Military violence constitutes -- in very exceptional circumstances -- a necessary evil in this very imperfect world. That is a bitter pill to swallow in a thoroughly non-militaristic society such as ours, where the clash of weapons provokes healthy reactions of repulsion. But unfortunately there is little one can do about it. Without armed violence the Nazi regime and similar forces that had the wind in their sails in Europe in the 1930s, would not have fallen. In the battle against the new forms of terrorism that reached a tragic culmination on 11 September, a limited form of military violence could also not be ruled out. 
	
	
 The many and often confusing reports we have received over recent weeks on who may be responsible for the attacks already allows a clear pattern to be detected. The network with which Usama Bin Ladin and his followers tried to destroy the very foundations of the West has ramifications worldwide, vast amounts of money, and thanks to the Taliban regime in Afghanistan also a number of excellent training and attack bases. The fight against the new, transnational terrorism requires an exceptionally broad and committed strategy. But to build this strategy, targeted attacks on the infrastructure available to Bin Ladin were necessary. 
	
	
 The United States and its principal allies have acted with exceptional caution over recent weeks to the unbelievable provocation of the 11 September attacks. They took pains to build a broad coalition, and tried to make it clear to their own population and the international community that the enemy is not Islam but a very well defined and perverse interpretation of this religion. And they placed the stress on the battle of endurance that must follow. 
	
	
 The attacks on targets in Afghanistan that began yesterday [7 October], remain a risky enterprise. The coming days will reveal whether or not they were effective, were sufficiently precisely targeted and limited in scope. That is a clear condition for this first, unavoidable phase in the battle against terrorism to be humanly acceptable. But they cannot be any real talk of success until the broad strategy against terrorism begins to bear fruit. A strategy that worldwide must include both a degree of repression but most importantly constructive and positive measures. 
	
	
 Whatever the case, we are entering a difficult period. There is a real danger that the wounded but not yet eliminated network will play its "trump card" and commit further acts of terrorism. The economic impact of the 11 September attacks was already disastrous, with clear effects on the world economy, hitting the poorest countries by far the most. The whole operation against terrorism can have positive but also unintentionally negative effects on the international stage. But we had no choice. To have sat back with arms folded would have made us all hostages.