November 11, 2001	Sunday	Shaba’an 24, 1422

LONDON: Our concerns about terrorism are already in danger of making us lose sight of the importance of human rights; and American newspapers are beginning openly to raise the possibility of bringing back torture for interrogation. As UK home secretary David Blunkett plans tougher internal security, we must remember the historical precedents for moves against terror leading to the repression of liberties.

The outrage and fear which followed Sept 11 produced some remarkable friendships. Russia and China agreed with America on the need to work together to stamp out terrorism. Last month Henry Kissinger, addressing the rightwing Centre of Policy Studies here in his sternest tones, compared this new unity with the European ‘concert of powers’ that combined after the Napoleonic wars to ensure that no future revolution would threaten the peace.

It was a predictable comparison; for Kissinger had always admired that European diplomacy. Certainly when George Bush met with Vladimir Putin and Jiang Zemin in Beijing, smiling in their exotic Chinese costumes, they could have been the reincarnations of the old autocrats of Europe Metternich, Talleyrand and Castlereagh. But there was a grim underside to that coalition which Kissinger did not mention: ruthless repression of dissent and strengthening of police powers, which cost many innocent lives.

Britain would later acquire a much more liberal reputation and give sanctuary to many revolutionaries and patriots, to her great future benefit as the world’s financial centre. As foreign powers became more repressive, the British became prouder of their relative freedom and respect for human rights.

In the early 20th century Europe was rocked by terrorists and assassins, culminating in the killing of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo which precipitated the first world war. But the British police were calmer and more intelligent than the continentals in dealing with potential terrorists in exile. The British police surveillance appeared too relaxed in the light of investigations since Sept 11, which revealed that Britain had been harbouring some dangerous groups. French investigations have uncovered a terrorist network of well educated, second generation Arab immigrants who are harder to identify than the usual suspects. We will have to be more vigilant about supposed asylum seekers and refugees with revolutionary ambitions. But we must not forget the importance of tolerance, and we must make sure that in our war against brutal enemies, we are not ourselves brutalized.

The most temptation is in the ruthless interrogation of suspects or, to put it bluntly, torture. Already the FBI is complaining that it cannot extract information from terrorists who were arrested after Sept 11, and is asking to be allowed tougher methods for interrogation - like the Israelis.

The Israelis are encouraging western police to be less squeamish. Joseph Lelyveld, the former editor of the New York Times, recently interviewed a security official in Tel Aviv. If the west is serious about the war against terrorism, he said, it may have to use “other methods” for interrogating suspects. He meant torture. And Lelyveld described his own uneasy feeling about “the temptations our protectors could face if this ‘war’ runs on inconclusively - and how much then could really be put at risk”.

The west must certainly be more vigilant about potential terrorists; but we must be equally vigilant about defending the human rights on which civilization ultimately rests. And we should remember the warning implicit in Conrad’s secret agent, who blew up the Greenwich observatory to provoke the British government into more repressive measures. —Dawn/The Guardian News Service.