Sir, - It is natural that US reactions to such an appalling calamity should range through bewilderment, grief, and anger, to a desire for retribution. What is surprising is that this terrible act of terrorism should so quickly be classified as an "act of war".
Part of the purpose of this classification is to prepare the global psyche for a warlike response. Mr Bush says: "We are a peaceful people, slow to anger, but fierce when roused." And: "We didn't start this war, but we will finish it". With such phrases he momentarily appeases the American people's visceral desire for retribution, but in so doing he paints himself into the corner of war.
He says: "This is a new war, the first of the 21st century." Mr Colin Powell speaks of "a drawn-out conflict". Over the coming weeks American anger is unlikely to subside in the face of several thousand American funerals. The clamour for war will increase. In the second year of the third millennium the world finds itself yet again baying for war. What holds us from each other at the moment is that we do not yet know who to fight, or where to fight him, though we cannot wait to discover.
The commemorative service at the cathedral in Washington was poignant. Sprinkled among the congregation were the more experienced military men. The younger soldiers, still boys, stood proudly and defiantly with their flags, as if to proclaim: "We are brave, we will fight". The dean called upon God to counsel American leaders so that in reacting they might not become worse than those who had acted against them. Mr Bush called upon God also. Once again we had a fusion of the concepts of God and war. It is an age-old union.
Mr Bush is forging a broad coalition. NATO has invoked for the first time a rule which permits each of its members to respond as if they too were attacked. Therefore, by implication, an act of war against the US becomes an act of war against each member of NATO.
Near to the roof of the world, Afghanistan perceives that it is the most likely target. It is already the subject of a number of UN resolutions condemning its support for terrorism, and in particular Osama bin Laden, international terrorism's supposed spiritual leader. Now it too seeks to broaden its coalition by calling on all Muslim states to engage in a holy war. While it is unlikely that any other Muslim state would intervene directly to support the extreme Taliban regime, we must be aware that, however frivolously the concepts of infidel and Muslim are invoked, we cannot know how these twins will proceed if they are unleashed. They form a dangerous sub-plot to the present contemplation of war.
While accepting as a given that modern-day terrorism must be pursued and thwarted, if we were to speak the language of democracy we would say: "A terrible crime has been committed. We must apprehend the perpetrators, one by one, and bring them to justice." We would not speak so readily of war, which permits us to involve indiscriminately both the innocent and the guilty.
By coincidence, Ireland comes on stage in this international crisis with its chairing of the UN Security Council from October 1st. We are uniquely positioned as a neutral state, and as a friend of America, to employ the voices of compassionate reason, and compassionate restraint. We must let those voices be heard now. - Yours, etc.,
Liam Bruadar, Rockchapel, Co Cork.