|
|
|
Oxford, Friday September 24, 2004
The following essay is a translation of an essay by Alvaro Matud, winner of the Oxford Analytica/ La Gaçeta de Los Negocios essay prize.
Europe lived through twenty five years of Cold War, when the main danger for western Europe was Soviet expansionism, and the main concern, from the point of view of security, was the defence of the North Atlantic Treaty. Nowadays we seem to miss that clear, specific and predictable enemy, compared to the current terrorist threat.
Yet it would be wrong to say that terrorism became a threat only after September 11 th 2001. Europe has been plagued by terrorism for decades: the IRA in Britain, the Baader- Meinhof gang in the former West Germany, the Red Brigades in Italy and ETA in Spain have been a terrible scourge for the lives and the freedom of Europe’s citizens. In the name of nationalist or ideological Utopias, these terrorist groups have killed, kidnapped and stolen money under threat in several European democratic states. Some of these groups have almost disappeared and the ones that still remain are feeling more and more pressured by the sterility of their struggle.
In the past few years, the process of European unification has been a great help in fighting terrorism, providing a number of instruments of police and judicial cooperation. It would be safe to say that the free circulation of citizens within the Union has not increased the threat of these terrorist groups, because it has been accompanied by measures such as the Euro Order. And while judges in some countries still incapable of distinguishing between terrorists and political activists, Europe as a whole is becoming increasingly more aware of the need for cooperation in the fight against terrorism.
However, the events of 9/11 brought about a change in the terrorist phenomenon. Following a series of attacks against American interests, the terrorism that sprang up from Islamic fundamentalism attacked the very heart of the United States and declared war on the West in a very public way. From that moment onwards, in Europe it became quite clear [1] that the terrorist threat no longer came exclusively from self-styled “freedom fighters” or “subversive left-wing extremists”, acting in a specific country and against a specific state. Today, terrorism is a global menace.
In order to describe this new phenomenon, we need to remember how al-Quaeda, which is now usually translated as “La Base” (The Base) came into existence. It is widely known that Osama bin Laden was one of the organizers of the guerrilla groups that fought against soviet troops when the former USSR invaded Afghanistan.
Thanks to funding from the US government, which wanted avoid the advance of soviet imperialism in the region, hundreds of Muslim fighters from a number of countries were armed and trained to fight against the Red Army. By the time the soviet enemy was eventually thrown out, an organization was firmly in place to provide funds, training and transport for Muslim radicals from anywhere in the world who were willing to take on the infidel invaders of their Islamic countries.
This organization remained secret until Saudi Arabia joined forces with the US-led coalition in the First Gulf War. It was this Saudi-US collaboration which led Bin Laden to take up the armed struggle not only against the infidels operating from Saudi military bases but also against the “traitor” governments who lent their support to the “unholy” leaders of the West who had joined forces to fight a new “Crusade.” [1] It should be remembered that in the eyes of the more fundamentalist members of Islam, the whole of the Arabian Peninsula, and not just the sacred cities, is a Holy Land. Following his escape from Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden set about reactivating the organization created originally for stopping the Soviet invasion, and called his supporters to a new struggle, this time against an enemy, the US and its allies, detested by many Muslims since the birth of the state of Israel. But the intention was not to create a terrorist group in the conventional sense of the term –Bin Laden aimed to become the catalyst for all those who wanted to fight in this war.
[3] ….The importance of al-Qaeda and Bin Laden lies not so much in their role in specific terrorist attacks, but in having defined an objective, an enemy, a battlefield and a strategy. It would be true to say that they are the inventors of the terrorist threat of the 21 st century in the form of a global threat, structured in a network. [2]
The new terrorism pursues the objective of encouraging the population of Muslim countries to take up arms against their non-Islamic governments and to establish fundamentalist regimes.[3] This is how they will achieve Muslim unity. The major obstacle to this unity is the western world because it appears as a potential enemy, both in political and moral terms. The west’s international policy clashes with the interests of Muslim unity because it supports the State of Israel and the secular governments of a number of Arab nations. Moreover, western culture represents a threat for the integrity of the Muslim faith and customs. This ultimate objective is compatible with and even draws from the intermediate objectives of Islamic terrorism such as the independence of Chechnya, overthrowing monarchies, the creation of the State of Palestine, and others.
The strategy used to achieve this objective is not new but rather relies on the eternal strategy of terrorism, a spiral of violence in which terrorist action is followed by a violent response from the authorities, and then by an enhanced terrorist response. Therefore, the way to get countries such as Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan, etc to rebel against their governments is to attack America and Europe and provoke punitive strikes against Muslims, which would achieve the solidarity of the followers of Muhammad. Subsequently, Islamic terrorism will only cease to wage war against the west when USA and Europe react violently against Muslim countries. A little further on, we will also consider the terrorist’s belief that Europe will occasionally help to weaken the American enemy. That is also why the royal families of Morocco and Saudi Arabia are higher up on the Islamic terrorism’s list of objectives than the non-theocratic governments of Syria and Pakistan. Their intention is to strike terror into those countries, forcing their authorities to retaliate harshly, which in turn would provoke fundamentalist counter-reactions.
The battlefield is no less than the entire planet. The new terrorism is ready to act anywhere in the world where western interests have the greatest effect on citizens and their governments are ready to reply with military force. This will always be the primary objective, so terrorist attacks must always have a move public opinion very strongly, either by creating a strong feeling of insecurity in western cities or by carrying out particularly violent attacks in the rest of the world. In this sense, western troops in Muslim countries provide easy targets for the terrorists. That is why, in recent times we have seen a number of kidnappings-murders of citizens from the western countries that make up the military coalition present in Iraq. The case of the kidnapped Italian citizens is paradigmatic; the ransom demanded by the terrorists was a media spectacle, in which the Italian authorities and citizens were required to organize and carry out public protests and demonstrations against Italy’s presence in the coalition. The new battleground also includes countries whose population has a Muslim majority, but with a non-Islamic government. That is why the recent attacks in Syria should come as no surprise.
The geography of the new terrorist threat is linked directly to the most important change introduced by al-Qaeda in the terrorist war: the organisation’s structure as a network. Unlike the kind of terrorism that plagued Europe all through the latter half of the 20 th century, in which specific terrorists groups had a hierarchical structure, the new terrorism of the 21 st century follows the laws of the theory of networks systems. Thus, al-Qaeda is only a node which is linked to other node whose aims are not only compatible with those of al-Quaeda but also capable of producing synergy. Promoted by Bin Laden, the different terrorist groups that share the Muslim faith are convinced that they pursue a common objective, and that if they achieve the right level of coordination they will be more effective than if they act separately. While still retaining their autonomy, each terrorist group has been assigned its own particular battlefield, in countries and regions such as the Caucasian republics and Russia, the Middle East, Israel, The Philippines, Indonesia and North Africa, among others.[4] Al-Qaeda’s role is to provide funds, training and spiritual guidance. It has also assigned itself the battlefield of the West, where it has introduced “sleeping” cells which can be activated thanks to a number of committed, well-trained and experienced militants.
So much for the brief description of the new terrorist threat facing Europe at the dawn of the 21 st century. Let’s move on and attempt to describe how Europe can rise to this new and important challenge which rears its head just when the Union has opened its doors to 25 new member states, whose governments have just agreed a new European Constitutional Text.
As we have seen from the brief description of the new terrorist menace, the world is faced with a extremely complex phenomenon. Consequently, the measures introduced by the European Union and its individual member states will need to take into account a number of aspects, such as the economic development of the Muslim countries, the political position in the conflict in the Middle East, political and judicial cooperation within the Union, the defence of religious freedom within the limits of the State of Rights, and so on.
Despite being extremely necessary, none of these measures will be enough against an enemy whose convictions are so strong that he or she is willing to sacrifice his or her own life in order to achieve his or her objectives. The problem, then, is not only a political, policingor economic one, even though these factors can be decisive. Although Europe is advancing steadily in all these areas, it will never be able to entirely prevent terrorists actions inspired by the fanatical and fundamentalist elements of Islam [5].
Without claiming to be able to provide a “providential” solution based on a simple analysis, it would be possible, however, to say that the first victory in an eventual triumph over terrorism would come by making its violence useless. In other words, it is important to ensure that terrorist actions do not achieve their desired effect. We have already identified the objective that they pursue, but what are the intermediate objectives that they attempt to achieve in Europe?
The course of events following the attack on the Twin Towers might help to reveal some of the main lines of the terrorist threat. Firstly, although this is al-Quaeda’s battleground, al-Quaeda uses some of the typical elements employed by North African terrorist groups. The international debate in Europe around American policy in Iraq has not passed unnoticed in al-Quaeda. Subsequently, the network is aware that European governments are unlikely to respond with military action in the event of an al-Quaeda attack on European citizens or interests. As a result, the terrorists carry out attacks in Europe with the aim of eroding European support for the U.S.A., and as a means of weakening the enemy. That would appear to be the purpose of the March 11 th attack in Madrid and the taking of Italian hostages in Iraq. The terrorists are aware that popular opinion in those European countries that supported the American invasion (mainly Great Britain, Spain and Italy) was strongly against the official stance, and want to weaken those positions further. Following the success of the terrorist attack carried out in Madrid, which led a change of government, followed by the withdrawal of Spanish troops from the Coalition forces, it is likely that there will be more attacks in those European countries, in an attempt to dismantle the alliance with the U.S.. Yet the terrorist attacks are intended to do more than influence international policy using bombs instead of dialogue. They also try to create a widespread feeling of threat from and distrust of everything Muslim. While attempting to provoke a military response from America [7] which would destabilize the Muslim-majority nations, the terrorists are also making every effort to push Muslim immigrants in Europe towards more radical positions. The way to achieve this is by stirring up xenophobic sentiment among non-Muslim Europeans and by forcing authorities into creating security policies that show little respect for human rights, particularly in religious freedom.
Only by identifying these objectives of Islamic terrorism will it be possible to neutralize them. And the war on terrorism will be won only if governments are capable of proving terrorism to be futile. At the same time, however, EU countries must make an effort to explain to their citizens where the enemy lies. Although Islamic terrorism feeds off personal tragedy, misguided policies, etc, it is vital to stress continuously that the real enemies are the terrorists. If the terrorists’ actions find support in the legitimate claims of Europe’s citizens, it will be impossible to eliminate this menace. It is important to show society that the claims of Muslim terrorism are purely a show for the media, that their real intention is to unite Muslim brothers under the rule of fundamentalist governments capable of fighting against the pernicious influence of the West. The enemy, then, is neither the foreign policies of Europe’s governments (the latter can be changed by means of democratic elections), nor the Muslim faith (as respectable as any other faith), but terrorism. The democratic system of European countries clearly has its shortcomings, but it is important to prevent terrorists from exploiting them for their own ends.
From the point of view of strategy, in order to bring about the necessary unity of Europe’s societies against the terrorist menace, it is important to achieve political unity among the parties and States. Only that unity, and a commitment to avoid the temptation to benefit politically from the collateral effects of Islamic terrorism, can help to make the attacks completely futile.
Furthermore, the authorities need to prepare citizens against inevitable terrorist attacks. If fanatical violence is only met with a society incapable of holding on to its values when required to suffer for them, citizens will inevitably urge their governments to resort to whatever measures they see fit, just as long as those measures succeed in avoiding any form of suffering. In those circumstances, it would be all to easy for populist leaders to show disregard for human rights by introducing harsh measures against immigrants or by leaving to their own fate the Muslim citizens of their countries, who also suffer the consequences of fundamentalism.
If Europe’s citizens are to be prepared for this kind of terrorism, they must first be given the right information about the problem. A good communications policy could help citizens to identify clearly the terrorist as the sole enemy, and could help to avoid emotional responses to the arguments of those who support terrorist groups. Propaganda is considered an inextricable component of terrorism, which is defined as the “systematic use of murder, pain and destruction or the threat of these, to create a climate of terror, in order to obtain notoriety for a cause, and to intimidate a wider sector in order to satisfy the ends of the terrorists”. [6]
Some experts recommend three ways of establishing a correct communications policy on terrorism. Firstly, avoid taking a neutral stance; secondly, understand the nature of terrorism in order to report in a different way and, finally, develop a form of journalism based on accuracy in order to avoid rushed and hasty reporting and an excessively dramatic vision of situations and events. [7]
Furthermore, European civil society must be strengthened in such a way as to increase the moral commitment of Europeans to the defence of human rights, particularly the right to life and physical integrity, and the right to religious freedom. The global terrorist threat has taken over from the threat from other, enemy states, and that means that patriotism must give way to a civic moral conscience as a means of demanding sacrifices from a country’s citizens.
Quite possibly, the days when European leaders could only promise their citizens “blood, sweat and tears” are not entirely past. It's not much, but it would be enough if it were to go hand-in-hand with the will to stand firm in the face of those who would use Western democracies to serve their own ends.
1 In a fatwa pronounced by al-Quaeda in August 1996, Bin Laden explained the reasons that, five years earlier, had convinced him that the Saudi Arabian monarchy had to be overthrown: “For having disobeyed Sharia law; for having deprived their people of their legitimate rights; for having allowed the Americans to occupy the land of the Holy Places; for having unjustly jailed the sincerest wise men… Because of these measures, the regime has lost its legitimacy”; and went on to denounce the profanation of the Holy Places by means of unholy practices and by the presence of infidels: “Men are preparing laws that allow that which has been forbidden by Allah, such as usury (riba) and other things. The banks that practice usury fight for lands with those from the Holy Places and have declared war against Allah because they have disobeyed His orders (…) All this is happening near the Holy Mosque of the Holy Land. (…) There is no greater obligation than the expulsion of the Americans from the Holy Land”. Quoted by Gunaratna (2002), 28-29. Back to text.
2 “It’s not about Islamic fundamentalism or political Islamism, but about the global terrorist and fundamentalist network that has been built around the World Islamic Front for the Jihad Against the Jews and the Crusaders (“al-Jabbah al-Islamiyyah al-‘Alamiyyha Li-Quital al-Yahud Wal-Salibiyyin”), created on February 23 rd 1998. It was created by Osama bin Laden and his network al-Quaeda; Aiman al-Zawahiri, in the name of the the Egyptiam Islamic Jihad; Shayyakh Mir Hamzah, representing the Jaimat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan”. Manuel Castells, “Geoplítica de la Identidad I”, La Vanguardia (26.01.2003). Back to text.
3 “Our duty, which we have already done, is to incite the umma so that it/they will take up war in the name of God against the United States, Israel and their allies (…) The time has come for Muslims to realize (…) that the countries of the region have no sovereignty. Our enemies move freely and unhindered across our seas, our lands and our skies. They attack without warning (…) In my opinion, there are two armies in this conflict: the international Crusaders in alliance with Jewish Zionism and led by the United States, Great Britain and Israel. And on the other side stands the Muslim world. I cannot accept that in this conflict the Crusaders attack my country, invade it and enter the Holy Places, and then steal the petrol of the Muslims. And then, when they meet any type of Muslim resistance, they say we are terrorists. Either this is a display of their own stupidity or they believe that everyone else is stupid. We believe that it is our legitimate duty to resist this occupation with all our strength, and we must punish the enemy with the same menas that he uses against us”. (Osama bin Laden, interviewed in the TV news channel, Al-Yazeerah; 20.09.2001). Back to text.
4 “Although this terrorist network has a number of characteristics in common with Palestinian organizations such as Hamas or the Islamic Jihad, there appears to be a clear division of labour that requires Palestinians to fight against Israel, the Islamic movements in certain countries to fight against the oppressors of their respective states (such as Chechnya-Russia, or Kashmir-India), while al-Quaeda and its associated networks fight against the US and American presence worldwide”. Manuel Castells, “Geopolítica de la Identidad II”, La Vanguardia; 27.01.2003. Back to text.
5 “The fundamental aim is to awaken the Muslim masses, and that requires complete and conscious participation. Consequently, social uprising in the Muslim countries and attacks on Western symbols are the easiest and most educational forms of fighting in this stage of the Jihad. Even so, the main weapon in the mind of al-Quaeda is God’s will. That is why they have no doubt that victory will be theirs, and that, for this reason, the fight will go on forever. Because in this particular case, the power of identity is the power of God”. Manuel Castells, “Geopolítica de la Identidad V”, La Vanguardia; 31.01.2003. Back to text.
6 Wilkinson, P. “The Fight against the Hydra: International Terrorism and the Empire of Law”, in “Terrorismo, ideología y revolución”. Alianza Editorial, Madrid, 1987, page 271. Back to text.
7 Soria, C and Giner, J.A., “El secuestro terrorista de los medios de información”, in “Prensa, paz, violencia y terrorismo: la crisis de credibilidad de los informadores”. Eunsa, Pamplona, 1987. Back to text.
Original Spanish version 