As the days and weeks have passed after September 11, it has slowly become apparent just how much everything has changed. Like the h2g2 banner says: the world is a different place today. With the threat of war looming and everyone's sense of security blown away, the most extraordinary things have been happening.

Many of us have had our senses of perspective restored. Suddenly and brutally, we've all been made aware of how fragile human life is. At such a time, differences that once seemed to matter now seem very petty. It's desperately sad that it took such horror to bring this about - but all of a sudden, there seem to be so many more possibilities. Entrenched positions and prejudices are revised. And politicians, eager to seize their moment in history, begin making visionary speeches.

Tony Blair's address to the UK Labour Party Conference on Tuesday was astonishing. When it comes to politicians and their pronouncements, I pride myself on the depth and resilience of my industrial-strength cynicism. I have been far too deeply disappointed by New Labour's new conservatism not to treat Blair's words with the severest scepticism.

But, by the God that Blair believes in and I don't, I want to believe in his vision of a better world. It's a measure of the poverty and pettiness of regular political discourse that it seems amazing to hear a major politician talking in idealistic terms about helping the poorest parts of the world. Usually, they're too busy promising tax cuts and finding scapegoats (preferably foreign) on whom all problems can be blamed.

Some of what Blair had to say was essentially a statement of the obvious.
'The state of Africa is a scar on the conscience of the world. But if the world as a community focused on it, we could heal it. And if we don't, it will become deeper and angrier.'

Well, yes, of course. Now, all that remains is the small matter of persuading the richest nations in the world to abandon at least some of the trading practices that keep African nations in a deadly degree of poverty. In normal circumstances, the very idea that such a thing might happen could only prompt a hollow laugh. But now, we're told, there is a plan of action that goes beyond anything previously proposed: huge financial aid, debt write-offs, investment. If all of this materialises, it really will change the world.

Meanwhile, President George W. Bush was also saying the previously unsayable, assuring reporters:
'You know, the idea of a Palestinian state has always been part of a vision, so long as the right for Israel to exist is respected.'

Well, the idea of a Palestinian state has certainly always been part of many people's vision, but has it really been part of the US Government's thinking? If so, then you could have fooled me, and I strongly suspect that you could also have fooled many Palestinians - especially those who were seen celebrating after the September 11 atrocities. But again, perhaps this is an example of how the world really is a different place today; how assumptions have shifted.

One thing is certain: Blair is still a very crafty politician. He used the present climate of international co-operation to advance the cause of European monetary union, and to attack anti-globalization protesters by claiming that globalization could mean international initiatives to help the have-nots.

My favourite online dictionary defines 'globalization' as 'To make global or worldwide in scope or application', so strictly speaking Blair was right: but this was still a shameless piece of opportunism. He must know perfectly well that the kind of globalization that prompts mass protests is the rapacious kind represented by the likes of McDonalds or Nestle, not the global interventions of Oxfam or Amnesty International. Blair's implication that the two kinds of 'globalization' are somehow necessarily interlinked was ingenious but disingenuous.

Blair's words about the 'wound' of African poverty and its potential to become 'deeper and angrier' hinted at what may well be the motivation behind these apparent changes of heart in high places. As Blair rightly said, nothing could ever justify the events of September 11 - but some good may yet come out of the horror of that day. It may be that, as a result of September 11, the Bushes and Blairs of the world have finally accepted what many have been trying to tell them for a long time: that you cannot keep whole nations homeless or hungry indefinitely and expect peace.

Perhaps, though, what really matters is what may now be possible, not why those possibilities have opened up. For all my reservations, Blair's speech was thrilling - a rare invitation to believe in a better world, rather than just better consumer goods. The world may still be waiting anxiously to see what comes next; but now there is a sense that there may be something better on the other side of the present, terrifying crisis.

Meanwhile, we all keep scanning the news bulletins anxiously waiting to find out if the world really is at war yet. The tension keeps building, and some form of military intervention seems inevitable. Significantly, in his speech Blair talked about the coming conflict in terms of when it happened rather than if it happened, although his message to the Taleban:
'...surrender the terrorists, or surrender power. It is your choice'

- seemed to suggest that there was still room for some form of negotiation.

Realistically, though, only the most optimistic pacifist could possibly believe that armed conflict can now be avoided. Blair promised that
'The action we take will be proportionate and targeted, we will do all we humanly can to avoid civilian casualties,'

and the fact that no military action has yet been taken three weeks after the attacks lends credibility to those words. At least the demands for immediate nuclear strikes that came from some corners of America have been rejected. Sadly, there is as yet no bomb so smart that it can discriminate between military personnel and civilians. When the conflict comes, there most assuredly will be civilian casualties.

War is always a tragedy, and I wear my membership of h2g2's People for Peace with pride. In truth, though, this does seem like a situation where the best that can be hoped for is a conflict that doesn't last too long. For those like myself who abhor violence and have spent a lot of time listening to John Lennon records, it's a painful conclusion to come to. But the Taleban regime is a monstrous affront to civilisation. A regime that denies women the right to education or medical help, and flogs any female bold enough to show her face in public, simply cannot be tolerated in the 21st Century.

It would be great to think that the Taleban could be removed by peaceful means, but such a solution hardly seems likely. That being the case, there will be casualties whatever happens. If the global alliance attacks the Taleban, innocent people will be caught in the crossfire. But if the Taleban remains in place, they will presumably continue to see fit to stone people to death for adultery and hang others from cranes in sports stadia. Meanwhile, Afghan women will continue to be denied the most basic human rights.

As a good liberal, I feel vaguely guilty about supporting military intervention to remove a foreign government from power. But I'll celebrate when the Taleban are ousted, as they surely will be in the near future. Osama bin Laden and friends may be the main target, but it's impossible to believe that those who sheltered him will be allowed to remain in power.

I suspect that the great majority of Muslims will also be relieved to see the back of them. The Taleban's appalling intolerance shames their professed faith, and projects an image of Islam that is light years away from that of the Muslims I meet on a daily basis in my home city of Bradford.

So, as war looms, how do we all cope?

Well, according to one expert, many of us have been turning to one of mankind's most traditional consolations. Sex.

Pepper Schwartz, a sociologist at the University of Washington, has observed that at a time like this, people live for the moment. They forget about the tomorrow that now may never come, and grab that person they've always secretly fancied. Those who believe in such conventions get married more readily. And they have more sex.

According to a somewhat breathless-sounding quote from Ms Schwartz,
'It's blotting out the world and living in a moment of heightened pleasure as opposed to heightened peril or depression so you block that out and stop thinking for at least a little while and just be and enjoy and get down to those basic emotions.'

Well, there are certainly worse ways we could all pass the time. Of course, there are likely to be some living consequences from this global surge in libido: Schwartz has predicted a 'baby boomlet' about nine months from now.

I wonder if, around 2007, there'll be a sudden outbreak of little Georges and Tonys in the playgrounds of the western world?

Ormondroyd

04.10.01. Front Page

Back Issue Page