When State Department spokesman Richard Boucher admitted Jan. 3 that the U.S. was still watching Somalia for signs of ties to terror groups, it was an ominous reminder that an African country could be the next target in the murky U.S. war on terrorism.

The prospect of America dropping bombs on another country wrecked by years of civil war and already suffering from internal, violent power struggles is troubling. It appears that the world�s only remaining superpower is acting more and more like a schoolyard bully.

When the horrific events of Sept. 11 unfolded, the world expressed sympathy and support for the terrorist attack on U.S. soil and the tragic deaths of innocent civilians.

No one would argue that the U.S. should not pursue the criminals who committed the vicious attacks. But there is considerable reason to urge caution as the U.S. widens its war on terrorism. Going after killers is one thing, using �terrorism� to assert an imperialist aim is another. They are incompatible and imperialism only leads to increased anger and opposition to U.S. foreign policy that oppresses and exploits other nations, or supports those who oppress and exploit their own people.

To date the U.S. cannot provide a cogent definition of what a terrorist is and the world has not provided a standard by which legitimate armed struggle is distinguished from terrorism. So the Israelis call suicide bombers terrorists and Palestinians who watch their stone-throwing children shot down in the streets and political leaders assassinated by the Israeli military say Israel is guilty of state sponsored terrorism.

Another worrisome aspect of the war on terrorism is America�s use of already feuding groups to fight a proxy war, or an American willingness to allow one side to call the other a terrorist to receive military aid needed to assert its dominance�whether the dominance will lead to peace in the country or not.

There is also legitimate fear that the U.S. could use terror as an excuse to get even with Somali warlords over the 1993 Special Operations exercise to arrest a Somali warlord that turned into a firefight. In the end, U.S. soldiers lost lives and videotape was shown of the bodies of servicemen dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. The carnage in the country has continued largely unabated.

In December, several warlords who refused to sign onto an agreement that clan elders approved to help create a central government, called some others who signed the accord terrorists. The name-calling was an obvious bid to get superpower weapons, money and support to continue an ongoing conflict�and hopefully win.

Calling the other side a terrorist today seems to have the same impact as calling an opponent a Communist yesterday�it opens the door for U.S. support. It is �support� from the U.S. on one side and the now defunct Soviet Union on the other that fueled the fires of civil war that still rage in the Motherland. Many of the seeds of the conflicts were planted and nurtured during the Cold War, when the East-West conflict meant both sides paid dictators who would do their bidding. In some cases, dictators simply changed sides when one paymaster balked at an embarrassing outrage or refused to up the ante in cash or weapons.

Could support of such dictators be called evidence of state-sponsored terror backed by the United States and its onetime nemesis?

Africa, in general, and Somalia, in particular, has enough problems already. More war in an already destroyed country only causes more suffering, more bitterness, more resentment and eventually more hatred, especially when it appears that outsiders are fomenting or exploiting already deep rooted conflict. The U.S. should forego military action in Somalia and Black America should lead calls for a careful expansion of any wider terror war. It might not be the popular thing to do, but it is the right course to pursue.