|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rice Thresher
Phone:
|
by Liora Danan thresher editorial staff
Baker Institute Director Edward Djerejian was one of the first to share his assessment of the events at a Baker press conference 11:30 a.m. Tuesday. "This is an infamous day in the history of the United States and the world," Djerejian said in his speech. "... These attacks in the heartland of our country, in the financial capital of the world and in our nation's capital show that all that we have been considering [in regards to terrorism] has been brought to our doorstep, quite tragically." In addition to emphasizing the magnitude of the tragedy, Djerejian outlined the current task facing the United States government. "The challenge to our country and to the world is to deter, prevent, find the perpetrators of events actually carried out and bring them to justice," Djerejian said. He said those responsible could be state-sponsored, non-state groups, or individuals and could have religious, ideological or political motives. He also said the magnitude and coordination of the attack were indications its source. "I think the coordinated attacks demonstrate clearly that there is a very serious organization behind this," Djerejian said. "This is not a random act of terrorism on the part of the individual." Political Science Department Chair Cliff Morgan said it is necessary to be careful in determining who was responsible so evidence is not overlooked. "It's just really easy when you think you know who did it to start finding evidence that points to them," Morgan said. He said caution must also be exercised when considering the American response. If the United States identifies perpetrators being harbored by other countries, Morgan said the U.S. will face the difficult decision between attempting to pursue judicial process and resorting to a military option. "We're going to have to be careful that we don't do something that is emotionally satisfying but actually doesn't help the cause that we want to further, which is to reduce the chances of future international terrorism," Morgan said. He said that while many Americans may support a strong U.S. military retaliation, such an action would not necessarily make future terrorism less likely. "It would probably make it, in some sense, even more likely to happen again because you're going to have even more people who are dissatisfied with the way America's dealing with it," Morgan said. Morgan said he thinks U.S. intelligence agencies do a good job of intercepting most terrorist attacks before they are carried out, and that additional security will only come at a cost. "We can have additional airport security if we're all willing to spend an additional three hours at the airport doing security checks," Morgan said. "Even if we did all that, a determined, well-backed terrorist is probably going to be able to find ways of getting around all that." Even a small reduction in the chances of a future attack would require enormous restrictions on Americans' current freedoms, Morgan said. "I don't think we're ever going to make ourselves so totally invulnerable to this that we can say this is never going to happen again," he said. "The possibility of this happening at any point in time is just positively minuscule." Still, Tuedsay's proof of the threat of terrorism will have consequences, economics professor Eli Berman said. "The U.S. now faces a new kind of economic instability associated with terrorism," Berman said. "We will have to wait and see what it costs to win that conflict." The attacks themselves should not have a major impact on the American economy, according to Berman. "The terrorists managed to destroy what is perhaps the most important building in the American economy," Berman said. "Yet most of the firms in that building have offices in other locations and [they] back up records electronically so that the firms will continue to function." Berman said the human toll is more important than any economic damage, emphasizing that economic paralysis in New York City and much of the U.S. lasted for only a day. He also said that while there will be some expense involved in increasing airport security, air travel is a relatively small part of the economy. Economics professor Dagobert Brito also said he foresees a relatively quick return to a normal economy. "I think the U.S. is a very strong economy and something like that's not going to hurt it," Brito said. "I think in three or four months, psychological issues will work their way out."
- back - |
|||
|
Search the Thresher pages:
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of: The Rice Thresher, Rice University MS-524, PO Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251-1892, USA. The Thresher Online Project -- ethresh@listserv.rice.edu |
