Once more, thanks to President Vaclav Havel for his foresight in organizing these distinguished seminars.  The Forum 2000 seminars were held long before the awful events of September 11 changed our world – and with it most conventional thinking:  not only about national security, but also about international affairs and domestic policy issues.

As a result of these terrible events, we in the USA learned some harsh lessons:  The very policies and technologies that we and other OECD countries used to create today's economic globalization – also created global interdependence.  We also globalized terrorism, crime, drugs and arms trafficking, money laundering, tax evasion and increased the risks of disease epidemics. Global mass media, films, TV and the Internet spread images of unattainable consumer lifestyles, advertising of luxuries, and much culturally degrading programming. 

While nothing excuses mass murder and criminal terrorists, we need to understand the frustration of the world's billions of poor and dispossessed as they try to better their lives.  Many retreat into religious fundamentalism and futile attempts to restrain their children from the forbidden fruits and temptations of Western culture. 

These attempts at preserving their own cultures from the Western influences go beyond Islam.  I have encountered similar attitudes in Europe, Latin America, Asia and among indigenous peoples worldwide.  They too see the invasion of Hollywood, global TV fare and violent videogames as degenerate and pathological – destroying their values and undermining their cultures, education and parental responsibilities.  Indeed, many US parents feel the same way and their protest movements against US media forced the V-chip and ratings systems on reluctant media moguls. 

Deeper lessons involve what many other countries see as US arrogance and the unilateralism that until recently characterized the current Bush Administration.  The lone US abrogation of the Kyoto Protocols on global warming angered many countries – as did our refusals to ratify treaties on land mines, nuclear proliferation, chemical and biological weapons, the international criminal court, small arms trafficking and even earlier conventions on core labor standards, the rights of women and children.  In many cases the US has thus infuriated its friends and allies as well.  A Newsweek/Princeton Survey of September 20^th found 64% of Americans believe that a major reason for the terrorist attacks were “Resentment of US military and economic power in general”; 68% cited “Opposition to US ties to Israel and US policies toward the Palestinian situation.  A combined 67% cited “Resentment of the impact of US culture such as movies and popular entertainment in Muslim countries” and 73% cited “Economic hardships in Muslim countries created by Western capitalism” as both major and minor reasons for the attacks.

Mercifully, Mr. Bush has since September 11 reversed this disastrous course – most crucially by getting Congress to pay up $584 of the over $1 billion of back dues owed to the UN.  As I predicted in my September 20 editorial, this was Mr. Bush's Win-Win Option and it did clear the way for the September 29 UN Security Council's resolution and the General Assembly's October 1 week-long Special Session on Global Terrorism.

Lessons still to be learned include coming to terms with our wasteful fossil fueled US economy – which perpetuates our 60% dependence on oil – mostly from OPEC and the Middle East and other Arab countries.  This bankrupt energy policy got us into the Gulf War and continues our support for dictatorial regimes, particularly the Saudi royal family.  These and other roots of US military presence in the Middle East and what is seen as our bias toward Israel have left the US even more exposed to terrorists and Islamic fundamentalism.  Opposition to the Gulf War and US presence in the Gulf Region was cited by 75% in the same Newsweek/Princeton poll as major (53%) and minor (32%) reasons for the attacks.

So how best can the US defend itself against these sophisticated new terrorists – who are conducting a clever campaign to try and hasten US disengagement from the Middle East and support for a Palestinian state?  These policies are contrary to mainstream US goals and those of many of our allies. Therefore, the world is in danger, not only from global terrorism, but a continuing conflict of major proportions – a possible World War Three.

I am not a military strategist, nor a conventional national security specialist.  I am a systems thinker synthesizing beyond most academic disciplines.  Never were “outside-the-box” thinking and strategies needed more.  We have already seen Mr. Bush change course.  He is wisely moving from unilateralism to the realization that the global interdependence the US did so much to create requires cooperation with many countries in the broadest coalition. Until October 7, Bush reined in the hawks in his Administration and the Pentagon and rightly cautioned the US public on the need for patience and a variety of approaches to global terrorism.  Since then, US strikes on Afghanistan have ignited opposition that may destabilize Pakistan and other countries.  The loss of 4 UN workers is tragic, as are all losses of innocent civilians.

Since today's terrorist threats involve suicide attackers and are low and high-tech and global – only systemic approaches are likely to be effective in the short and the long run.  These include: