Terrorism, an Unconventional Crime: Do We Have the Wisdom and Capability to Defeat Terrorism?

By Vahab Aghai Ph.D

The terrorist attacks of 9 /11 opened a window on a host of questions and assumptions about terrorism. Terrorism, An Unconventional Crime, uses those questions and assumptions as a starting point to explore the history, ideology, movements, leaders, and modern methodology of what is in fact an ancient phenomenon. Chapter topics include the following: What Are the Historic Roots of Terrorism? September 11How Could It Happen Here? Who Are the Taliban?

Is al Qaeda Taking Root in America? What Are the Tactics of Terrorism? Are Rebels, Guerillas, and Drug Cartels Terrorists? Is Islam a Major Threat to Europe? Can Terrorism Be Eradicated? If Terrorism Is an Unconventional Crime, What Are the Unconventional Solutions?

The book's principal focus is the current war on terrorism. The book discusses the various reasons for conducting operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, examines the tactics used, and evaluates their effectiveness. It devotes multiple chapters to the Taliban and al Qaeda, allowing readers to distinguish between the two groups and their varying interests and motives. There is also a detailed, chapter-long biography of the late Osama bin Laden.

One of the most important chapters is the one dedicated to the September 11 attacks. The rapid narration of the timeline of events, along with the descriptions of each of the nineteen hijackers and the modus operandi they used to succeed in the attack, transports the reader back to that fatal day. The gaps in the security system, the near misses of local authorities, the hijacker- pilot who was a near no-showthe what-ifs of the day are brought into sharp and painful focus.

Finally, Terrorism, An Unconventional Crime, presents factual information to debunk the idea, all too common in some circles, that all Muslims are terrorists or potential terrorists. The book cites a wide spectrum of studies, ranging from statistical surveys of terrorist incidents to social demographics, psychological profiles, compilations of correspondence, and the views of religious scholars specializing in many faiths. The latter affirm that every faith has a fundamentalist wing that could be radicalized at any time.

This kind of approach is a hallmark of Terrorism An Unconventional Crime. When dealing with contemporary material, the book carefully presents at least two different points of view, usually starting with official government reports and then comparing and contrasting the opinions of various experts. The object of the book is not to impose a particular viewpoint on readers, but to inform and involve them in what for years to come will likely be an urgent and important issue.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Aug 30, 2011
• ISBN: 9781465349934

Book preview

PART I

Terrorism Basics

Chapter 1 What Is Terrorism?

Chapter 2 What Are the Historic Roots of Terrorism?

image part I.jpg

CHAPTER 1

What is Terrorism?

FOR DECADES EXPERTS in foreign affairs, international law, and related fields have been searching for a definition of terrorism that will cover all of its various aspects. Different governments (and even different agencies within the same government) often operate with different definitions of terrorism, a situation that maximizes opportunities for misinterpretation, inconsistency, and mistakes.

A Spectrum of Definitions

Terrorism is a complex and ambiguous term, one for which there is no universally accepted definition. At its simplest, terrorism can be defined as using violent acts to obtain a specific goal (Merriam-Webster 2010) or, with a bit more specificity, using violence and threats to intimidate or coerce for political purposes (Princeton University WordNet 2010).

Beyond this point, the term tends to be colored by the perspectives of the people or entities using it. Some groups and governments have espoused it as part of a religious or political ideology, while others have actively employed it as a tactic. As a result, terrorism has been considered both a crime and a holy duty, a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination.

Three of the U.S. agencies responsible for counteracting terrorism define the term differently. The Department of Defense’s Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (2010) states that terrorism is the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological [and] including three fundamental elements: violence, fear, and intimidation.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (2006) describes terrorism as the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85). According to the FBI, terrorism is either domestic or international, depending on its origin, base, and objectives.

Title 22 of the U.S. Code, Section 2656(d) of the Department of State (2007), defines terrorism as premeditated politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

Other nations have gone into even more detail in devising their own definitions of terrorism. The British government enacted legislation that interpreted terrorism as including the use or threat of violent action against persons; serious damage to property; endangerment of a person’s life; implication of major risk for public safety or health; violence used or threatened to influence the government or an international governmental organization or to intimidate the public or any section of the public; and use of extreme violence or threat for political, religious, racial, or ideological cause (United Kingdom Legislation 2000).

One international body, the United Nations, has adopted a set of characteristics to define and criminalize various types of terrorist activities. Alex Peter Schmid proposed the following legal definition of terrorism to the United Nations Crime Branch: An anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by clandestine or semi-clandestine individual, group, or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal, or political reasons, whereby, in contrast to assassination, the direct targets of violence are not the main target. Victims are used to manipulate the main target (United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime 2006). It should be noted that this definition arguably fails to satisfy objections offered back in 200l that a comprehensive legal definition must distinguish between terrorism and legitimate struggle (United Nations 2001).

While the above does not constitute a unanimously accepted definition of terrorism, it has served as a basis for the United Nations to express its strong opposition to both terrorism and terrorist acts, methods, and practices. Furthermore, the General Assembly has stated, Any criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons, or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstances unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethic, religious, or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them (United Nations 1995).

Elements of Terrorism

Experts on terrorism differ on the number of elements needed to define the phenomenon; but as the preceding survey of definitions shows, there is a core of concepts: terrorism involves (1) the unlawful use of force (i.e., coercion) to produce (2) public fear (i.e., a psychological effect) in order to achieve (3) political and/or social objectives.

• Coercion. Terrorism is indisputably a criminal act. Whether terrorists choose to identify themselves as military or civilian warriors, their violations of civil and criminal laws are evident in activities such as murder, arson, and kidnapping. They routinely use force to subdue populations or make states change their policies.

• Psychological effect. Terrorism has as one of its key goals the fracturing of a society’s sense of security. Therefore terrorists rely on keeping societies in a constant state of fear. Such long-lasting effects, in turn, contribute to violence, stereotyping, and prejudice (McCauley), all of which further isolate people and keep the society divided and insecure.

• Political effect. Most terrorist acts are intended to cause a political effect. The aim is to influence members of the society to change their attitudes or behavior to favor the terrorists (Schmid and Jongman 2005). The effectiveness of the terrorist act lies not in the act itself, but on the intended target’s reaction to the act. The terrorists use the immediate victims as a means to reach the true target. For example, in an attack on a U.S. facility in a conflict zone, the dead and wounded of the attack are the immediate victims, but the true targets are the American people and the U.S. government. If the United States decides to withdraw its forces from such a place, then the attack would be considered a success.

Some experts would add an organizational component to these key elements. Consider this list of characteristics:

• Rooted in ineluctably political aims and motives

• Marked by violence or threats of violence

• Designed to have psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victims/targets

• Conducted by an organization with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure, whose members wear no uniforms or identifying insignia

• Perpetrated by a subnational group or nonstate entity (Hoffman 2006)

Political Terrorism

Acts of terrorism are driven mainly by political purpose. They are committed in order to achieve a desired social or political change that the terrorists believe would be impossible to achieve by any other means.

For political terrorists, the perceived enemy is usually the state—its law enforcement agencies, military, and/or entrepreneurial class (Meinardus 2010). Compared to opponents like these, the terrorists lack power and numbers, but they compensate with tactics. They use underground operations and surprise attacks to make a show of strength.

Terrorists often select highly symbolic targets to provoke and humiliate their opponents by demonstrating control over the foundations of a society (Deflem 2004). To spread and maintain a high level of fear among the general population, they attack innocent civilians. Their success depends on the severity of the reaction from the state and the intensity of the psychological impact they have on the society. Whatever the response, however, coverage by the media amplifies it by magnitudes. In fact, the best way for terrorists to achieve a great and an enduring impact worldwide is through the media, which experts consider to be one of terrorism’s key tools (Deflem 2004).

Terrorists perceive themselves as part of a morally superior elite charged with guarding the interests of society and fighting for the liberation of people. This stance is seldom supported by a democratically voted mandate. Nonetheless, terrorists use it to justify their immoral actions, like taking innocent lives for political or psychological effect.

Religious Terrorism

Extremist religious groups often use terrorism to achieve their political or social goals. Wahhabism is one example of a radical religious ideology that subtly fuses with politics. Wahhabism is a rigorous and radical form of Islam based on a literal interpretation of the Qur’an. It has been Saudi Arabia’s dominant faith since the 1800s and has had a major influence on terrorist groups. As religious ideologies go, it is intolerant of any deviation from its principles. Anyone taking exception to its teachings is considered an infidel and deserving of death (Schwartz 2002).

Interestingly enough, the majority of the mosques in the United States are influenced by Wahhabist ideology. This makes for some inherently contradictory situations: their fellow religionists abroad depend on Western countries for aid when needed, but they also kill citizens of those countries because they are infidels (Schwartz 2002). Similarly, the 9/11 hijackers slaughtered Muslims as well as non-Muslims when they brought down the World Trade Center towers.

How could this be justified? When political and religious terrorism mix, political problems are viewed from a spiritual perspective. That means that destroying those with opposing views is not merely an obligation, but a heavenly duty. It means that the cause has greater value than their own lives or the lives of others. It means that the number and nature of opponents must vastly expand to include every member of every other religion or creed, because all members of other faiths are viewed as infidels and therefore either potential enemies or targets. Religious terrorism’s enemies are far greater in number than political terrorism’s.

In recent years, the religious variant of terrorism has been gaining power and has become one of the main sources of terrorist threats. It is also increasingly linking up with political variant organizations, enlarging the power and potential danger of their acts (Meinardus 2010).

State and International Terrorism

Terrorism can also be classified as state or international. State terrorism involves violent actions within the geographic limits of a nation-state against people of the same nationality as the perpetrators and motivated by political or religious causes to change the current situation of the country. Frequently, domestic terrorist groups develop into international ones, increasing their enemies and targets. International relations are the key factor involved in internationalization. Some of these international terrorist groups receive support from state governments or from major powers, either for destabilizing a government or for geostrategic reasons (Barker 2003).

International terrorist groups focus on international operations. The radical groups are a prime example. During the late 1980s, the United States and Saudi Arabia supported such groups to fight the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan; however, the groups disagreed with the Afghan anarchist system and formed the Taliban instead. Its objectives changed over time, from expelling the Russians from Afghanistan to targeting and fighting the outside supporters of the corrupt regimes of the Arab world (Karman 2010).

Osama bin Laden wrote two declarations of war revealing details about these strategic changes: Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Holy Places in 1996 (Laden) and Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders in 1998 (World Islamic Front). In both documents, the United States and its allies were declared the principal enemies and oppressors of Muslims. Muslims would be liberated when the United States and other Western countries were defeated and expelled from the Arab world. The 1998 declaration, written by bin Laden and three other leaders of terrorist organizations, stated that it was the duty of every Muslim to kill Americans and their allies whether they were civilian or military. The purpose of this violence was to eliminate Western influence from the Arab and Islamic worlds and replace it with Islamic law. At the same time, the document excluded any possibility of conciliation, dialogue, or compromise with other religions because Islam was to be considered the only pure doctrine in existence, making moderate Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, Christians, and Jews potential targets of attacks as well (World Islamic Front 2010).

102936-AGHA-layout-low.pdf

History reveals that terrorism uses religion to mask a political agenda. Islamic extremists have erroneously perceived themselves to be the purest followers of Islam. Their extremist ideology makes them believe that all nations must be ruled by a literal interpretation of the Qur’an. Anyone or any entity not sharing their ideology is deemed to be against it.

The Wahhabis claim to follow in the footsteps of the early Muslims. They use semantics to recruit followers to support jihad and convince people that practicing other religions, including any other branch of Islam, is erroneous (Qamar 2010).

In conclusion, radical terrorism represents an effort to replace so-called infidel governments with scholars who have a fanatical ideology and interpretation Islam. In the process, the fine line between politics and religion is often and easily erased.

CHAPTER 2

What are the Historic

Roots of Terrorism?

TERRORISM HAS BEEN part of human history since ancient times. In 105 BC, the warrior Cimbri tribe had Rome in a state of panic called the terror cimbricus. A century later, the Romans found themselves facing a revolt by the Zealots, who were opposing Rome’s occupation of Judea. The Sicarii, as the Zealots were then known, used murder as a tactic. In fact, the group’s name was derived from the small daggers that they used to stab their victims, usually in crowded settings to facilitate escape (Gottheil and Krauss 2002). At the time, the Sicarii were considered assassins; today, however, their activities would be considered terrorism (The Columbia Encyclopedia 2008).

In 657, the Kharijites, the earliest sect of Islam, became fanatical and condemned Utman B. Affan, the third caliph (Muhammad’s son-in-law), and Ali Abi Talib, the fourth caliph (Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law). Those who disagreed with this turn of events were denounced as infidels deserving of execution, a tactic designed to keep the population in fear. The rigidity of the Kharijites’ ideology led to the creation of several different moderate and extreme subsects (Princeton University 2010).

Hassan Sabbah and the Hashshashin

The Hashshashin were another example of early terrorism. They were a secret militant religious group of Ismaili Muslims from the Nizari subsect who specialized in terrorizing the Abbasid elite. The Hashshashin were active from the eighth to the fourteenth centuries (Mock 2007).

The Hashshashin were followers of Hassan Sabbah, whom some consider to be the father of terrorism. Sabbah was born in 1031 into a Shiite family in Qum. When he was a child, his ambition was to become a religious scholar. To that end, he studied the Ismaili doctrine with Amir Darrab, a Fatimit da’i. Hassan truly believed that Ismailism represented the ultimate reality and embraced it as his faith. He held religious deliberations with Sunni theologians and denied the right of Sunni muftis to interpret religion, which he believed to be the prerogative of the imams. He knew the Qur’an by heart and often cited verses. His knowledge was also extensive in other areas, including astronomy, mathematics, alchemy, medicine, and architecture.

Sabbah was extremely disciplined and strict with his community. He insisted on observance of the Islamic religious duty of commanding the good and prohibiting the evil. So devoted was he to this principle that he had his two sons executed. One was sentenced to death for drinking wine (music, dance, and alcohol were strictly prohibited). His second son was convicted of complicity in a murder.

The doctrine Sabbah espoused was that of an Islamic mystery cult. Arkon Daruel, in his book A History of Secret Societies (1989), described the initiation rite to which Sabbah’s followers were subjected. First, they were taken to the Alamut, an imposing mountain fortress. There they were drugged. When they awoke, they found themselves in a lush garden sculpted into the mountainside—a depiction of the Muslim version of heaven. There they were served food and drink, and initiated into the secrets of sexual pleasure by houris (heavenly maidens). This was, according to Sabbah, a glimpse of the heaven that awaited those who would sacrifice their lives in his service. With this promise in mind, the Hashshashin (Assassins) were willing to follow his orders blindly.

Sabbah’s was a hidden political empire that existed within the borders of other empires. This arrangement required an entirely new kind of warfare with special tactics: Sabbah’s adepts would infiltrate to kill his enemies, often posing as religious teachers. Ultimately his power to assassinate an enemy reached as far as India to the east and France to the west.

Some experts consider Hassan Sabbah to be one of the great figures in history. A natural leader and organizer as well as a devoted missionary, he ruled the Alamut and other fortresses for thirty-five years. He died in June 1124 at the age of ninety (Amir 2007).

Modern Terrorism

The beginnings of modern terrorism can be traced back to England and the Gunpowder Plot of 1605. The object of the plot was to kill King James I and members of the House of Lords. Guy Fawkes organized a group of provincial English Catholic extremists to do the job. The plot failed (Trueman)).

Nearly 200 years later, French revolutionaries succeeded where Fawkes and his English co-conspirators had failed: the French removed and executed their king along with high-ranking nobles. What followed was a period of terror in the Cimbri mold. Maximilien Robespierre, leader of the Jacobins and one of the twelve heads of the new French state, decided that the best way to get a better government was through threat and violence. He established a dictatorship and ordered the execution of revolution detractors. The French Reign of Terror, as it was called, lasted a year and claimed thousands of