The Modern Blood Feud: Thoughts on the Philosophy of Terrorism

The Catholic Lawyer Volume 33, Number 3 Article 2 The Modern Blood Feud: Thoughts on the Philosophy of Terrorism Christopher L. Blakesley Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl Part of the Terrorism Studies Commons Recommended Citation Christopher L. Blakesley (1990) "The Modern Blood Feud: Thoughts on the Philosophy of Terrorism," The Catholic Lawyer: Vol. 33 : No. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl/vol33/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Catholic Lawyer by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact . THE MODERN BLOOD FEUD: THOUGHTS ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF TERRORISM CHRISTOPHER L. BLAKESLEY* All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick. He piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart's shell upon it. H. MELVILLE, MOBY DICK 160 (Hayford & Parker eds. 1967). I. INTRODUCTION Herman Melville brilliantly lets us feel, through Captain Ahab, the sensation of destructive rage, hatred and violence. Sadly, Melville's insight penetrates to the core of society, perhaps of each of us, in today's omnipresent terroristic melodrama. We have all suffered moments of vicarious terror and rage over the past few years as we watched news accounts of terrorist incidents, such as the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 * Christopher L. Blakesley, is a Professor of Law, Louisiana State University Law Center. He received his B.A. from the University of Utah, his M.A. from the Fletcher School of International Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, his J.D. from the University of Utah, his LL.M from Columbia University, and his J.S.D. from Columbia University. He teaches public international law, international and comparative criminal law, comparative family law, as well as domestic criminal law and family law. Prior to entering academia, he was Attorney Adviser in the Office of the Legal Adviser, the United States Department of State. He has written extensively in his fields of expertise, including a four volume treatise in family law, and over thirty major articles in law reviews or chapters in books, both in the United States and Europe. He has also taught at the University of the Pacific, the University of Utah, and has taught courses in Salzburg, Austria and Budapest, Hungary, where he team taught comparative criminal law and procedure with Dr. Arpad Erdei, of Etvos Lorrand University, Budapest. This article is drawn from author's forthcoming book, TERRORISM, INTERNATIONAL LAW AND PROTECTING CIVIL LIBERTIES (Transnat'l Pub. Inc. 1990). 33 CATHOLIC LAWYER, No. 3 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The melodrama of terrorism has penetrated each of our lives. We see it and feel the rage nearly on a daily basis. Innocent children, women and men aboard Pan Am Flight 103 were used as fodder in some "war" or other. Perhaps the pusillanimous carnage was in retaliation for the slaughter of innocent children, women and men aboard the Iranian Air Bus, blown out of the sky by American forces last year.' Or perhaps it was committed by those interested in thwarting prospects of peace in the Middle East. Terroristic outrage is sickeningly common. Chemical warfare has recently been reinstituted against combatants and noncombatants alike. Evidence indicates that on or about March 23, 1988, the Iraqui Air Force bombed villages in Kurdistan, spreading mustard and possibly nerve gas over villagers, dropping them in their panicked tracks, many holding their babies to their breasts.2 Iraq has accused Iran of using similar weapons.' Libya is said to have nearly completed construction of a chemical weap' Was United States Captain Will Rogers of the warship VII Vincennes, which shot down the Airbus, or were his superiors informed, or were they grossly negligent not to have been informed, that "bellicose rhetoric is not a good indication of actual intent in the Middle East?" Rubin, Payment Precedents in the Gulf Affair, Christian Sci. Monitor, July 21, 1988, at 13. Did they know that Iran had very good military reasons for not attacking a United States war vessel by air, and that Iran, indeed, had carefully avoided doing so? Were they aware that it was actually Iraq that had attacked United States ships in this manner; that it was in Iraq's interest, not Iran's, to provoke the United States? Professor Alfred Rubin notes some of these deficiencies in the United States explanation of the slaughter of those 290 souls, and suggests a tort rationale and settlement ex gratia to satisfy "Iran's and the world's gut feeling that America must be wrong." Id. I would submit that although the tort model is appropriate and that compensation ought to be forthcoming, criminal action should not be ruled out. If the evidence is such that the killing of those innocent people was done intentionally or in a grossly reckless (wanton) fashion, mass murder has been committed. If both sides were grossly reckless, perhaps both are responsible. Naval Commander, David R. Carlson, Commander of the U.S.S Sides, a frigate on the scene when the Vincennes shot down the Iranian Aribus, in Proceedings, U.S. Naval Institute magazine, said that the Vincennes, nicknamed Robo Cruiser had "no good reason" for downing the Iranian Airbus. He noted, further, "[tlhe Vincennes saw an opportunity for action, and pressed hard for Commander Middle East Force to give permission to fire.... The tragedy was avoidable, and we must learn from it. ... When the decision was made to shoot down the Airbus, the airliner was climbing, not diving; it was showing the proper identification friend or foe.... The Vincennes was never under attack by the Iranian aircraft." Brennan, Iran Air Tragedy Was Avoidable, Officer Says, Baton Rouge Morning Advocate, Sept. 2, 1989, at 9A, col. 1. 2 CNN Network News, on March 24, 1988, showed videotape of the grotesque slaughter. World Report, (CNN television broadcast, Apr. 3, 1988); see also Iraq Threatens Chemical Warfare on Iran, Baton Rouge Morning Advocate, March 30, 1988, at 9A, col. 1 (report of bombing). Now Iraq has threatened to use them on Israel. 3 Iraq Threatens Chemical Warfare on Iran, Baton Rouge Morning Advocate, March 30, 1988, at 9A, col. 1; Smolowe, Return of the Silent Killer, TIME, Aug. 22, 1988, at 46; Smolowe, Where is the Outrage?, TIME, Sept. 26, 1988, at 36. PHILOSOPHY OF TERRORISM ons manufacturing facility.4 It has been proposed that the United States Government increase its capacity to (...truncated)