8 PARTISAN REVIEW
maneuver, Israel gets fidgety," was a report on "The lively dialogue of
two New York Jews during a time of doubt and fear." And the editor–
ial expanded on "The New Russian-American friendship," even herald–
ing it as the real end of the Cold War.
On the following day,
Le Monde's
headline in extra-large letters
stated that "The war against al Qaeda has begun." Now, the focus
shifted to "fear, concern for civilians, and hope for Afghan refugees in
France," some of whom "a few days before had been fiercely against
intervention...and now are 'content,'" though reflecting that "this had
better be done with quickly, so that the Afghan people will not suffer
too much." Many of the subsequent pages were about the first strikes
by British and American planes on the Taliban-their effectiveness and
attitudes toward them from around the world. Also, the entire text of
bin Laden's televised statement that"America will never again know
security" was reproduced, as was the result of another survey that
found "no true opposition against the strikes."
On my last day in Paris,
Le Monde's
headline read: "Bin Laden:
Malaise in the Islamic world."
It
was followed by articles about embar–
rassed Muslim leaders, mounting anti-Americanism among their peo–
ples, anger after two waves of air strikes, the presence of French agents
on the ground, and the "mystery of the second case of anthrax in
Florida." An essay on the days of funerals in New York was printed as
well. At the bottom of that page was a feature, entitled "Viewpoint,"
about "A world coalition against poverty," by James D. Wolfensohn,
President of the World Bank. He began by stating: "The terrible events
of September
I
Ith led many among us to reflect on the means of build–
ing a better and safer world." Of course, we all argue for a better, more
equitable world, for better inter.national relations, and for the eradica–
tion of poverty. I doubt that anyone-on the left or on the right-still
questions these ends. Wolfensohn does allow that "these conditions are
not the immediate sources of terrorism." Who could possibly disagree?
And with his argument for peace? But is it possible to hold on to this
typically American idealism when dealing with brutal terrorists, how–
ever much we like to moralize?
On the same day, the
Herald Tribune
printed a letter to the editor by
a German reader, apparently in response to a Marxist-inspired comment
that blamed U.S. capitalism and business interests for the terrorist
attacks. She asked,
"If
poverty and lack of education are the root causes
of terrorism, how is it that no Mexican has ever perpetrated an act of
terrorism against the United States...nor [anyone] in the rest of South
America, where the population is equally poor and undereducated?"
