Sam Knight
Win Sky+HD for a year and a trip to Barcelona
The Development Secretary, Hilary Benn, will cast his lot with critics of the Bush Administration tonight when he questions the validity of the phrase "War on Terror" during a speech in New York tonight.
His address will place the Government firmly on the side of the Democrats in what is presently a fraught debate in Washington over the use of the expression, which was coined by the Bush Administration in the days after the September 11 attacks and taken up by Tony Blair as Britain joined the wars that followed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Mr Benn will argue that the term — which takes the form of "the global war on terror" or "GWOT" in US policy documents — gives an unwarranted legitimacy to the struggles of small fringe groups which really do not have much in common.
He will also say that war is only part of the solution to combating terrorism and Britain and America should do more to use the "soft power" of values, ideas and reform to bring about lasting change in the failed and angry states where terrorist groups prosper.

“In the UK, we do not use the phrase ‘War on Terror’ because we can’t win by military means alone, and because this isn’t us against one organised enemy with a clear identity and a coherent set of objectives,” Mr Benn will say, according to excerpts of his speech released in advance.
“It is the vast majority of the people in the world — of all nationalities and faiths — against a small number of loose, shifting and disparate groups who have relatively little in common apart from their identification with others who share their distorted view of the world and their idea of being part of something bigger.
“What these groups want is to force their individual and narrow values on others without dialogue, without debate, through violence. And by letting them feel part of something bigger, we give them strength,” he will add.
The Prime Minister's spokesman denied today that Mr Benn's speech marked a change in policy, saying: “We all use our own phraseology, and we talk about terrorism, we talk about the fight against terrorism, but we also talk about trying to find political solutions to political problems."
But Mr Blair has also shown a wariness around using the American terminology, rarely using the phrase in the last two years. In his most recent major address to the House of Commons about Iraq, the Prime Minister preferred to speak of "an epochal struggle between the forces of progress and the forces of reaction".
Mr Benn's speech, which will be given at New York University’s Center on International Co-operation, is also considered an attempt to increase his standing among Labour MPs, whose support he is seeking in his bid to become the party's deputy leader. Putting some daylight between Britain and the Bush Administration's foreign policy is thought be a key priority after Mr Blair steps down this summer.
The usefulness of the phrase "War on Terror" has been the subject of debate ever since it was used to describe America's reaction to the attacks of September 11. In August 2004, President Bush even admitted that the phrase had its limits, telling journalists:
"We actually misnamed the War on Terror. It ought to be the Struggle Against Ideological Extremists Who Do Not Believe in Free Societies Who Happen to Use Terror as a Weapon to Try to Shake the Conscience of the Free World."
The following year, two years after the invasion of Iraq and three-and-a-half years after the toppling of the Taleban in Afghanistan, the term was tussled over by the Pentagon and the White House. The then US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, started speaking of "a global struggle against violent extremism" rather than a war, but he was swiftly put down by Mr Bush.
''Make no mistake about it, we are at war," said the President on August 3, 2005, after both Mr Rumsfeld and Stephen Hadley, his national security adviser, temporarily dropped the expression.
The debate re-opened earlier this month when the Democrats sought to use their control of Congress to delete "the global war on terror" from the 2008 defence budget. A 15-page memo from the House Armed Services Committee ordered members to “avoid using colloquialisms" and refer to specific military operations.
The memo drew fierce criticism from Republican congressmen and the scorn of Vice President Dick Cheney, a regular user of the expression. In a speech to the right-leaning Heritage Foundation in Washington last Friday, Mr Cheney said of the "Global War on Terrorism":
"I'm left to wonder — which part of that phrase is the problem? Do they deny the struggle is global, after the enemy has declared the ambition of building a totalitarian empire that stretches from Europe around to Indonesia? Do they deny this is a war, in which one side will win and the other will lose? Do they deny that it's terror that we're fighting, with unlawful combatants who wear no uniform, who reject the rules of warfare, and who target the innocent for indiscriminate slaughter?"
"That's the nature of the fight we're in. We can't wish it away, or define it away."
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
2007
£30,000
2006
£14,337
2008
£39,937
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
1 & 2 Bed apartments
From £249,995
Great Investment, River Views
Great Dubai Investment Opportunities
from £89,950
low-cost ownership homes in London
Las Vegas SALE!
£POA
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - find property for sale and rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Or do we create many of the problems that have come to haunt us at a later time.People have a habit of pointing fingers at any race or country that they have little knowledge of or if it fails to fit into the norm as we precieve it customs,religion etc.We in many ways are our own worse enemies and will continue to be untill we change our mode of thinking,but of course thats what creates war's and far to many see that as the ultimate solution.!!!!
Robert Ferrin, Bliss, U.S.A.
look, your lame numbers and statistics don't matter. fringe groups are fringe groups, the ones who win are called patriots and the ones who lose are called traitors and terrorists.
afghanistan was a viable, justified and nessesary response to an act of war facilitated by that country. i'm not sure what iraq is....while it is really messing up everything, it must be finished to the extent it can make up it's own mind with as few fringes involved as possible (if that ever really happens is another point but that must be done to the best of our ability)
ideas arent fought with bullets unless you aim to wipe out everyone who has them. the phrase war on terror was used to justify iraq in my opinion. any action we take outside of an afghanistan type scenario with our military will all end up like iraq and military is for killing people not policeing them.
other than that ALL HOMELAND terror plot break ups were done with top notch police work AT home mostly under old laws....
Aaron, mebane, nc
To the more gung-ho posters (particularly US readers), no one is saying there is no point fighting the terrorists. What Benn is saying is that the phrase War on Terror gives a sense of moral strength and the illusion of solidarity to various groups around the world.
In reality, many of these fanatical groups have very different aims and beliefs from each other. Clumping them together in a homogenous grey cloud is good for marketing, for lining up the American people (primarily) behind the government's strategy. It does not necessarily reduce the scale of the task. And don't underestimate the value of PR to a terrorist: after all, where would terrorism be without it?
Rich, Birmingham, UK
The 'War on Terror' is a convenient slogan but whether it is questioned tonight or not is of little relevance on US policy.
As a note, if the US is engaged in a war on terror it would be worth understanding your 'enemy'. Michael Lloyd in Florida might want to do some research on world history prior to the foundation of the US as the Middle East developed a high degree of the foundations behind science such mathematics, architecture etc. It is sad that the majority of governments in that region in the 20th century have done little to encourage their citizens to continue such traditions in their home countries. In a way this suppression of liberal education has allowed the fanatics to gain a stronger foothold.
Us brits are not spineless however we have 50 years of experience in fighting unconvential wars such as Malaya, and N. Ireland - the heavy handed approach in Iraq was never going to work. Read Eating soup with a knife by John Nagl (US ex-colonel)
Andy, Manchester, UK
Islam will be the cause of a third world war in my opinion. It has far too many followers (clerics included) that want a world wide islamic state which is led like something from the dark ages
John, Salford, England
The english speaking peoples have given the world some of its greatest achievements. Without Sir Alexander Flemings discovery of penicillin millions would have perished, not thousands, millions, and thats just one example. And that one example has done more for mankind than all of histories crazed religous fanatics. Western civilisation may have its rough spots, but its still the best game in town, and worth fighting for.
Michael LLoyd, Seminole, Florida
Islam wants it all - the whole world.
So make up your mind. Do you want a modern, 21st century lifestyle, with music and joy and freedom, or do you want to wear dark robes, cover your face/hair and pray 3 times a day?
j griffiths, manchester, England
... or in Canada for that matter?........
iain, Norfolk,
Darren -
IRA terrorists: 1800+ (this being mainly funded by US sympathisers)
Charles, London, England
In response to the people asking how many british have lost thier lives through terrorism, i am in shock at thier lack of knowledge on the subject, especially the americans who have directly financed terrorism on british soil.
Between 1969 and 2001, 3,523 people were killed as a result of the Troubles in Northern Ireland. and i hasten to add that many of the IRA groups were directly financed by american sympathisers.(ref: the troubles, wikipedia)
this total alone far outranks the americans casualties from 9/11(~2900)
this british total is not including the attack in london nor the lockerbie disaster nor 2 hostages killed in the Iranian embassy siege. indeed neither does it include the casualties suffered from the attacks in the 19th century.
Britain has had a long and bloody history in dealing with terrorism folks. we realised you cannot directly combat it after years of futile attempts. as a suggestion to the american learn from your mistakes and use a tactful approach
Daniel-John, Manchester, UK
The war on Terror has always been pile of a hogwash and I'm pretty sure that deep down those that parrot the line know so. It's no more than using 9/11 as a cheap excuse for Britain and America to invade who they want on the flimiest of pretexts. Its an absolute disgrace.
Mark, Newcastle,
Unfortunately, a lot of people like Dick Cheney who use the term "War" have neither experienced it as a Military participant, or as an unwilling Civilian caught up in it. I was born in Southampton, England in 1938, and consequently my whole life experience until the age of 8 was nothing but War. Daily runs to the Air-Raid Shelter, going out after the "All-Clear" to pick up hot, jagged pieces of Shrapnel as Souvenirs, looking at bombed-out homes etc. Naturally our families tried to insulate us from fear and anxiety, but even as kids we could pick up the underlying stress. The only times I have experienced the same feeling was on the night of the big 'Quake Oct. 17th 1989 when we lived in Scotts Valley CA, 4 miles from the epicenter, and to a lesser degree on Sept 11th 2001.
Mike, Chico, USA
Perhaps the next acronym we will hear is BYHITS (Bury Your Head in the Sand). We are at war with islamic extremists, and their tactics are terrorism. Perhaps you don't feel that blowing up cars in public markets is terrorism, and terrorism worth fighting against, but I certainly do. The democrats and other leftists are a bunch of spineless cowards that think fighting your enemies is the act that creates them. That's pure rubbish. All this worthless talk by the spineless is making it worse for our soldiers in the field, and it emboldens the enemy. Sorry folks, but innocent people and young men and women die in war, it's one of the facts of the matter. We're fighting savages that don't care a lick for human life, so get with it and stop crying like a bunch of babies.
Paul, Atlanta,
I am not a fan of terrorism but think THE UK have pillaged
the world in the name of progress check our HISTORY
perhaps we learnt it from the ROMANS but no wonder
other third world and ISSLAMIC people get peed ed off
at us and the USA BUT JUST PERHAPS 9/11 AND7/7 WAS
A WAKE UP CALL for us all to change our ways if children
are brainwashed to hate us they will always hate us so
the suicide bombers are here to stay unless we can find away to make them love us and that's never going to
happen
george william taylor, hull, uk
this is insanity.... the world is under attack from islamists, not just britain and america. as for brits killed islamic terrorists have taken a toll on our troops abroad.
for anyone that thinks we can run away from the war on terror there have been over 8,000 islamic terror attacks since 9/11.
arthur, brighton, england
See? Further evidence that the former courageous defenders of the Isles over the centuries now lack the backbone to defend themselves. As I said in past comments: abolish your armed forces!
Kenneth Lizotte, Bristol, Vermont, USA
Re: "Excuse me, but how many people died in Britain at the hands of terrorist bombers?"
I'd also count the 11 Scots who died on the ground in the Lockerbie disaster.
C Lofters, New York, New York
David Goodale: How right you are. together we fought 2 REAL wars where the enemy did have this capability and this didn't change our way of life. The biggest threat here is governments changing our way of life with the promise 'we'll make you safe' knowing full well that they can't.
John, Reading, UK
Darren -
Muslim terrorists? 52. So far.
M. Fernandez, San Francisco,
Re: "Excuse me, but how many people died in Britain at the hands of terrorist bombers?"
Darren, Vancouver, Canada
Plenty of bombs exploded / bullets fired and plenty of lives lost in the Ulster part of the U.K. (n.b. NOT 'Britain') for decades now, Darren. Or does that not count?
Barry Lees, Greenock, Scotland
Most rational Americans are beginning to take this view, some what.
These NGO terrorist groups do not have the power to march into our capitols and change our way of life. Instead, they must frighten us into changing our way of life ourselves.
David Goodale, Granada Hills, USA
Here we are 6 years down the line and the uk government has finally realised that using the phrase war ON terror requires you to accept contrary opinions and beliefs at the same time. In other words doublethink. Well I sigh with relief to the fact that they have actually admitted it.
steven, leeds,
Excuse me, but how many people died in Britain at the hands of terrorist bombers?
Darren, Vancouver, Canada
U.S.; U.K.; Spain, Morocco; Algeria;India; Bali; Turkey, etc. all places that have been attacked since 9-11. We can add the USS Cole, bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Africa, first World Trade Center attack if you go back to when war was declared by Bin Laden. Looks global and looks like terrorism. Go stick your heads in the sand!!
Chuck, Gahanna, Ohio, USA
Put your heads a little deeper in the sand and you won't have to call it anything.
Bob Hall, New York, United States