.jpg)
= 
Posted on 03/16/2004 8:42:00 AM PST by quidnunc
The headlines on Monday’s front page told the story: "Spanish voters oust ruling party, cite war," "6 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq over weekend," "Two suicide bombings kill 11, hurt 18 Israelis"… . Around the world, terrorists of whatever stripe had reason to celebrate.
The headline on Page 1 of the New York Times proclaimed: "Blow to Bush: Ally Rejected/Voters Clearly Reiterate Opposition to Iraq War." The story underneath concluded: "The Bush administration must now fight the perception, accurate or not, that acts of terror against America’s allies can sway nations into rethinking the wisdom of standing too closely with Mr. Bush." And too close to America.
The volatility of mass opinion has seldom been illustrated so quickly. One day the streets of Spain are filled with millions of angry, grief-stricken protesters chanting "Cowards!" and "Assassins!" The next, millions of voters turn out to give the Socialist Party, which has opposed Spanish support for the war in Iraq, a dramatic victory.
Why the change? Speculation abounds, for election results can be just as hard to interpret as predict. A young Spanish voter quoted in the Times story explained why he switched from the right-center Popular Party to the winning Socialists: "Maybe the Socialists will get our troops out of Iraq, and al-Qaida will forget about Spain, so we will be less frightened. A bit of us died…." The heart, we suspect.
So long as the terrorist attacks that shocked Spain were thought to be the work of homegrown Basque extremists — the notorious ETA — terrorism was to be given no quarter. Spaniards understood there can be no compromise with those killers. But when the clues pointed to al-Qaida, Spain’s reaction was different. It was the government, not the terrorists, that was blamed for the horror.
Why? Maybe because Spaniards thought their government had misled them by first blaming the attacks on the ETA. Or maybe the growing evidence that al-Qaida was involved galvanized popular opposition to the war, which had been only latent before." Our prime minister has gotten us into a terrible, completely wrong war, "said one young teacher. "And because of it, I spent yesterday and today going to funerals."
Whatever the reasons for the election results, the comments from Spaniards on the street will have a familiar flavor to students of European history. "How horrible, how fantastic, how incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks because of a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing!" – British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain on the eve of the Munich conference in September of 1938.
Yesterday’s pictures of the winners celebrating their electoral victory in Madrid brought back another image that has been almost forgotten. It is hard now to recapture the euphoria, the nationwide celebration, the outburst of joy that swept England when Mr. Chamberlain returned form Munich with Peace in Our Time. There was to be no war. The crisis had been averted. Appeasement had worked!
But in the midst of all the cheers, another English politician understood all too well what had really happened: "I do not grudge our loyal, brave people … the natural, spontaneous outburst of joy and relief when they learned that the hard ordeal would no longer be required of them at the moment; but they should know the truth. They should know that … we have sustained a defeat without war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road… . Do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour we rise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time." – Winston Churchill in the House of Commons, October 5, 1938.
Not that Churchill was listened to, not just then. Once again he would be dismissed as a right-wing crank who saw dangers where none existed. It would take another year till it became evident just how clearly he had foreseen what was to come.
The millions who turned out to vote the anti-war Socialists into power in Spain may think they, too, have avoided further sacrifice — only to invite it later. For such victories will only hearten the terrorists. Whether they’re the imported or homegrown kind — and who says they have to be either one or the other? Both could have made common cause to dishearten Spain. And now that the terrorists seem to have succeeded in Spain, who’ll be next to falter — Italy, Poland, Britain, Australia? Whose spirit can be sapped by a few strategically placed explosives? It is not just skyscrapers or train stations that terrorists seek to destroy, but a nation’s will.
We tend to forget now, viewing long-ago events through the narrow prism that is history as it played out, what a good man Neville Chamberlain was. He did not seek war. On the contrary, he thought he could avoid it by a judicious mix of compromise and understanding. He thought he could do business with Herr Hitler, and meet reasonable demands halfway. Besides, he could do it at some other contry’s expense. Who cared about Czechoslovakia? Mr. Chamberlain was far from alone. American isolationists, too, thought we could avoid being dragged into another far-away war. Their political descendants say much the same thing now. Who cares about the Middle East and the dangers Saddam Hussein would have posed further down the road?
Today, too, we are urged to understand the terrorists and their grievances, and told we can avoid further violence by a judicious mix of compromise and understanding. We forget that terrorism is caused not by reasonable men but by terrorists. And that they thrive on appeasement.
The temptation now will be to find some assuring interpretation of the Spanish elections and pretend that nothing really has changed. It would be better to face the bitter truth: Terrorism has won a major victory in Spain — not just by blowing people apart but at the polls. And it will not do to dismiss it. Instead our leaders, in office and out, Democrat and Republican, should speak forthrightly. And make it clear what awaits a Europe — and an America — that thinks it can appease evil.
Said Zapatero: "Sure the ETA are terrorists, but they are OUR terrorists. Now Al Qaeda is something else!"
To hear the ever-so-patrician Mara Liasson of NPR tell it on Brit's show yesterday, it's too early to say that the Spanish electorate caved to terrorists. The Popular Party candidate apparently made some last- minute impolitic remarks that might've caused him to lose the election.
In other words, the situation in Spain is much more ... nuanced. <|:/~
=
Cowardice asks the question, Is it safe? Expediency asks the question, Is it politic? Vanity asks the question, Is it popular? But conscience asks the question, Is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he msut take it because his conscience tells him it is right... --- Martin Luther 1483
And Spain reacted just like Fredo did after he saw his father get shot. And we know what Al Pacino ended up doing to Fredo.
Fat chance. You realize, of course, that Spain is part of the Umma...
"...so we will be less frightened..."
You realize, of course, that you now have reason to be more frightened.
In the future, as you cross the Pyrenees and glace back with a tear, you will hear a woman's voice whisper, "Do not weep like a woman..." Don't stop until you reach Poitiers, and there only to catch your breath.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.