Violence and nonviolence are not exact equivalents but different approaches and worldviews. By its response and actions the USA has bolstered the cult of redemptive violence and of might being right. By the way its has pursued its actions it has undermined international law. Whether it has undermined stability in that part of the world, well, let us hope not because a more right-wing radical Pakistan, for example, is a danger to the globe and not just the region (with India and Pakistan indulging in their nuclear habit). We have still to see how things pan out in Afghanistan in the medium and long term.

There are many lessons to be learnt from 11th September. Security grows not from the barrel of a gun but from dealing justly with people. For example, initial impressions that the USA might have learnt the importance of an Israeli-Palestinian settlement were dashed by strong US support for Israel after a terrible spate of Palestinian suicide bombings. The US's strong backing for Israeli military over-reaction does not augur well for the USA pushing Israel back to the negotiating table.

The USA is not the world's 'policeman'. This role is assumed by the US unilaterally as a by-product of superpowerdom. If there is to be a 'world police service' then it has to be under the auspices of the United Nations, not the UN being dragged in as an after-thought. The USA can play a constructive role internationally as part of a family of nations, not as a lone agent or bribing superpower. And what 'policeman' bombs the hell out of a country looking for one man and a few thousand accomplices?

More worrying again is the possibility of further 'anti-terrorist' action in other countries by the US, again supported by its sidekick, the British government. Of course there are a lot of nasties at work in the world (some of them in the Pentagon). The way forward is not to kill people to prove that killing people is wrong. The way forward is international cooperation in advancement of human rights to shame even reluctant nations into action. Those who use violence as states will merely prove that violence is what they understand; so will it be nuclear weapons that violent non-state groups feel they have to use next time?

The injustices and misunderstandings of the world have to be tackled if meaningful peace is to be developed. That requires some very radical measures including limits to globalisation which entitle rich corporations to own key components of poor societies and economies. In the long term those radical changes are for the good of everyone. Does the West really want the arrival of several million Bangladeshi refugees who can no longer live in their own land because global warming has turned their 'land' into sea or flooded areas? Does Ireland want container loads of dead asylum seekers or economic refugees turning up in our ports?