AT the start of the last century, Britain was still the world's greatest power. No one at that time would imagine that the days of British supremacy were numbered.

But even at mid century, the sun still never set on the British Empire. In the primary school I attended up to 1949, a world map that faced us at daily assembly was dominated by the red of the British Empire.

Who is to say that the US, the world's top superpower at the dawn of the present century, whose massive influence gives it an empire in all but name, will still be top dog when the century ends? The Soviet Union, once the political and military equal to the US, came and went within 75 years.

Where the present hiatus will lead is hard to say. Probably George W Bush has no more idea than the rest of us. But his promise to "defeat'' world terrorism, rightly called by Tony Blair "new evil'', and Blair's own call to "eradicate'' this threat to civilised life, are commitments that might come back to haunt them.

Blair's Britain still harbours the IRA. And what about the Basques in Spain, the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka? Are they to be "eradicated'' - once we have dealt with the Muslim fundamentalists?

Realistically, the US is bound to retaliate to the horror of last week's multi-strike at its heart with strong military action. But the surest way to eradicate or defeat terrorism is to remove its political roots.

The US speaks of the values of freedom and democracy. Yet it almost routinely ignores any UN resolution that is not to its liking. Its support for Israel's occupation of Palestine is a disgrace that should cause us, the British, special shame. For back in 1917, when Britain's word was still virtually law, we issued a declaration, via Foreign Secretary Lord Balfour, affirming that "in establishing in Palestine a national home for the Jewish people, it is clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities''. While we might have forgotten this, the Arab world hasn't.

Perhaps switching the billions intended by President Bush for his Missile Defence Shield towards alleviating poverty would more effectively disable terrorists than strongarm tactics. Perhaps there should be serious efforts to establish the UN as the forum where all international disputes are settled.

Without doubt, to brand the US terrorists merely as "madmen'' or "fanatics'' will not help vanquish them - or safeguard our future. An expert on terrorist groups stresses that the supporters of Osama bin Laden, the perceived mastermind of last week's attack, are "not country bumpkins. The typical profile would be doctors, accountants, or somone with a technical background''.

We need to ask ourselves why young men like these are prepared to die to wound America. And why, even excluding the US's sworn enemies, there are not a few countries, including Pakistan, where, according to reports, the unqualified grief expressed by leaders is not fully shared by the people.

To eradicate terrorism we need to make fundamental changes to global society. Otherwise the terrorists, probably uneradicated and undefeated unless we are prepared to nuke the planet, will do it for us.