The tendency in various circles to try and understand “the hatreds” that have produced the terrorist attacks in the United States is as comprehensible as endeavoring to understand “the hatreds” that led the Nazis to act as they did in the 1930s.
Several commentators have attempted to look at the roots of the terrorist attacks in order to understand what it is that the United States itself could have done to ameliorate the hostility which leads to these type of acts.
Several reasons are advanced in this context. Some of these are false. Others are true in part but hardly relevant – from the United States’ support of Israel to its policies in Iraq.
Following the same logic one could convincingly argue that the Nazis were in part right in saying that the Versailles Treaty that ended World War I humiliated Germany. Whether the Germans deserved to be treated like that or not is another matter.
Indeed, whether these grievances had been addressed by Germany’s former foes during the 1920s is also another matter. Further, Adolph Hitler was right also in claiming that many Germans were unwillingly living under non-German regimes as a result of the Versailles Settlement.
But all these arguments were irrelevant. For the Nazis were not in the business of redressing a wrong. Their aim went much beyond that. The British and the French tried to go all the way towards meeting Hitler’s demands. But to no avail. The Nazis’ hatreds could not be ameliorated by diplomatic compromise, nor by a more sensitive display of understanding towards them.
The hatreds that instigated the terrorist attacks against the United States may have been based on a subjective, coherent reading of reality. Endeavoring to mitigate those hatreds, however, would not have prevented these attacks – unless, of course, the United States would have completely capitulated to the most extreme demands of its enemies. And even then, it would hardly have mattered.
Those responsible for the attacks in New York and Washington entertain absolute aims which they wish to achieve by absolute means.
Their hatred cannot be negotiated away. Doing one thing or avoiding another would have been of no help to the United States. It’s not a certain policy that these terrorists and their backers are opposed to. Rather, the basic tenets of United States foreign policy, alongside its socio-political culture, is what they are wholeheartedly against.
The terrorists behind the latest atrocities in the United States do not wish to see their demands accommodated within a legitimate framework of international relations. Their objective is the destruction of the international system as we know it today.
They are not looking for a concession. It’s not understanding that they ask for.
To be sure, these terrorists are not Nazis. Nazism is a singular phenomenon in human history. But the arguments adduced in trying to comprehend the so called “hatreds” that led to these attacks can certainly be compared to the myopia that prompted well-meaning people in the 1930s to confuse a so-called “legitimate claim” with what Nazi Germany was all about.
Dr. Yoav J. Tenembaum is a journalist and political analyst based in Israel. He has been published in a variety of newspapers and holds a doctorate degree in Modern History from Oxford University, where his doctoral thesis was on the international relations of the Middle East. Additionally he holds a masters degree in international relations from Cambridge University and obtained his first degree in history at Tel Aviv University.
