Semantics of US Embassy attack in Athens
Dr. George Voskopoulos
January 12, 2007
The attack on American Embassy in Athens reminded everyone that terrorism is still a major threat to our societies. It was ten years ago when the American Embassy in Athens was targeted with a rocket. This time the attack took place early in the morning, a couple of minutes before 6 am, and according to officials the rocket was manufactured either in an ex-Soviet country, Albania or Bulgaria and was probably sold in the black market. The attack itself sets a number of issues on the practical and semantics level.
First, the timing of the terrorist attack on the part of it seems to be a leftist group may have some significance. It was at a time Greece felt secure after the successful organization of the Athens 2004 Olympic Games.
Second, the aims of the perpetrators may be approached in different ways. For a start the attack could mean to send a message to Greek and American officials that terrorists are still operationally able to strike. Alternatively it could be explained as an act against American policy in Iraq and the wider Middle East region.
Public opinion in the country has been hostile to the war against Iraq and as a result the terrorist attack might be a response to the forthcoming American offensive in Iraq. Opposition to major American policy choices is the rule in the country, a fact that may explain anti-American feelings.
Yet, this sort of anti-Americanism should be analyzed on different levels through different causational patterns. There are those who reject the catalytic role of the US in international politics on ideological grounds. Marxist groups motivated by a very specific ideology define the US as an aggressive actor. This drives them to engage in terrorist activities against American targets. These small units have been responsible for terrorist attacks against American targets in Greece for several decades. What they have aimed all these years is to gain the support of the public opinion. They are unable to articulate constructive criticism, as they do not dispose of the required political culture.
Greek public opinion may have rejected particular American policies, however, the Greek public has categorically and repeatedly condemned terrorist attacks. Such irrational behavior on the part of small groups of extremists is unacceptable by definition. Yet, it is a side-effect of the operational and constitutional mode of liberal democracies and the construction of open societies. Terrorists take advantage of the privileges provided by the structure of democracy and operationally externalize their inability to articulate politically.
The terrorist attack on the US Embassy in Athens should not jeopardize Greek-American relations, yet, it is up to both sides to overlay its side-effects. On the one hand the Greek government is expected to intensify its struggle against terrorist groups, as it has actually done in the last years. On the other hand, the American administration should not use similar acts of terror to put pressure on the Greek side at a time the country is trying to resolve disputes with Turkey and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia over the latter’s constitutional name. The American response should aim at discrediting terrorists not “justify” their aphoristic view of the US.
First, the timing of the terrorist attack on the part of it seems to be a leftist group may have some significance. It was at a time Greece felt secure after the successful organization of the Athens 2004 Olympic Games.
Second, the aims of the perpetrators may be approached in different ways. For a start the attack could mean to send a message to Greek and American officials that terrorists are still operationally able to strike. Alternatively it could be explained as an act against American policy in Iraq and the wider Middle East region.
Public opinion in the country has been hostile to the war against Iraq and as a result the terrorist attack might be a response to the forthcoming American offensive in Iraq. Opposition to major American policy choices is the rule in the country, a fact that may explain anti-American feelings.
Yet, this sort of anti-Americanism should be analyzed on different levels through different causational patterns. There are those who reject the catalytic role of the US in international politics on ideological grounds. Marxist groups motivated by a very specific ideology define the US as an aggressive actor. This drives them to engage in terrorist activities against American targets. These small units have been responsible for terrorist attacks against American targets in Greece for several decades. What they have aimed all these years is to gain the support of the public opinion. They are unable to articulate constructive criticism, as they do not dispose of the required political culture.
Greek public opinion may have rejected particular American policies, however, the Greek public has categorically and repeatedly condemned terrorist attacks. Such irrational behavior on the part of small groups of extremists is unacceptable by definition. Yet, it is a side-effect of the operational and constitutional mode of liberal democracies and the construction of open societies. Terrorists take advantage of the privileges provided by the structure of democracy and operationally externalize their inability to articulate politically.
The terrorist attack on the US Embassy in Athens should not jeopardize Greek-American relations, yet, it is up to both sides to overlay its side-effects. On the one hand the Greek government is expected to intensify its struggle against terrorist groups, as it has actually done in the last years. On the other hand, the American administration should not use similar acts of terror to put pressure on the Greek side at a time the country is trying to resolve disputes with Turkey and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia over the latter’s constitutional name. The American response should aim at discrediting terrorists not “justify” their aphoristic view of the US.
Print
Email
