Internal attacks are the hardest battles

James Bourke's letter to the editor Oct. 18 is interesting and a useful rebuttal to critics of U.S. military action abroad. But Mr. Bourke fails to note that the United States is already mobilizing and leading worldwide law enforcement agencies to apprehend the Sept. 11 terrorists (recommendation No. 1); leading the U.N. in actions to seize terrorist assets (No. 2); bringing economic and political power to bear against nations that harbor terrorists (No. 3); leading the international community in efforts to safeguard and destroy WMD (No. 7); and resuming actions to bring an end to the Israeli-Palestine conflict (No. 9). \nGranted, the U.S. is fulfilling some of these missions imperfectly (our resistance to the inspection protocols to the Biological Weapons Convention springs to mind). But some of Mr. Bourke's recommendations (dramatically increasing U.S. humanitarian aid to millions of refugees in hot spots, No. 6) are impractical (perhaps he has forgotten Somalia). \nIronically, his call on the United States to develop alternative fuels (which I support) and reduce our dependence on foreign oil (which even President George W. Bush supports) would have a destabilizing effect on the Middle East. As oil exports tapered off, governments would become less able to control their peoples, not more. It is entirely possible that the Middle East would become another central Africa. Finally, the peace activists' position, while admirably comprehensive, fails to meet the test any anti-terror policy must pass: It fails to deter future terrorism. \nAs has been stressed repeatedly on these pages, al Qaeda is not interested in a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, nor do they want the U.S. to stop harboring Orlando Bosch. They want to see the United States brought low. As long as the United States is powerful, and as long as we remain involved in world affairs, we will be in the crosshairs of some group we have wronged intentionally or accidentally. \nNo matter what policy we adopt, we will breed resentment against us. A "just resolution" to the Palestinian problem might well cause Israeli nationalists to attack the United States. The peace activists do not urge a withdrawal from the world. This is because they know, as all rational people do, that isolation is irrational and in the long run more dangerous than engagement. By a process of elimination, therefore, there really is only one choice: an assertive self-defense conducted in the shadows, where even our victories will be hidden. \nIt is unfortunate that the peace activists do not instead focus their activities on raising awareness of the infringements on civil liberties that new legislation will almost certainly entail; it is unfortunate that they do not highlight the lunacy of constructing a $60-billion (minimum price tag) national missile defense; and it is unfortunate that they do not know how to package their arguments in such a way that they cannot be dismissed out of hand as "crazy hippies." I hope that their advocacy will become more sophisticated in the months ahead. As Henry Kissinger wrote, the system can defend itself against all attacks -- except those from within.