• The US’ only answer to terrorism is violence against violence, but that’s like trying to eradicate diseases by killing patients; a more constructive approach is needed, says Jan Oberg, director of the Transnational Foundation for Peace & Future Research.
Text and video interview
A report released under the Freedom of Information Act shows the US has been simulating an invasion of West Africa in response to an imaginary terror attack on American soil.
The latest Pentagon project was designed to train those who will manage future American wars. The terror attack scenario was played last year as part of the simulated exercise by students from the US military’s war colleges.
RT: Do you have any issues with the US simulating a New York terror attack to invade Africa?
Jan Oberg: No. First of all, this is a kind of a war game. … People are thinking about what the future will be like. What is really interesting is that it ends with getting stuck in Africa too, like everywhere else with all these failed wars by the US.
Secondly, it is very interesting that the African experience has to do with the fact that Libya was smashed up, and that is why we have a generation of new terrorism and the training of new terrorists in that part of the world.
Third, it is very indicative and revealing that after 16 years of fighting terrorism – ‘the global war on terror’ – there is not one person in the US, who is obviously beginning to think: “Have we got things wrong the last 16 years?” Because statistics tell you the global terror problem cost 80 times more human lives today than it did in the year 2000. The main creator, today of terrorism, is ‘the war on terror’ – it is not terrorists, but the ‘war on terror’ – that provokes that.