Legitimate defence” “” “

Since 11 September the international community has been overshadowed by the terrorist threat. In France an anti-terrorist plan has swung into action throughout the country, which has only added to public fear and alarm. According to a survey published by the Catholic daily La Croix, however, two thirds of the French approve of the US strikes on Afghanistan. The notion of “legitimate defence” is also supported by the Pax Christi and Justice and Peace associations in France. Ever since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the “Vigie Pirate” plan (an anti-terrorist plan drawn up on the occasion of the Gulf War in 1991) has become operational and has been beefed up throughout the country. In Paris there isn’t a station of the metro in which, throughout the day, warnings to the public are broadcast through the loudspeakers. Both in the capital and in the rest of the country all public places are subjected to extreme vigilance by the security forces. Since 16 November 2001 France, indeed, has been at war against the Teleban at the side of America and Great Britain. She has sent a special contingent of professionals composed of some sixty troops, of the 21st marine infantry Regiment. Their humanitarian mission is to build a bridge to transport urgently needed food and medical supplies to the stricken populations. Other French forces are rumoured to be about to join them, some 140 in all. According to the survey conducted by La Croix, 67% of the French approve the military action against Afghanistan. Public opinion seems in fact, as the French daily points out, influenced “by the return to normal life in Kabul” after the fall of the Taleban. According to the president of Pax Christi-France, Msgr. Henri Derouet, the attacks carried out by the USA fall into the category of legitimate defence: “The doctrine of the Catholic Church on just defence is clear. The recourse to direct violence against terrorism may be considered legitimate if, after a rational analysis, war is shown to be indispensable for stopping the terrorist actions: on condition that disproportionate damage to those who do not participate in such actions be avoided”. Pax Christi defends, therefore, the thesis of a just war. But defence in itself is not enough. Msgr. Derouet places his trust in a movement of opinion, in “a reawakening of believers: the fundamentalist interpretation of Scripture which leads to justifying ideologies, in particular, the territorial goals of Zionism and an integralist deviation of Islam, needs to be denounced”. He also condemns the “neo-liberalism whose effects increase the inequalities between rich and poor countries in an unacceptable way”. The Justice and Peace association in France, for its part, has urged prudence and discernment. The association’s president, Msgr. Lucien Daloz, advises choosing the ground on which we stand: “Speaking of the war and not of the crime means shifting the ground towards a military action, i.e. a conflict between States. Two mechanisms are then put into motion: one political, to denounce a regime and organize its replacement, the other material, linked to the means used, which cannot avoid striking the population, even if involuntarily”. But “it’s not enough to heal the symptoms”: we need to trace them back to their causes. We need to launch “a huge plan of material solidarity” and reflect on “a just and peaceful solution of the conflict in the Middle East”. To this end, Msgr. Daloz makes a resolute plea to the international organizations: “Only these, in spite of their limitations, permit a concerted action according to norms and rights recognized by everyone. It is only in the framework of the UNO and international accords that the USA and its allies can, with the other peoples, find lasting solutions for a real world order”. The opinion is shared by Msgr. Derouet, according to whom “the struggle against terrorism and the systems that nourish it should be conducted by an international police force, under the aegis of the UN”. M.G.