us first note that Aznar’s conservative Partido Popular was in trouble over the unpopular Spanish participation in the Iraq war from the start. That policy literally blew up in the faces of the Spanish people, not because hardcore "Saddam loyalists" took revenge, but because the Bush-Blair-Aznar Iraq War blunder has greatly strengthened the loose worldwide network associated with al-Qaeda.

Spain's voters might have forgiven Aznar for Iraq, had he not tried to conceal the nature of what had happened in Madrid by blaming Basque separatists. A tough stand against ETA being more popular than the Iraq War, Aznar tried to confuse the issue.

However, the bombings were al-Qaeda’s style rather than ETA’s, and both the ruling party and the opposition had specific information that the perpetrators were bin Laden's followers. A combination of foreign cable channels, cell phones and the Internet trumped the conservatives' attempt to impose a televison news blackout, and a Spanish electorate that was already displeased about their country having been led to war in Iraq with lies about weapons of mass destruction wasn’t willing to accept another big lie on the eve of a national election. Aznar’s party lost not because al-Qaeda won a military victory over Spain, but because of Aznar’s palpable dishonesty under fire.

Just about the first thing that the new socialist government of Spain announced was its intention to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq. Nobody is lining up to take Spain’s place in the front lines.

Thus count the Spanish election as both a military and a political setback for George W. Bush. The Iraq War has allowed Osama bin Laden to recruit new forces, open a new battle front and regain the initiative that he lost after the attacks of September 11, 2001. The conservatives’ defeat in Spain underlines the risks for governments that back Bush’s ever-lengthening string of military adventures around the world.

What happened in Madrid should also be a warning for Panama.

Yes, it’s obvious after these bombings that Americans of all parties, ideologies, religions, races and walks of life --- both in the United States and abroad --- must remain on guard against the probability of a new al-Qaeda attack. But the threat facing Panama, even though it may not be as obvious, is no less deadly.

In 1994 this country had a commuter plane bombing that bore the hallmarks of al-Qaeda methods. It's very likely that we have enemies among us and the Panama Canal may be a tempting target for them.

Panama's neutrality offers us scant protection. Just ask the people of Dar-es-Salaam, Nairobi or Bali. We are dealing with desperate enemies with few scruples and little to lose, yet who have the resources and organization to cause great destruction and suffering anywhere in the world. Merely because we don’t have troops in Iraq in no way makes this country immune to attack.

The question facing Panamanian voters in May and American voters in November is not whether we are for or against Osama bin Laden. Nor is it whether, as George W. Bush likes to put it, we are for or against the United States. It is, rather, how our countries can best counter the al-Qaeda threat.

editorial

Spain: hard lessons to learn

Bear in mind...