As the bombing in Afghanistan has become newsworthy only as a story to update rather than one that is breaking, we approach a major decision – whether or not to bomb during the approaching holy month of Ramadan. Regardless of whether we morally agree with the U.S. air campaign in Afghanistan, the fact is that our military is bombing a nation whose people are preparing to observe their most sacred season, and are trying to maintain relations with many other nations who have significant populations of Muslims.

We can stop the bombing out of respect for the Islamic faith, and we can use the cessation as a strategy to fight terrorism, without risking the harms of bombing during a sacred time.

Some may be quick to criticize such a plan, citing Egypt’s attack on Israel on Yom Kippur in 1973. Several factors bear consideration before justifying a bombing campaign based on actions by warring states nearly three decades ago. Such as justification – called a tit-for-tat strategy – hardly applies. We cannot continue a strike in Afghanistan during a holy time because Egypt once did the same thing in Israel; the same parties are not involved, and so the `turnabout as fair play’ logic is inapplicable in this case.

If we ignore the relevant facts of the current situation and maintain that `tit-for-tat’ is fair, then we must be ready to accept the consequences. If we strike during Ramadan, we must accept an increased likelihood of attacks on America during our upcoming secular and religious holidays. Thanksgiving. Hanukkah. Christmas. Kwanzaa. New Year’s. Can our leaders put our citizens at greater risk for retaliatory attack during our most important holiday season? How much more vulnerable and demoralized will Americans feel if they cannot safely gather with their families or worship?

By not striking during Ramadan, we can retain the moral authority upon which we have been capitalizing ever since Sept. 11. The righteous posturing that has garnered international support will dissipate, especially from nations with significant Muslim populations. Major international agencies, such as Oxfam and Doctors Without Borders, are already vocally opposed to U.S. actions that have barred aid organizations from administering food and medical aid to Afghan people in dire need. They will continue to contest U.S. military action, and will gain support as our bombs gut Red Cross tents and torch aid supplies.

Ceasing bombing during Ramadan allows a month to mount a massive aid campaign, time to dig latrines in the refugee camps and distribute blankets, time to get convoys into more remote areas and distribute food and fuel. What better way to recognize Ramadan than to observe one of the five pillars of Islam and give alms to the poor. We cannot do this if we bomb during Ramadan.

Bombing during Ramadan gives many of our tentative supporters a reason to withdraw their lip service from our campaign. Leaders of nations with large Muslim populations are already under extreme popular pressure, and if they support war during a time of fasting, prayer, and forgiveness of sins, they risk great political danger. If we do not force our allies into such a position by bombing during Ramadan, they will be more willing to cooperate with a nation that respects their beliefs and traditions.

Besides the good that will come by allowing a month of aid, cooperation, and respect, ending the air campaign during Ramadan allows more venues for bargaining and diplomacy. If we can grant the people of Afghanistan a month of grace and charge them with handing over Osama and other key al Qaida leaders before the end of Ramadan, the reprieve could evolve into a permanent end to the air campaign.

No weakness lies in pursuing alternate means of fighting terrorism, such as humanitarian aid and diplomacy. No weakness lies in transferring our national value of respect for religious differences to our dealings with other nations.

Weakness lies in ignoring the consequences of actions of vengeful force, and further embittering the faithful.

Rachel Faber Machacha is a graduate in international development studies from Emmetsburg.