The so-called war against terrorism could be a ploy by the United States' government to push the American public into unwittingly backing the current US foreign policy, believing it is for their own personal security, American scholar suggested.

"A Pax-Americana is not something Americans will support," said Prof Paul Knitter, an American theologian at Xavier University in Cincinnati.

He explained that normally average Americans are not interested to pursue an "American Empire" or want the US to extend its influence around the world.

Americans are basically inward-looking people and they are not interested in the rest of the world, he added.

The scholar was speaking at a panel discussion entitled 'Pax-Americana A Threat to World Peace?' organised by the International Movement for a Just World (Just) at its office in Petaling Jaya yesterday.

The scholar was among the 24 participants who took part in the three-day International Roundtable on 'The Challenge of Globalisation: Towards a Shared Universal Spiritual and Moral Ethic' in Genting Highlands which ended Wednesday.

Exploiting Sept 11

However, Knitter believes that the US government is exploiting the tragedy of Sept 11 to expand its influence around the world without invoking hostile public opinion against its foreign policy.

The scholar claimed that Americans are "politically-naive" and they would support their government's endeavours if they felt that their own security is threatened.

"If you ask me if we are exploiting the terrorist attack...damn right we are," he said.

While US foreign policy has been criticised for decades, it is following the tragedy of Sept 11 which triggered the re-assertion of US military involvement around the world.

The US-led 'war against terrorism' declared by President George W Bush last year has been used to rally public support as well as cooperation of other countries, thus justifying US intelligence and military presence in various countries.

Since last year's war in Afghanistan and the possibility of an attack on Iraq, there has been heightened US military presence in the Middle-East. Meanwhile, the campaign against terrorism had led to more US involvement in Southeast Asia.

Some political scientists decry this development as the return of US involvement in the region which has been dwindling since the end of the Cold War.

Increased US involvement in other countries under the guise of a campaign against terrorism was perceived by certain quarters as a means for the sole superpower to protect its economic interests.

The war against terrorism has also indirectly given local regimes the ammunition they need to decapitate their political opponents by denouncing them as "terrorists".

War on Iraq

Meanwhile, Knitter also expressed his concern about the possible outcome of a war against Iraq.

"My fear is if and when America moves into Iraq and if it becomes 'bloody' and body bags keep coming back, people will start questioning why they are doing this?" Knitter said.

The theologian added that people will then ask: "Is it [against] terrorism or is it for oil? Is it defending ourselves or an economic system?"

Prominent political scientists such as Malaysia's Chandra Muzaffar had argued that the United States particularly the Washington elites will become dominant and powerful since the Soviet Union has already collapsed.

Chandra claimed that such hegemonic power will pave the way for the rise of an empire.

"Pax-Americana, we knew, would emerge as the new empire without colonial territories, which would nonetheless perpetuate its power through economic corporations, money markets, the media and the entertainment industry, buttressed by Washington's political clout and its formidable military machine," said Chandra, who is also the president of Just.