Actions that generate blowback are normally kept totally secret from the
American public and from most of their representatives in Congress. This means
that when innocent civilians become victims of a retaliatory strike, they are at
first unable to put it in context or to understand the sequence of events that
led up to it. In its most rigorous definition, blowback does not mean mere
reactions to historical events but rather to clandestine operations carried out
by the U.S. government that are aimed at overthrowing foreign regimes, or
seeking the execution of people the United States wants eliminated by “friendly”
foreign armies, or helping launch state terrorist operations against overseas
target populations. The American people may not know what is done in their name,
but those on the receiving end surely do—including the people of Iran (1953),
Guatemala (1954), Cuba (1959 to the present), Congo (1960), Brazil (1964),
Indonesia (1965), Vietnam (1961-73), Laos (1961-73), Cambodia (1961-73), Greece
(1967-74), Chile (1973), Afghanistan (1979 to the present), El Salvador,
Guatemala, and Nicaragua (1980s), and Iraq (1991 to the present), to name only
the most obvious cases.
In a broader sense, blowback is another way of saying that a nation reaps
what it sows. Although individuals usually know what they have sown, they rarely
have the same knowledge on a national level, especially since so much of what
the managers of the American empire have sown has been kept secret. As a
concept, blowback is obviously most easily grasped in its straightforward
manifestations. The unintended consequences of American policies and acts in
country X lead to a bomb at an American embassy in country Y or a dead American
in country Z. Certainly, any number of Americans have been killed in that
fashion, from Catholic nuns in El Salvador to tourists in Uganda who just
happened to wander into hidden imperial scenarios about which they knew nothing.
But blowback is hardly restricted to such reasonably straightforward
examples. In its extended sense, it also includes the decline of key American
industries because of the export-led economic policies of our satellites, the
militarism and arrogance of power that inevitably conflict with our democratic
structure of government, and the distortions to our culture and basic values as
we are increasingly required to try to justify our imperialism.
The term “blowback” first appeared in a classified government document in the
CIA’s post-action report on the secret overthrow of the Iranian government in
1953. In 2000, James Risen of the New York Times explained: “When the Central
Intelligence Agency helped overthrow Mohammed Mossadegh as Iran’s prime minister
in 1953, ensuring another 25 years of rule for Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the
CIA was already figuring that its first effort to topple a foreign government
would not be its last. The CIA, then just six years old and deeply committed to
winning the cold war, viewed its covert action in Iran as a blueprint for coup
plots elsewhere around the world, and so commissioned a secret history to detail
for future generations of CIA operatives how it had been done. . . . Amid the
sometimes curious argot of the spy world—‘safebases’ and ‘assets’ and the
like—the CIA warns of the possibilities of ‘blowback.’ The word . . . has since
come into use as shorthand for the unintended consequences of covert
operations.”
The attacks of September 11 descend in a direct line from events in 1979, the
year in which the CIA, with full presidential authority, began carrying out its
largest ever clandestine operation—the secret arming of Afghan freedom fighters
(mujahideen) to wage a proxy war against the Soviet Union, which involved the
recruitment and training of militants from all over the Islamic world. Various
members of the current Bush cabinet were complicit in generating the blowback of
9/11. Former general Colin Powell certainly knows why “they” might hate us. He
was Ronald Reagan’s last national security adviser and then chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff during the George H. W. Bush administration. Others
include former secretary of defense Dick Cheney, former National Security
Council staff official Condoleezza Rice, former Reagan confidant and emissary to
Saddam Hussein Donald Rumsfeld, former Pentagon official in both the Reagan and
George H. W. Bush administrations Paul Wolfowitz, and many more. Throughout the
1980s, these officials designed and implemented the secret war in Afghanistan
and then, after the Soviet Union’s withdrawal, made the decision to abandon
America’s Islamic agents.
The USSR’s invasion of Afghanistan was deliberately provoked. In his 1996
memoirs, former CIA director Robert Gates writes that the American intelligence
services actually began to aid the mujahideen guerrillas in Afghanistan not
after the Soviet invasion of that country, but six months before it. And in a
1998 interview with the French weekly magazine Le Nouvel Observateur, former
president Carter’s National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, unambiguously
confirmed Gates’s assertion.
“According to the official version of history,” Brzezinski told the Nouvel
Observateur, “CIA aid to the mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after
the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality,
closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979,
that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents
of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the
president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to
induce a Soviet military intervention.”
When asked whether he regretted these actions, Brzezinski replied:
“Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect
of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The
day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter,
essentially: ‘We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam
War.’”
Nouvel Observateur: “And neither do you regret having supported Islamic
fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?”
Brzezinski: “What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the
collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of
Central Europe and the end of the cold war?”