BRUSSELS, Dec. 2 (UPI) -- Jose Maria Aznar was prime minister of Spain between 1996 and 2004 and is currently a visiting professor at Georgetown University and president of FAES, a think-tank based in Madrid. At the launch of a major report on reforming NATO in Brussels, United Press International spoke to the center-right politician about the war in Iraq, the fight against terrorism and the "profound crisis" facing the Atlantic Alliance.
--
UPI: How great is the terrorist threat we face at the moment?
Aznar: It is as great a threat to Western democracy as fascism and communism were in the last century. You only have to read the speeches and Internet messages of the leaders of al-Qaida and other Jihadists to realize the danger we face. The decision to declare war on the Western World or to declare a new caliphate is a reality. But we must remember this is not Islam, these are terrorists who use Islam as a basis to justify their attacks.
Q. Many people in Europe are uncomfortable with the phrase 'war on terror.' Do you think you can wage war on terrorism -- and win?
A. Yes, I think it is possible to win the war on terrorism. To do so we must fight the terrorists every day and everywhere. But I admit the perception of the terrorist threat among Europeans is different to the threat perceived by Americans.
Before Sept. 11, 2001 the reaction of the United States towards terrorism was weak. After 9/11 it made the correct response.
Europe looks at the threat from a different angle. Even after the attacks on Madrid and London, Europe is more a supporter of appeasement that a fighter of terrorism and for me this is a mistake. It is not possible to appease terrorism, to have a dialogue with terrorism or to contain terrorism, it is necessary to combat it, fight it and defeat it.
History shows us that appeasement is very bad for the interests of the Western World. For me the choice is clear: it is them or us.
Q. As a survivor of terrorism, do you understand what makes terrorists tick?
A. There is only one reason for terrorist acts: hate. It is not possible to analyze terrorists with the same mind and vision as normal people because they are not normal people -- they are people who maim, kill and kidnap. For example, this female archaeologist who has been kidnapped in Iraq -- she's a German. What is the relation between this woman, or even Germany, and the war in Iraq? It's completely stupid. For me, this latest round of kidnappings is just another demonstration that Iraq at this moment is the first front in the war against terror.
Q. In your report -- 'NATO: An Alliance for Freedom' -- you call for radical reforms to the organization. Do you think NATO is in danger of dying if it does not change?
A. This organization is a zombie organization at the moment. It does a lot of things -- for example in the Balkans, Afghanistan and elsewhere -- but we must not forget that NATO is an organization founded to protect such values as freedom, democracy and liberty and to guarantee the security of all its members.
So if the main threat facing all of us is terrorism and the objective of the alliance is to guarantee our security, the main objective of the alliance today should be fighting terrorism. It is absurd that NATO gives support to the African Union in Darfur but can't define a policy to guarantee the security of its citizens at home.
The main objective of NATO is that Spaniards, French, Germans and Britons are secure. That's why I propose the creation of a counter-terrorism command inside NATO and to create a doctrine which renovates NATO's strategic doctrine to fight terrorism.
Q. So NATO is failing in its principal task?
A. At the moment, yes. But NATO is still indispensable. I support the alliance of America and European states. It is a vital alliance for all the world -- especially for Europeans. Those who want to build a Europe against the United States or to weaken the Atlantic Alliance are making a serious mistake.
Q. In retrospect, do you think you were right to immediately blame (the Basque terrorist group) ETA for the Madrid train bombings last year?
A. It was normal, because Spain suffered from ETA terrorism from 35 years. So immediately I thought of ETA, not foreign terrorists. But I would remind you that the first leader in Spain to blame ETA for the attacks was the president of the Basque government, the second was the leader of the Communist Party and the third is the current prime minister (Jose Luis Zapatero, whose Socialist Party won a surprise victory partly because the Popular Party were accused of using the attacks for electoral gain.)
Q. Does ETA still pose a threat to Spain?
A. When I left office, ETA was weaker than at any other time in its history. It had almost disappeared. Now the government has changed this policy and offered negotiations with ETA. As a result, ETA has risen from the dead. Every time a terrorist is offered the possibility of negotiation, he thinks "it is possible for me to win this battle." When you are strong, you never offer negotiations, but when you are weak you talk about them every day.
Q. What sort of message do you think the present government sent by withdrawing its troops from Iraq immediately after the Madrid bombings?
A. It sent a very good message to the terrorists because they wanted to provoke a situation that would change the government. They committed the attacks so the government would be blamed and not the terrorists. This is the first time in history that terrorists have had a good success in elections. But then if you withdraw your troops from Iraq, you send another message to the terrorists: that you were right.
I know terrorism very well -- I am a survivor of terrorism and I have fought it in Spain and abroad -- and I know it is essential terrorists understand that there is no hope for them, their only destiny is defeat.
Q. Do you believe the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq -- which you actively supported -- has made the terrorist threat greater?
A. No. Every step against terrorism -- whether in Afghanistan or Iraq -- offers the possibility for terrorists to react, but if you go after them they have to dedicate more time to defending themselves than to planning their next attack. The action against Iraq has had positive consequences in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Middle East peace process. If democracy is established in Iraq, the defeat of the terrorists could be total.
