Most emerging economies around the world often see the World Bank as an unwelcome guest that will not leave even when its host is not happy with it. Why is that so, you may ask? It is because, almost always, reports from that global financial institution is seen as bad news.
The fact that from hindsight, many prescriptions or reports from the World Bank have not quite helped the economies of developing countries adds to this intrinsic fear that any report seen as unhealthy by developing countries may cause an economic overheating.
The worrying prospect for investment inflow is perhaps the most dreaded of any uncomforting report from the World Bank.
But as disturbing as some World Bank reports may seem to many third World economies, (Nigeria inclusive), reports from that financial institution do carry a lot of weight. They signal either how good or bad the level of business prospect is in any particular states country or states within that nation.
And since commonsense is an integral part of economics, investors don't joke with any bad report concerning any country or its component parts.
It is in that regard that the recent report by the World Bank about some states in Nigeria, as very unfriendly for business must elicit more than a passing interest. The Bank had in its report headlined: “ Doing Business in Nigeria 2010”, listed Anambra, Imo and Ogun states as the “most difficult states for business operations in Nigeria. Doing Business Report is a sub-national and regional publication that captures differences in business regulations and enforcement across locations within a country or region. For what matters, the report provides the necessary data on the ease of doing business, using selected indicators, ranks each location and recommends reforms that will enable these regions or states to improve performance.
Whether the states so categorized as unfriendly business terrains avail themselves of the necessary data to improve on the “afflicted' areas, is up to them.
Taken together, the World Bank Doing Business Report not only rates the ease of doing business across nation's or states, it also analyses regulations affecting the life-circle of domestic, small to medium size firms, from business start-ups and operations, to trading, paying taxes and the closure of such businesses whenever the need arises.
Specifically, in arriving at why Anambra, Imo and Ogun, states were the “most difficult” for business operations, the Bank's Vice-President and Head of Network, Financial and Private sector Development, Mr. Janamitra Devan, identified four main indicators used in its judgement. These pressure points he said, include the ease of starting a business, dealing with construction permits, registration of companies and enforcing contracts. Apart from Anambra, Imo and Ogun States, the report also noted that Ebonyi, Cross Rivers, Ekiti, Abia and Enugu states were very unfriendly for doing business. While the report explained that doing business in the Northern states are much easier that cannot be said of the states in the south, especially Anambra, Imo and Ogun States. These states (Anambra, Imo and Ogun), the report insists do not have competitive regulatory frameworks that make businesses to flourish. Kano state was listed as the top performer in three, out of the four criteria used in the ranking.
Though many will complain sensibly about the yardsticks used by the World Bank, a dispassionate view should not be a hoo-hah at the states so categorized as most difficult for business. Some business analysts have dubbed the report as a poor advert for global business. However, the report being the highest circulation publication of the bank is indeed, a veritable business guide with uncommon influence worldwide. It is not a surprise why all the five states in the South East were ranked unfavourably by this report. States like Abia and Imo are gradually becoming “ungovernable” as a result of spate of kidnappings and armed robberies. This can be a big disincentive to business operations. Only recently, all the banks in Aba, the commercial nerve centre of Abia state, were forced to close shop for days because of robbery attacks. Add that to the incidence of kidnappings, which has become a cottage industry of sorts in Aba cannot but make business a dangerous undertaking.
The situation in Abia is not different from that of neighbouring Imo state. Perhaps worse. For instance, last week, bank workers in Okigwe, embarked on a 5-day strike as a result of incessant armed robbery attacks on their banks and staff. Precisely on April 21, Okigwe recorded perhaps the most numbing spectacle when a simultaneous robbery attacks on nine banks left at least 9 persons dead. Millions of naira were also carted away by the robbers. In the past one year alone, such incidence has become a regular occurrence in both Abia and Imo states, and to a lesser degree, in Anambra as well. Interestingly, the World Bank report came the very week Gov. Ikedi Ohakim claimed at the state organised Economic Summit that Imo State was the most crime-free state in the country. Really? That cannot be comforting at all, because business thrives on security and stability. The citizens and business operators in these states have watched helplessly as things just go from bad to worse in these South East states, most disturbingly, in Abia and Imo states. And in the worst of these, this cannot be good news. Without saying so openly, the World Bank considered these happenings before arriving at its decision.
In the absence of security, rumours take over as business of its own. Such is the peddling of malicious rumours in Imo state, that the state Police Command had to issue a strong statement warning rumour mongers to stop. It was the Police quick response to the wide spread rumour that a mere handshake with a Hausa man could cause the disappearance of one's sexual organ.
Sound ridiculous, isn't it? The command's spokesman, Mr. Livinus Nwaiwu who issued the statement last week described the rumour as “unfounded and irresponsible fabrication”, attributing it to the “idle work of talebearers”. The difficulty here, indeed, more difficult than the indices the World Bank used, is that rumour as news without a discernible source, its peddlers are as hard to nail as nail itself. Three months ago, I wrote in this column on the 'evil reports' always coming from the South East, especially Imo State. That doesn't mean that Imo is more crime-prone than others, but I did warn that the political and socio-economic implications of the spate of kidnapping, bitter rivalries among the political elites could be foreboding enough, with the unintended consequence of scaring away potential entrepreneurs and even existing businessmen.
When recently a group of concerned citizens of Ihiala in Anambra state visited the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Ogbonna Onovo, they lamented that insecurity poses a present danger in all the South East states. The truth is that the present inclement environment in the South East is making businessmen to relocate to other states they consider as safe havens. The biggest loser is the South East economy which used to contribute the highest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the whole of West Africa. But not any more. Has politics got anything to do with the bad reports from the South East? Yes! It has to do with the 'do-or-die' politics by the politicians.
Today, there is a strong suspicion that the governors in the South East are not doing enough to contain the sense of insecurity in their domains. This recently prompted the IGP to deploy 10,000 police personnel to the South East. The World Bank report should task the governors to do something urgent to check the factors that are giving their states this terrible image. They should be reminded that of all issues on which their administrations would be judged by the electorate next year, security challenge tops, perhaps, above all things else.
Writing on Security Alert in the July - August 2009 edition of Harvard Business Review, two leading security experts, Messrs George K Campbell and Richard A. Lefler noted that the insider threats have historically accounted for the majority of economic losses incurred by business operators. They do collateral damage through such nefarious activities like frauds, theft and generally, making businesses too hard to function. What's the solution? Embrace transparency, quell rumours, communicate candidly and reduce levels of discontent by creating job opportunities. Unfortunately, some of the state governors are the masterminds and conspirators of the problems they are elected to solve.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Sunday, June 20, 2010
PROBLEMS OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
A RESEARCH PAPER ON THE PROBLEMS OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM: A CASE STUDY OF OSAMA BIN LADEN’S ALQAEDA NETWORK
BY
ASIEGBU, TOCHUKWU .E.
THE CONCEPT OF TERRORISM
Terrorism has no universally accepted definition, and the heated arguments and debates in regards to what constitute it have made terrorism a contested concept. The language used to describe terrorism play a role in how it is perceived. Most definitions are in line with state legitimacy which describes the use of force by states against other states non combatants or civilians as legitimate or necessary evil, but when non state actors or other individuals apply the same types of violent attacks to achieve their goals it is being seen as terrorist acts. On the other hand, individuals that are being referred to as terrorists call states who perpetrate acts of violence against their own people terrorists, and this brings us to the statement “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.
International Terrorism and Security Research provided us with the definition of terrorism by The United States Department of Defense as “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.”1. According to this research, U.S. Department of State defines "terrorism" to be "premeditated politically-motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience’.2 For the fact that terrorism has no clear or universally acknowledged definition, thousands of definitions abound. Jason Franks defined terrorism as “the use of violence against civilians for political ends, including its use by states themselves“.3
This definition includes states that apply similar acts of violence in achieving their various interests as terrorists, and thus debunks states use of force against non combatants as legitimate action. Al-Abed Al-Jabbar, an Islamic scholar provided different definitions of terrorism by various international organizations as follows;
United Nations definition: Terrorism means” the acts that endanger the innocent human beings souls or threaten the basic freedoms or violates the human being dignity.”4
International law definition: Terrorism is “a group of acts that are forbidden by the national laws of most countries.”5
Arab Agreement definition: Terrorism means “each act of terrorism or threatening of such act, whatever the motives or purposes, implemented for crime project, individual or collective. It aims to spread terror between people and threatening them or endanger their lives or freedoms and their security. Also, it includes harm the environment or facilities or properties (private and public) or occupy them and conquer them or endanger any of the national sources.”6 In the words of Jason Franks, Terrorism can be seen as “a concept that is defined and understood relative to the legitimacy of state governance (as an illegal and illegitimate act), or as specific methods of political violence, such as hijack or bombing or as acts of violence against a specific target group, particularly civilians”.7
It is naturally proving difficult to establish a firm basis of research with which to investigate why it actually occurs. As Walter Laqueur has pointed out ‘disputes about a detailed, comprehensive definition of terrorism will continue for a long time and will make no noticeable contribution towards the understanding of terrorism’8 He also viewed terrorism as “violence generated by the conflict over the contention for political legitimacy. States believe they have legitimacy and brand any challenge to their authority as illegitimate.”9 States call groups terrorist, not necessarily because they use lethal violence to attempt to attain political goals but because they view their challenge as illegitimate. Equally groups label states terrorist not because they use lethal state violence to maintain their political position, but because they see it as illegitimate. Hence, the constant referral in the definition of terrorism debate to the expression, ‘one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist’. Sheikh Fadlallah, spiritual leader of Hizballah suggests that terrorism is ‘fighting with special means against aggressor nations in religious and lawful warfare against world imperial powers’.10
The orthodox definition of terrorism is employed in this agenda to legitimize violence in this definition. Terrorism is not new, and even though it has been used since the beginning of recorded history it can be relatively hard to define. Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. Obviously, a lot depends on whose point of view is being represented. Terrorism has often been an effective tactic for the weaker side in a conflict. As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Due to the secretive nature and small size of terrorist organizations, they often offer opponents no clear organization to defend against or to deter. The cycle of terrorist violence and recrimination is a common characteristic in so-called terrorist conflicts and is clearly illustrated in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The Israelis view Palestinian attacks as terrorism and respond with military violence, the Palestinians view this as terrorism and respond with violence. Both claim legitimacy of action, both view the other as terrorists.
According to Jason Franks, Many researchers agree that terrorism can be seen as the expression of a particular type of lethal violence and can be defined methodologically as a ‘special method’ of armed struggle or as a ‘weapons-system that incorporates recognized techniques such as assassinations and bombing, and is characteristically directed against people or property”11
The new war/new terrorism debates suggest that those involved in these types of violence are becoming increasingly hard to separate, especially as those involved in terrorism often perceive themselves to be in conflict. This conceivably accounts for the high lethality against non-combatants and the similarities in the type of violence used in both new war and new terrorism. The moral legitimacy debate on what terrorism constitutes has made it extremely difficult to come to a conclusion on a universally acknowledged concept. In line with this, Jason Franks pointed out that;
The problem is that whilst the study of conflict has moved
on and engaged with alternative methods of understanding
war and conflict, the orthodox terrorism understanding is still
constrained by the relative moral legitimacy debate, out of
which it is presently unable to break.12
REFERENCES
1) International Terrorism and Security Research. “What Is Terrorism”
http://www.about.com, March 05, 2005
2) International Terrorism and Security Research Ibid
3) Jason Franks Rethinking The Roots of Terrorism, (New York: Palgrave
Macmillan 2006), p1. 4) Adel Abdullah Al-Abed Al- Jabbar “Terrorism in Islam”
. http://www.saaid.com, web, August 14, 2005
5) Adel Abdullah Al-Abed Al- Jabbar Ibid.
6) Ibid.
7) Jason Franks op cit p2
8) Walter Laqueur in Jason Franks Rethinking The Roots of Terrorism,
(New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2006). p2
9) Ibid.
10) Sheikh Fadlallah in Jason Franks Rethinking The Roots of Terrorism,
(New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2006). p4
11) Jason Franks op cit p4
12) Ibid.
HISTORICAL CASES OF TERRORIST ACTIVITIES
Terrorism has surely existed since before the dawn of recorded history, but this assumed concept grew enormously in the twentieth century which came in the form of revolutions, liberation movements, rebellion, genocide, ethnic cleansing, military expeditions and other forms of violence perpetrated by both states and individuals alike against non combatants at different occasions and in different conditions.
At this point, it will be pertinent to point out some incidents of terrorism that occurred in ancient times before coming back to the twentieth century which witnessed series of terrorist attacks. Amy Zalman stated that;
The history of terrorism is as old as humans' willingness to use violence to affect politics. The Sicarii were a first century Jewish group who murdered enemies and collaborators in their campaign to oust their Roman rulers from Judea.1
He also noted that the Hashhashin, whose name gave us the English word "assassins," were a secretive Islamic sect active in Iran and Syria from the 11th to the 13th century who dramatically executed assassinations of Abbasid and Seljuk political figures terrified their contemporaries.2
Zealots and assassins were not, however, really terrorists in the modern sense. Terrorism is best thought of as a modern phenomenon. Its characteristics flow from the international system of nation-states, and its success depends on the existence of a mass media to create an aura of terror among many people. In the words of Brian M. Jenkins, “The word terrorism comes from the Reign of Terror instigated by Maxmilien Robespierre in 1793, following the French revolution. Robespierre, one of twelve heads of the new state, had enemies of the revolution killed, and installed a dictatorship to stabilize the country. He justified his methods as necessary in the transformation of the monarchy to a liberal democracy:”3
Robespierre's sentiment probably laid the foundations for modern terrorists, who believe violence will usher in a better system.
The rise of guerrilla tactics by non-state actors in the last half of the twentieth century was due to several factors. These included the flowering of ethnic nationalism (e.g. Irish, Basque, and Zionist), anti-colonial sentiments in the vast British, French and other empires, and new ideologies such as communism. In line with this, Brian M. Jenkins pointed out that Terrorist groups with a nationalist agenda have formed in every part of the world. For example, the Irish Republican Army grew from the quest by Irish Catholics to form an independent republic, rather than being part of Great Britain.4
The activities of a secret nationalist group based in Serbia (Black Hand or Union of death) could not be forgotten so soon, as it was a member of this group named Gavrilo Princip who actually succeeded in killing Archduke Francis Ferdinand on June 28, 1914 in the streets of Sarajevo, capital of Bosnia- Herzegovina, and the resultant effect combined with other factors caused the first World War. This action is nationalistic on one side, and rebellious on the other side, depending on individual opinions. Similarly, the Kurds, a distinct ethnic and linguistic group in Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq, have sought national autonomy since the beginning of the 20th Century. The Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK), formed in the 1970s, uses terrorist tactics to announce its goal of a Kurdish state. The Sri Lankan Liberation Tigers of Tamil are members of the ethnic Tamil minority. They use suicide bombing and other lethal tactics to wage a battle for independence against the Sinhalese majority government.
The age of modern terrorism might be said to have begun in 1968 when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an El Al airliner en route from Tel Aviv to Rome. While hijackings of airliners had occurred before, this was the first time that the nationality of the carrier (Israeli) and its symbolic value was a specific operational aim. Also a first was the deliberate use of the passengers as hostages for demands made publicly against the Israeli government. The combination of these unique events, added to the international scope of the operation, gained significant media attention. The founder of PFLP, Dr. George Habash observed that the level of coverage was tremendously greater than battles with Israeli soldiers in their previous area of operations. "At least the world is talking about us now.”5 Writing in similar manner, Arnaud Blin noted that International terrorism became a prominent issue in the late 1960s, when hijacking became a favored tactic. In 1968, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine hijacked an El Al Flight. Twenty years later, the bombing of a Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, shocked the world.6 He also observed that the era also gave us our contemporary sense of terrorism as highly theatrical, symbolic acts of violence by organized groups with specific political grievances.7 Throughout the Cold War, both the U.S. and the Soviet Union made extensive use of violent nationalist organizations to carry on a war by proxy, just as Gustave LeBon rightly put it, “Soviet and Chinese military advisers provided training and support to the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War, while the U.S. funded groups such as the Contras in Nicaragua.”8 He also pointed out that ironically, many violent Islamic militants of the late 20th and early 21st century had been funded in the 1980s by the US and the UK because they were fighting the USSR in Afghanistan.9 Fatah was organized as a Palestinian nationalist group in 1954, and exists today as a political party in Palestine. In 1967 it joined the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), an umbrella organization for secular Palestinian nationalist groups formed in 1964. Hoffman Bruce recorded that Factions of the PLO have advocated or carried out acts of terrorism.10 He also noted that Abu Iyad organized the Fatah splinter group Black September in 1970; the group is best known for seizing eleven Israeli athletes as hostages at the September 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich.11 All the athletes and five Black September operatives died during a gun battle with the West German police, in what was later known as the Munich massacre. In the 1980s and 1990s, Islamic militancy in pursuit of religious and political goals increased, many militants drawing inspiration from Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution. Brian M. Jenkins recorded that In the 1990s, well-known violent acts that targeted civilians were the Tokyo subway sarin gas attack by Aum Shinrikyo and the bombing of Oklahoma City's Murrah Federal Building.12 In the Americas, the activities of the Contras were also recorded. The Contras were a counter-revolutionary militia formed in 1979 to oppose Nicaragua's Sandinista government. According to Audrey Kurth’s observation, “The record of the contras in the field . . . is one of consistent and bloody abuse of human rights, of murder, torture, mutilation, rape, arson, destruction and kidnapping.”13 In the Middle=East, a lot of these groups assumed to be terrorists abound. Hezbollah ("Party of God") is an Islamic movement and political party founded in Lebanon shortly after that country's 1982 civil war. Inspired by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the Iranian revolution, the group originally sought an Islamic revolution in Lebanon and has long fought for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. Led by Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Kurth also asserted that since 1992, the group has kidnapped Israeli soldiers and carried out missile attacks and suicide bombings against Israeli military and civilian targets.14 Other groups that fight for their cause in the region include; Egyptian Islamic Jihad (a.k.a. Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiyya, Hamas, Al Qaeda which has Osama Bin laden as its leader etc
Terrorism continues to be a world issue even till date, and its existence does not seem to be coming to an end as more groups and individuals alike see the act as a way of achieving their different aims and objectives. The table below highlights terrorism timeline since the 1970s.
TERRORISM TIMELINE
Sources: TDO, USA News, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, FBI
Pictures by Sayyid Azim, AP by CNN
1970's to 1980's
Date, Place Type of Attack Casualties Who
January 1975: USA, NYC, Bar Bomb 4 killed It is one of a series of 49 bombings between 1974 and 1977 attributed to the Puerto Rican National Liberation Army.
December 1975: USA, NYC, La Guardia Airport Bomb planted in luggage department 11 dead, 75 injured
May 1981 : USA, NYC, JFK Airport, toilet of Pan Am terminal Bomb 1 dead Puerto Rican Resistance Army.
August 1982: Honolulu, Hawaii. Pan Am airplane. Bomb 1 killed, several injured Palestinian terrorist Mohammad Rashid
April 1983: Beirut, U.S. Embassy Suicide car bomb 63 killed Radical Shiite Muslim group takes credit
October 1983: Beirut, U.S. Marine barracks Bomb 241 killed Lebanese Party of God faction
December 1983: Kuwait City, U.S. Embassy Suicide truck bomb Six killed; dozens injured 17 pro-Iranian terrorists convicted
September 1984: Beirut, U.S. embassy Suicide car bomb 16 killed Islamic Jihad claims responsibility
April 1985: Spain, Restaurant near U.S. Air Base Bomb 17 Killed
June 1985: TWA flight 847 Hijacking to Beirut One killed Lebanese Party of God faction
June 1985: El Salvador Machine gun 13 killed
August 1985, Germany, American base in Frankfurt car bomb Two killed, 20 injured
October 1985: Egyptian coast, Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro Hostage situation One killed Palestine Liberation Front
November 1985: Egypt Air flight 648 Hijacking to Malta 60 killed Abu Nidal's Arab Revolutionary Command
December 1985: Rome and Vienna Airport attacks at U.S. and Israeli airport check-in desks 16 killed
February 1986: Lisbon, U.S. embassy Car bomb No injuries Leftist guerrillas take credit
April 1986: West Berlin night club Bomb Three killed, 150 injured A Libyan diplomat, two Palestinians and two Germans
April 1986: Rome to Athens TWA flight Bomb Four killed Mohammed Rashid, Palestinian terrorist, members of Iraqi backed May 15 organization
June 1987: Rome, U.S. Embassy Rocket fired on embassy Minor injuries Japan-based Red Army terrorists
February 1988: Southern Lebanon Kidnapping One U.S. Marine executed Lebanese Party of God
March 1988: Bogota, Colombia Rocket- propelled grenade Minor damage Guerrilla group
1990's to 2001
Date, Place Type of Attack Casualties Who
Feb 26 1993: USA, NYC, World Trade Center A bomb planted in an underground car parked at the World Trade Center 6 killed, 1000 injured Four Muslim fundamentalists are convicted of conspiracy and other charges related to the bombing, thought to have been ordered by Saudi terror master Osama bin Laden. In 1998, the so-called mastermind, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, is convicted and sentenced to life plus 240 years in prison.
July 1993: Lima, Peru Bomb explodes in bus outside embassy One killed Shining Path guerrillas suspected
March 1995: Karachi, Pakistan, U.S. Consulate Murder Two American diplomats killed Possible retaliation for World Trade Center bombing conviction
April 19 1995: USA, Oklahoma City Car bomb left outside a federal building 168 killed, 600 injured Timothy McVeigh, 33, a member of an anarchist group hostile to the federal government, is convicted of the attack in 1997 and is executed in June 2001.
September 1995: Moscow, U.S. Embassy Rocket-propelled grenade Minor damage No suspects
Oct 1995: USA, train travelling between Miami and Los Angeles and derailed in Arizona Derailed by sabotage. Two of the bolts on one of the joints of the track were removed. 1 killed, 80 injured Previously unknown group calling themselves "The Sons of the Gestapo".
November 1995: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, U.S. military headquarters Bomb Seven killed Four anti-royal Saudi Arabian dissidents, possible connections to Party of God an Iran; beheaded in Saudi Arabia
February 1996: Athens, U.S. Embassy Anti-tank missile attack No injuries National Struggle terrorist group
June 1996: Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Khobar Towers Truck bomb 19 U.S. airmen killed Unknown
July 1996: USA, Centenary Park in Atlanta, Georgia. Olympic Games. Bomb 2 killed, 110 injured
November 1997: Karachi, Pakistan Murder of American oil-company employees Five killed Possible revenge for U.S. conviction of Pakistani for murders of two CIA agents
May 1998: Unabomber sentenced to life Parcel bombings 3 killed, 28 injured Theodore Kaczynski, alias the "Unabomber", is sentenced to life imprisonment for an 18-year campaign of parcel bombings as part of an "anti-modernist" crusade
June 1998: Lebanon, U.S. Embassy Rocket-propelled grenades No injuries
August 1998: Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, U.S. embassies Simultaneous bombings 263 killed, 5000 injured Possibly Osama bin Laden, Saudi financier
October 2000: The Destroyer USS Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden Bomb blast 17 killed
September 11, 2001:
USA, NYC, World Trade Center, Pentagon, Pensylvania Airplane crashes Over 6000 killed, thousands injured Possibly Osama Bin Laden with the help of the Taliban and international cells and states.
REFERENCES
1. Amy Zalman, , “History of Terrorism- A Guide to the History of
Terrorism>” about.com, web, June 1, 2007.
2. Ibid.
3. Brian M. Jenkins “Terrorism & Terrorists: Introduction” helium.com,
web, May 25, 2004.
4. Ibid.
5. George Habash, “A history of terrorism” books.google.com, web,
April 15, 2010.
6. Arnaud Blin “A history of terrorism: from antiquity to al Qaeda”
books.google.com, web, Nay 28, 2006.
7. Ibid.
8. Gustave LeBon, The Psychology of the Great War,
books.google.com, web, October7, 2008.
9. Ibid.
10. Hoffman Bruce. Inside Terrorism. (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1988). p. 47
11. Ibid.
12. . Brian M. Jenkins, op cit.
13. Audrey Kurth Cronin “Terrorists and Suicide Attacks”
education.crs.org, web, August 29, 2003.
14. Ibid.
HISTORICAL EMERGENCE OF OSAMA BIN LADEN AND HIS AL QAEDA NETWORK
Considered the world's foremost terrorist, Osama bin Laden is the leader of an assumed terrorist organization known as Al-Qaeda, or "The Base." Bin Laden is the alleged perpetrator of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center, damaged part of the Pentagon, and resulted in a plane crash in Pennsylvania. At first he denied involvement in the attacks, referring to them, through an aid, as "punishment from Allah." In recent years he has taken responsibility for "inspiring" the events of Sept. 11, 2001.
The origin of Al Qaeda is traced to the events following the invasion of Afghanistan by the defunct Soviet Union. Just as Michel Chossudovsky recorded, “the alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders"1 He also noted that In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan: "With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad."2
The United States viewed the conflict in Afghanistan, with the Afghan Marxists and allied Soviet troops on one side and the native Afghan mujahideen on the other, as a blatant case of Soviet expansionism and aggression. According to Wright, Lawrence, “The U.S. channeled funds through Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency to the native Afghan mujahideen fighting the Soviet occupation in a CIA program called Operation Cyclone”.3
Maktab al-Khidamat was established by Abdullah Azzam and Bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan, in 1984. Wright also stated that from 1986 it began to set up a network of recruiting offices in the United States, the hub of which was the Al Kifah Refugee Center at the Farouq Mosque in Brooklyn's Atlantic Avenue. Among notable figures at the Brooklyn center were "double agent.4
According to Esposito, John, “Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khidamat, or the "Services Office", a Muslim organization founded in 1980 to raise and channel funds and recruit foreign mujahideen for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was founded by Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, a Palestinian Islamic scholar and member of the Muslim Brotherhood.”5 Beginning in 1987, Azzam and bin Laden started creating camps inside Afghanistan. The Soviet Union finally withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. To the surprise of many, Mohammed Najibullah's communist Afghan government hung on for three more years before being overrun by elements of the mujahideen. With mujahideen leaders unable to agree on a structure for governance, chaos ensued, with constantly reorganizing alliances fighting for control of ill-defined territories, leaving the country devastated. Esposito also revealed that Toward the end of the Soviet military mission in Afghanistan, some mujahideen wanted to expand their operations to include Islamist struggles in other parts of the world, such as Israel and Kashmir.6 A number of overlapping and interrelated organizations were formed to further those aspirations. One of these was the organization that would eventually be called al-Qaeda, formed by Osama bin Laden with an initial meeting held on August 11, 1988. Bin Laden wished to establish nonmilitary operations in other parts of the world; Azzam, in contrast, wanted to remain focused on military campaigns. After Azzam was assassinated in 1989, the MAK split, with a significant number joining bin Laden's organization. In the words of Arnaud Blin, “From around 1992 to 1996, al-Qaeda and bin Laden based themselves in Sudan at the invitation of Islamist theoretician Hassan al Turabi.” 7 The move followed an Islamist coup d'état in Sudan, led by Colonel Omar al-Bashir, who professed a commitment to reordering Muslim political values. During this time, bin Laden assisted the Sudanese government, bought or set up various business enterprises, and established camps where insurgents trained. Due to bin Laden's continuous verbal assault on King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, on 5 March 1994 Fahd sent an emissary to Sudan demanding bin Laden's passport; bin Laden's Saudi citizenship was also revoked. His family was persuaded to cut off his monthly stipend, the equivalent of $7 million a year, and his Saudi assets were frozen. His family publicly disowned him. In 1996, al-Qaeda announced its jihad to expel foreign troops and interests from what they considered Islamic lands. Bin Laden issued a fatwa, which amounted to a public declaration of war against the United States of America and any of its allies, and began to refocus al-Qaeda's resources towards large-scale, propagandist strikes. Also occurring on June 25, 1996, was the bombing of the Khobar towers, located in Khobar, Saudi Arabia. Arnaud Blin also recorded that On February 23, 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, a leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, along with three other Islamist leaders, co-signed and issued a fatwa (binding religious edict) calling on Muslims to kill Americans and their allies where they can, when they can. 8 It was this declaration of the Fatwas and the call for jihad against the US and Israel that instigated other attacks by the Al Qaeda which got to its height on September 11, 2001.
AL QAEDA ATTACKS
Al Qaeda attacks started in 1992, just as Chossudovsky recorded, “Al-Qaeda attacks (also al-Qa'ida) began in 1992, with coordinated bombings of two hotels in Aden, Yemen, killing one Australian tourist.”9 He also asserted that Bin Laden has claimed al-Qaeda responsibility for the 1993 attack on U.S. troops in Mogadishu, the bombing of the National Guard Training Center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in 1995, and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.10 However, there is no solid evidence to support these claims from Bin Laden, though he may have provided financial support along with inspiration for the attackers.
Wright highlighted Al Qaeda alleged major attacks as follows;
• On December 29, 1992, the first attack by Al Qaeda was carried out in Aden, Yemen.11
• The 1993 World Trade Center bombing occurred on February 26, 1993, when Ramzi Yousef parked a rented van full of explosives in the parking garage beneath the World Trade Center.12
According to David Johnson, “In 1996, bin Laden personally engineered a plot to assassinate Clinton while the president was in Manila for the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation. However, intelligence agents intercepted a message just minutes before the motorcade was to leave, and alerted the United States Secret Service. Agents later discovered a bomb planted under a bridge” 13
He also stated that In October 2000, al-Qaeda militants in Yemen bombed the missile destroyer U.S.S. Cole in a suicide attack, killing 17 U.S. servicemen and damaging the vessel while it lay offshore.14
The September 11 attacks were the most devastating terrorist acts in American history, killing approximately 3,000 people. Two commercial airliners were deliberately flown into the World Trade Center towers, a third into The Pentagon, and a fourth, originally intended to target the United States Capitol, crashed in Pennsylvania. Wright recorded that the attacks were conducted by al-Qaeda, acting in accord with the 1998 fatwa issued against the United States and its allies by military forces under the command of bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and others. 15
He also revealed that evidence points to suicide squads led by al-Qaeda military commander Mohamed Atta as the culprits of the attacks, with bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Hambali as the key planners and part of the political and military command. 16
Messages issued by bin Laden after September 11, 2001, praised the attacks, and explained their motivation while denying any involvement.[ Bin Laden legitimized the attacks by identifying grievances felt by both mainstream and Islamist Muslims, such as the general perception that the United States was actively oppressing Muslims.
According to David Johnson, “It is thought that al-Qaeda was responsible for the bombing of the Madrid commuter train system, 911 days after the 9/11 attacks.”17 However, the group did not claim any responsibility of this attack. He also asserted that Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb claimed to have been responsible for the April 11, 2007 Algiers bombings.18
In the words of Chossudovsky, “Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the bombing of the Danish embassy in Pakistan on 2 June 2008.”19 He also reported that On June 1, 2009, Muslim convert Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad opened fire in a drive-by shooting on a United States military recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas, killing one US soldier and wounding another. At the time he stated that the act was "for the sake of Allah, the Lord of the entire world, and also retaliation on U.S. military" and law enforcement authorities concluded "there doesn't appear to be a wider conspiracy or, at this point in time, any indication that he's a part of a larger group or a conspiracy". However he later professed that he had conducted a "Jihad attack" as part of Al Qaeda.20
Shortly after the arrest of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in the December 25, 2009 bombing attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 253, the suspect reportedly told officials he had traveled to Yemen for training by Al-Qaeda, although British counterterrorism officials dismissed the claims. According to David Johnson, “Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula claimed responsibility for the attack.”21
He also revealed that group released photos of Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab smiling in a white shirt and white Islamic skullcap with the Al Qaeda in Arabian Peninsula banner in the background.22
Al Qaeda network will continue to soar as long as there are devoted Islamic Fundamentalists who are willing to sacrifice their lives in order to actualize what they perceive as a just cause.
REFERENCES
1) Michel Chossudovsky “Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism",
globalresearch.ca, web, January 20, 2008
2) Ibid.
3) Wright, Lawrence. "The Rebellion Within". The New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com, web, September
15, 2009
4) Ibid.
5) Esposito, John L. Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam.
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2002)
p.36
6) Ibid.
7) Arnaud Blin “A history of terrorism: from antiquity to al Qaeda”
books.google.com, web, Nay 28, 2006
8) Ibid.
9) Michel Chossudovsky, op cit.
10) Ibid.
11) Wright, Lawrence. Op cit.
12) Ibid.
13) David Johnson, op cit.
14) Ibid.
15) Wright, Lawrence. Op cit.
16) Ibid.
17) David Johnson, op cit.
18) Ibid.
19) Michel Chossudovsky, op cit.
20) Ibid.
21) David Johnson, op cit.
22) Ibid.
GRIEVANCES OF OSAMA BIN LADEN AND HIS AL QAEDA NETWORK AGAINST THE UNITED STATES AND HER ALLIES
Most liberation fighters of Arab origin trace the roots of their grievances against the US and her western allies to the Arab- Israeli conflict in the Middle- East, and Al Qaeda is not an exception to this fact. The support that US has continued to give the Israelis in respect of this conflict has brought anger and hatred against US and her allies by the Arabs. Consequently, the Arabs who perceive the war in Palestine as a holy one have continued to show all forms of retaliation against the US and her allies in order to seek redress.
In his 1998 fatwa entitled, "Jihad against Jews and Crusaders” Bin Laden identified three grievances against the US:
First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.1
If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.
Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once again trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.
So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.2
Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper state lets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.3
In respect to Bin Laden’s grievances against the Jews, He warned against alleged Jewish conspiracies: as Wright recorded it in his exact words, “These Jews are masters of usury and leaders in treachery. They will leave you nothing, either in this world or the next.4 He revealed that Osama has also made at least one clear denunciation of Christians: "Every Muslim, from the moment they realize the distinction in their hearts, hates American, hates Jews, and hates Christians. This is a part of our belief and our religion.” 5
As events of 9/11 unfolded, the first question asked was, “Why would anyone do this terrible thing?” The fact is that Usama bin Laden tried to explain, but few were listening. In 1996, bin Laden issued a “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places." This statement set forth a number of his grievances. In 1998, his so-called World Islamic Front released a call for “Jihad against Jews and Crusaders.” And in November 2002, he tried again to make his points in a folksy sounding “Letter to America.” These statements outline the basic complaints:
• The US, Israel and Western Allies support Israel and persecute Palestinians • The US violates the sanctity of Muslim Holy Lands by placing troops in Saudi Arabia • The US undermines Islam by supporting secular regimes • The US undermines Islam by exporting Western values • The US obstructs establishment of Shariah (Islamic law) • The US, Israel and Western allies plunder the Middle East oil at paltry prices • The US and its allies are killing Muslims with impunity • The US and UN sanctions and bombing starved Iraqi children • The US has attacked us [Muslims] in Somalia, and supported the Russians in Chechnya, the Indian oppression in Kashmir, and Jewish aggression in Lebanon • The US imposed sanctions on Pakistan for developing nuclear weapons, but takes no action against Israel for developing nuclear weapons, missiles and submarines. 6
When you consider these grievances as outlined by Osama Bin Laden himself, you can agree with me that the end of terror or Al Qaeda oriented activities is not in sight as all parties involved in this new form of conflict are unlikely to surrender anytime in the near future.
REFERENCES
1) Osama Bin Laden, "Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders"
infoplease.com, web, February 13, 1999.
2) Ibid.
3) Ibid.
4) Wright, Lawrence. "Declaration of War against the Americans
Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places",
mideastweb.com, web, December 15, 1996. 5) Ibid.
6) Osama Bin Laden, “Letter to America.” mideastweb.com, web,
November 25, 2002
OBSTACLES TO ERADICATION OF AL QAEDA ORIENTED TERRORISM BY THE US AND HER ALLIES
Whenever an established government is confronted with terrorism they try to stop it (1) by imprisoning or killing terrorist leaders, (2) by bribing or appeasing terrorist leaders, or in extreme cases (3) by killing every male belonging to the group on behalf of which the terrorists operate (genocide).
It has been proved by the history of mankind, and it logically follows from the nature of terrorism, that it is impossible to stop terrorism by killing or imprisoning terrorist leaders. As long as the cause of terrorism (the feeling of injustice) remains, new terrorist leaders appear and replace those killed or imprisoned. Deutch was quite right when he stated that the very fact of killing or imprisoning terrorist leaders increases the feeling of injustice and hatred that feeds terrorism and arouses desire for revenge.1 He also noted that the killed terrorist leaders become symbols, martyrs, saints and role models for their followers. Occasional terrorist incidents become regular and increasingly frequent part of daily life, until they reach the proportions of a full scale civil war.2
It has been proved by the history of mankind, and it logically follows from the nature of terrorism, that it is impossible to stop terrorism by bribing or appeasing terrorist leaders. In line with this fact, Nicholas Berry stated that as long as the cause of terrorism (the feeling of injustice) remains, the bribed or appeased leaders will lose the support of their followers and will be replaced by new leaders.3 He also noted that the very fact of bribery or appeasement increases the feeling of disdain towards the established government and the resolve to continue the struggle.4
Theoretically genocide appears to be an effective way to eradicate terrorism: kill every terrorist and all the people on whose behalf terrorists fight their war, and terrorism will disappear. In practice such solution could be extremely difficult or even impossible to implement.
The very fact that terrorists have sanctuaries in most part of the world makes it difficult for the United States and her allies to track down all possible attacks against them.
The willingness of perpetrators of this act to sacrifice their lives in the process of carrying it out, and the belief in fighting for “a just cause” by these fundamentalists ensure the sustainability of the terrorists’ struggle. Osama Bin Laden and other Islamic leaders are aware of this fact as it could be noticed in the extract from Bin Laden’s 1996 Fatwa as recorded by Wright; “Those youths know that their rewards in fighting you, the USA, are double their rewards in fighting someone else not from the people of the book. They have no intention except to enter paradise by killing you. An infidel, and enemy of God like you, cannot be in the same hell with his righteous executioner. Our youths chanting and reciting the word of Allah, the most exalted: {fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace, and assist you against them and heal the heart of a believing people}…5
Finally, as a result of the fact that the root causes of this violence has not been properly addressed by either the United Nations or anybody who has the power to do so, the end to this very act of violence does not seem to be in sight.
REFERENCES
1) Carter Deutch, “Truth, Honesty and Justice: The Alternative to Wars,
Terrorism and Politics” worldjustice.org,
web, July 14, 2002.
2) Ibid.
3) Nicholas Berry, “Eliminating Terrorist Sanctuaries” worldjustice.org,
web, December 10, 2001.
4) Ibid.
5) Wright, Lawrence. "Declaration of War against the Americans
Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places",
mideastweb.com, web, December 15, 1996
RECOMMENDATIONS
The problems associated with terrorism are quite enormous. The term itself has also been subjected to overheated debates without arriving at a reasonable conclusion as to what it constitutes. In order to address this new threat to world peace, I hereby recommend that:
1. The United Nations should come up with a good definition of terrorism which will include all forms of violence directed against non- combatants and other civilians by both state and non state actors which should be done without sentiments or special preferences, and devise means of punishing perpetrators of the act accordingly.
2. The UN Security Council should re- visit the issue of Arab- Israeli conflict in the Middle- East and address the problem squarely without the involvement of either the US or Great Britain. It will be considered wise to bring in neutral bodies in respect to this.
3. The US should stay clear off the Middle- East crises in order not to attract further acts of aggression against its citizens or try as much as possible to maintain a neutral position in respect to these crises with particular reference to Palestinian- Israeli conflict.
4. The US should try as much as possible to respect the sovereignty of other states by allowing the UN to do its work in respect to conflict resolution and other related matters instead of carrying out series of invasions against weaker nations which is against International law.
5. All the Moslem world and Islamic Fundamentalists should not be allowed to use “Jihad” to instigate youths and direct acts of violence against non Moslems even when they are not involved in any conflict with them thereby threatening global peace and security.
6. Arabs and other Moslems should allow other existing religions to have their own freedom to accept their belief without striving to spread Islam to other states forcefully through Jihad or other means. They should be made to understand that this constant call for a global Jihad is a serious threat to world peace, and should be dealt with accordingly.
BY
ASIEGBU, TOCHUKWU .E.
THE CONCEPT OF TERRORISM
Terrorism has no universally accepted definition, and the heated arguments and debates in regards to what constitute it have made terrorism a contested concept. The language used to describe terrorism play a role in how it is perceived. Most definitions are in line with state legitimacy which describes the use of force by states against other states non combatants or civilians as legitimate or necessary evil, but when non state actors or other individuals apply the same types of violent attacks to achieve their goals it is being seen as terrorist acts. On the other hand, individuals that are being referred to as terrorists call states who perpetrate acts of violence against their own people terrorists, and this brings us to the statement “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.
International Terrorism and Security Research provided us with the definition of terrorism by The United States Department of Defense as “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.”1. According to this research, U.S. Department of State defines "terrorism" to be "premeditated politically-motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience’.2 For the fact that terrorism has no clear or universally acknowledged definition, thousands of definitions abound. Jason Franks defined terrorism as “the use of violence against civilians for political ends, including its use by states themselves“.3
This definition includes states that apply similar acts of violence in achieving their various interests as terrorists, and thus debunks states use of force against non combatants as legitimate action. Al-Abed Al-Jabbar, an Islamic scholar provided different definitions of terrorism by various international organizations as follows;
United Nations definition: Terrorism means” the acts that endanger the innocent human beings souls or threaten the basic freedoms or violates the human being dignity.”4
International law definition: Terrorism is “a group of acts that are forbidden by the national laws of most countries.”5
Arab Agreement definition: Terrorism means “each act of terrorism or threatening of such act, whatever the motives or purposes, implemented for crime project, individual or collective. It aims to spread terror between people and threatening them or endanger their lives or freedoms and their security. Also, it includes harm the environment or facilities or properties (private and public) or occupy them and conquer them or endanger any of the national sources.”6 In the words of Jason Franks, Terrorism can be seen as “a concept that is defined and understood relative to the legitimacy of state governance (as an illegal and illegitimate act), or as specific methods of political violence, such as hijack or bombing or as acts of violence against a specific target group, particularly civilians”.7
It is naturally proving difficult to establish a firm basis of research with which to investigate why it actually occurs. As Walter Laqueur has pointed out ‘disputes about a detailed, comprehensive definition of terrorism will continue for a long time and will make no noticeable contribution towards the understanding of terrorism’8 He also viewed terrorism as “violence generated by the conflict over the contention for political legitimacy. States believe they have legitimacy and brand any challenge to their authority as illegitimate.”9 States call groups terrorist, not necessarily because they use lethal violence to attempt to attain political goals but because they view their challenge as illegitimate. Equally groups label states terrorist not because they use lethal state violence to maintain their political position, but because they see it as illegitimate. Hence, the constant referral in the definition of terrorism debate to the expression, ‘one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist’. Sheikh Fadlallah, spiritual leader of Hizballah suggests that terrorism is ‘fighting with special means against aggressor nations in religious and lawful warfare against world imperial powers’.10
The orthodox definition of terrorism is employed in this agenda to legitimize violence in this definition. Terrorism is not new, and even though it has been used since the beginning of recorded history it can be relatively hard to define. Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. Obviously, a lot depends on whose point of view is being represented. Terrorism has often been an effective tactic for the weaker side in a conflict. As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Due to the secretive nature and small size of terrorist organizations, they often offer opponents no clear organization to defend against or to deter. The cycle of terrorist violence and recrimination is a common characteristic in so-called terrorist conflicts and is clearly illustrated in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The Israelis view Palestinian attacks as terrorism and respond with military violence, the Palestinians view this as terrorism and respond with violence. Both claim legitimacy of action, both view the other as terrorists.
According to Jason Franks, Many researchers agree that terrorism can be seen as the expression of a particular type of lethal violence and can be defined methodologically as a ‘special method’ of armed struggle or as a ‘weapons-system that incorporates recognized techniques such as assassinations and bombing, and is characteristically directed against people or property”11
The new war/new terrorism debates suggest that those involved in these types of violence are becoming increasingly hard to separate, especially as those involved in terrorism often perceive themselves to be in conflict. This conceivably accounts for the high lethality against non-combatants and the similarities in the type of violence used in both new war and new terrorism. The moral legitimacy debate on what terrorism constitutes has made it extremely difficult to come to a conclusion on a universally acknowledged concept. In line with this, Jason Franks pointed out that;
The problem is that whilst the study of conflict has moved
on and engaged with alternative methods of understanding
war and conflict, the orthodox terrorism understanding is still
constrained by the relative moral legitimacy debate, out of
which it is presently unable to break.12
REFERENCES
1) International Terrorism and Security Research. “What Is Terrorism”
http://www.about.com, March 05, 2005
2) International Terrorism and Security Research Ibid
3) Jason Franks Rethinking The Roots of Terrorism, (New York: Palgrave
Macmillan 2006), p1. 4) Adel Abdullah Al-Abed Al- Jabbar “Terrorism in Islam”
. http://www.saaid.com, web, August 14, 2005
5) Adel Abdullah Al-Abed Al- Jabbar Ibid.
6) Ibid.
7) Jason Franks op cit p2
8) Walter Laqueur in Jason Franks Rethinking The Roots of Terrorism,
(New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2006). p2
9) Ibid.
10) Sheikh Fadlallah in Jason Franks Rethinking The Roots of Terrorism,
(New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2006). p4
11) Jason Franks op cit p4
12) Ibid.
HISTORICAL CASES OF TERRORIST ACTIVITIES
Terrorism has surely existed since before the dawn of recorded history, but this assumed concept grew enormously in the twentieth century which came in the form of revolutions, liberation movements, rebellion, genocide, ethnic cleansing, military expeditions and other forms of violence perpetrated by both states and individuals alike against non combatants at different occasions and in different conditions.
At this point, it will be pertinent to point out some incidents of terrorism that occurred in ancient times before coming back to the twentieth century which witnessed series of terrorist attacks. Amy Zalman stated that;
The history of terrorism is as old as humans' willingness to use violence to affect politics. The Sicarii were a first century Jewish group who murdered enemies and collaborators in their campaign to oust their Roman rulers from Judea.1
He also noted that the Hashhashin, whose name gave us the English word "assassins," were a secretive Islamic sect active in Iran and Syria from the 11th to the 13th century who dramatically executed assassinations of Abbasid and Seljuk political figures terrified their contemporaries.2
Zealots and assassins were not, however, really terrorists in the modern sense. Terrorism is best thought of as a modern phenomenon. Its characteristics flow from the international system of nation-states, and its success depends on the existence of a mass media to create an aura of terror among many people. In the words of Brian M. Jenkins, “The word terrorism comes from the Reign of Terror instigated by Maxmilien Robespierre in 1793, following the French revolution. Robespierre, one of twelve heads of the new state, had enemies of the revolution killed, and installed a dictatorship to stabilize the country. He justified his methods as necessary in the transformation of the monarchy to a liberal democracy:”3
Robespierre's sentiment probably laid the foundations for modern terrorists, who believe violence will usher in a better system.
The rise of guerrilla tactics by non-state actors in the last half of the twentieth century was due to several factors. These included the flowering of ethnic nationalism (e.g. Irish, Basque, and Zionist), anti-colonial sentiments in the vast British, French and other empires, and new ideologies such as communism. In line with this, Brian M. Jenkins pointed out that Terrorist groups with a nationalist agenda have formed in every part of the world. For example, the Irish Republican Army grew from the quest by Irish Catholics to form an independent republic, rather than being part of Great Britain.4
The activities of a secret nationalist group based in Serbia (Black Hand or Union of death) could not be forgotten so soon, as it was a member of this group named Gavrilo Princip who actually succeeded in killing Archduke Francis Ferdinand on June 28, 1914 in the streets of Sarajevo, capital of Bosnia- Herzegovina, and the resultant effect combined with other factors caused the first World War. This action is nationalistic on one side, and rebellious on the other side, depending on individual opinions. Similarly, the Kurds, a distinct ethnic and linguistic group in Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq, have sought national autonomy since the beginning of the 20th Century. The Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK), formed in the 1970s, uses terrorist tactics to announce its goal of a Kurdish state. The Sri Lankan Liberation Tigers of Tamil are members of the ethnic Tamil minority. They use suicide bombing and other lethal tactics to wage a battle for independence against the Sinhalese majority government.
The age of modern terrorism might be said to have begun in 1968 when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an El Al airliner en route from Tel Aviv to Rome. While hijackings of airliners had occurred before, this was the first time that the nationality of the carrier (Israeli) and its symbolic value was a specific operational aim. Also a first was the deliberate use of the passengers as hostages for demands made publicly against the Israeli government. The combination of these unique events, added to the international scope of the operation, gained significant media attention. The founder of PFLP, Dr. George Habash observed that the level of coverage was tremendously greater than battles with Israeli soldiers in their previous area of operations. "At least the world is talking about us now.”5 Writing in similar manner, Arnaud Blin noted that International terrorism became a prominent issue in the late 1960s, when hijacking became a favored tactic. In 1968, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine hijacked an El Al Flight. Twenty years later, the bombing of a Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, shocked the world.6 He also observed that the era also gave us our contemporary sense of terrorism as highly theatrical, symbolic acts of violence by organized groups with specific political grievances.7 Throughout the Cold War, both the U.S. and the Soviet Union made extensive use of violent nationalist organizations to carry on a war by proxy, just as Gustave LeBon rightly put it, “Soviet and Chinese military advisers provided training and support to the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War, while the U.S. funded groups such as the Contras in Nicaragua.”8 He also pointed out that ironically, many violent Islamic militants of the late 20th and early 21st century had been funded in the 1980s by the US and the UK because they were fighting the USSR in Afghanistan.9 Fatah was organized as a Palestinian nationalist group in 1954, and exists today as a political party in Palestine. In 1967 it joined the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), an umbrella organization for secular Palestinian nationalist groups formed in 1964. Hoffman Bruce recorded that Factions of the PLO have advocated or carried out acts of terrorism.10 He also noted that Abu Iyad organized the Fatah splinter group Black September in 1970; the group is best known for seizing eleven Israeli athletes as hostages at the September 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich.11 All the athletes and five Black September operatives died during a gun battle with the West German police, in what was later known as the Munich massacre. In the 1980s and 1990s, Islamic militancy in pursuit of religious and political goals increased, many militants drawing inspiration from Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution. Brian M. Jenkins recorded that In the 1990s, well-known violent acts that targeted civilians were the Tokyo subway sarin gas attack by Aum Shinrikyo and the bombing of Oklahoma City's Murrah Federal Building.12 In the Americas, the activities of the Contras were also recorded. The Contras were a counter-revolutionary militia formed in 1979 to oppose Nicaragua's Sandinista government. According to Audrey Kurth’s observation, “The record of the contras in the field . . . is one of consistent and bloody abuse of human rights, of murder, torture, mutilation, rape, arson, destruction and kidnapping.”13 In the Middle=East, a lot of these groups assumed to be terrorists abound. Hezbollah ("Party of God") is an Islamic movement and political party founded in Lebanon shortly after that country's 1982 civil war. Inspired by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the Iranian revolution, the group originally sought an Islamic revolution in Lebanon and has long fought for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. Led by Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Kurth also asserted that since 1992, the group has kidnapped Israeli soldiers and carried out missile attacks and suicide bombings against Israeli military and civilian targets.14 Other groups that fight for their cause in the region include; Egyptian Islamic Jihad (a.k.a. Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiyya, Hamas, Al Qaeda which has Osama Bin laden as its leader etc
Terrorism continues to be a world issue even till date, and its existence does not seem to be coming to an end as more groups and individuals alike see the act as a way of achieving their different aims and objectives. The table below highlights terrorism timeline since the 1970s.
TERRORISM TIMELINE
Sources: TDO, USA News, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, FBI
Pictures by Sayyid Azim, AP by CNN
1970's to 1980's
Date, Place Type of Attack Casualties Who
January 1975: USA, NYC, Bar Bomb 4 killed It is one of a series of 49 bombings between 1974 and 1977 attributed to the Puerto Rican National Liberation Army.
December 1975: USA, NYC, La Guardia Airport Bomb planted in luggage department 11 dead, 75 injured
May 1981 : USA, NYC, JFK Airport, toilet of Pan Am terminal Bomb 1 dead Puerto Rican Resistance Army.
August 1982: Honolulu, Hawaii. Pan Am airplane. Bomb 1 killed, several injured Palestinian terrorist Mohammad Rashid
April 1983: Beirut, U.S. Embassy Suicide car bomb 63 killed Radical Shiite Muslim group takes credit
October 1983: Beirut, U.S. Marine barracks Bomb 241 killed Lebanese Party of God faction
December 1983: Kuwait City, U.S. Embassy Suicide truck bomb Six killed; dozens injured 17 pro-Iranian terrorists convicted
September 1984: Beirut, U.S. embassy Suicide car bomb 16 killed Islamic Jihad claims responsibility
April 1985: Spain, Restaurant near U.S. Air Base Bomb 17 Killed
June 1985: TWA flight 847 Hijacking to Beirut One killed Lebanese Party of God faction
June 1985: El Salvador Machine gun 13 killed
August 1985, Germany, American base in Frankfurt car bomb Two killed, 20 injured
October 1985: Egyptian coast, Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro Hostage situation One killed Palestine Liberation Front
November 1985: Egypt Air flight 648 Hijacking to Malta 60 killed Abu Nidal's Arab Revolutionary Command
December 1985: Rome and Vienna Airport attacks at U.S. and Israeli airport check-in desks 16 killed
February 1986: Lisbon, U.S. embassy Car bomb No injuries Leftist guerrillas take credit
April 1986: West Berlin night club Bomb Three killed, 150 injured A Libyan diplomat, two Palestinians and two Germans
April 1986: Rome to Athens TWA flight Bomb Four killed Mohammed Rashid, Palestinian terrorist, members of Iraqi backed May 15 organization
June 1987: Rome, U.S. Embassy Rocket fired on embassy Minor injuries Japan-based Red Army terrorists
February 1988: Southern Lebanon Kidnapping One U.S. Marine executed Lebanese Party of God
March 1988: Bogota, Colombia Rocket- propelled grenade Minor damage Guerrilla group
1990's to 2001
Date, Place Type of Attack Casualties Who
Feb 26 1993: USA, NYC, World Trade Center A bomb planted in an underground car parked at the World Trade Center 6 killed, 1000 injured Four Muslim fundamentalists are convicted of conspiracy and other charges related to the bombing, thought to have been ordered by Saudi terror master Osama bin Laden. In 1998, the so-called mastermind, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, is convicted and sentenced to life plus 240 years in prison.
July 1993: Lima, Peru Bomb explodes in bus outside embassy One killed Shining Path guerrillas suspected
March 1995: Karachi, Pakistan, U.S. Consulate Murder Two American diplomats killed Possible retaliation for World Trade Center bombing conviction
April 19 1995: USA, Oklahoma City Car bomb left outside a federal building 168 killed, 600 injured Timothy McVeigh, 33, a member of an anarchist group hostile to the federal government, is convicted of the attack in 1997 and is executed in June 2001.
September 1995: Moscow, U.S. Embassy Rocket-propelled grenade Minor damage No suspects
Oct 1995: USA, train travelling between Miami and Los Angeles and derailed in Arizona Derailed by sabotage. Two of the bolts on one of the joints of the track were removed. 1 killed, 80 injured Previously unknown group calling themselves "The Sons of the Gestapo".
November 1995: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, U.S. military headquarters Bomb Seven killed Four anti-royal Saudi Arabian dissidents, possible connections to Party of God an Iran; beheaded in Saudi Arabia
February 1996: Athens, U.S. Embassy Anti-tank missile attack No injuries National Struggle terrorist group
June 1996: Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Khobar Towers Truck bomb 19 U.S. airmen killed Unknown
July 1996: USA, Centenary Park in Atlanta, Georgia. Olympic Games. Bomb 2 killed, 110 injured
November 1997: Karachi, Pakistan Murder of American oil-company employees Five killed Possible revenge for U.S. conviction of Pakistani for murders of two CIA agents
May 1998: Unabomber sentenced to life Parcel bombings 3 killed, 28 injured Theodore Kaczynski, alias the "Unabomber", is sentenced to life imprisonment for an 18-year campaign of parcel bombings as part of an "anti-modernist" crusade
June 1998: Lebanon, U.S. Embassy Rocket-propelled grenades No injuries
August 1998: Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, U.S. embassies Simultaneous bombings 263 killed, 5000 injured Possibly Osama bin Laden, Saudi financier
October 2000: The Destroyer USS Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden Bomb blast 17 killed
September 11, 2001:
USA, NYC, World Trade Center, Pentagon, Pensylvania Airplane crashes Over 6000 killed, thousands injured Possibly Osama Bin Laden with the help of the Taliban and international cells and states.
REFERENCES
1. Amy Zalman, , “History of Terrorism- A Guide to the History of
Terrorism>” about.com, web, June 1, 2007.
2. Ibid.
3. Brian M. Jenkins “Terrorism & Terrorists: Introduction” helium.com,
web, May 25, 2004.
4. Ibid.
5. George Habash, “A history of terrorism” books.google.com, web,
April 15, 2010.
6. Arnaud Blin “A history of terrorism: from antiquity to al Qaeda”
books.google.com, web, Nay 28, 2006.
7. Ibid.
8. Gustave LeBon, The Psychology of the Great War,
books.google.com, web, October7, 2008.
9. Ibid.
10. Hoffman Bruce. Inside Terrorism. (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1988). p. 47
11. Ibid.
12. . Brian M. Jenkins, op cit.
13. Audrey Kurth Cronin “Terrorists and Suicide Attacks”
education.crs.org, web, August 29, 2003.
14. Ibid.
HISTORICAL EMERGENCE OF OSAMA BIN LADEN AND HIS AL QAEDA NETWORK
Considered the world's foremost terrorist, Osama bin Laden is the leader of an assumed terrorist organization known as Al-Qaeda, or "The Base." Bin Laden is the alleged perpetrator of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center, damaged part of the Pentagon, and resulted in a plane crash in Pennsylvania. At first he denied involvement in the attacks, referring to them, through an aid, as "punishment from Allah." In recent years he has taken responsibility for "inspiring" the events of Sept. 11, 2001.
The origin of Al Qaeda is traced to the events following the invasion of Afghanistan by the defunct Soviet Union. Just as Michel Chossudovsky recorded, “the alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders"1 He also noted that In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan: "With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad."2
The United States viewed the conflict in Afghanistan, with the Afghan Marxists and allied Soviet troops on one side and the native Afghan mujahideen on the other, as a blatant case of Soviet expansionism and aggression. According to Wright, Lawrence, “The U.S. channeled funds through Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency to the native Afghan mujahideen fighting the Soviet occupation in a CIA program called Operation Cyclone”.3
Maktab al-Khidamat was established by Abdullah Azzam and Bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan, in 1984. Wright also stated that from 1986 it began to set up a network of recruiting offices in the United States, the hub of which was the Al Kifah Refugee Center at the Farouq Mosque in Brooklyn's Atlantic Avenue. Among notable figures at the Brooklyn center were "double agent.4
According to Esposito, John, “Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khidamat, or the "Services Office", a Muslim organization founded in 1980 to raise and channel funds and recruit foreign mujahideen for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was founded by Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, a Palestinian Islamic scholar and member of the Muslim Brotherhood.”5 Beginning in 1987, Azzam and bin Laden started creating camps inside Afghanistan. The Soviet Union finally withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. To the surprise of many, Mohammed Najibullah's communist Afghan government hung on for three more years before being overrun by elements of the mujahideen. With mujahideen leaders unable to agree on a structure for governance, chaos ensued, with constantly reorganizing alliances fighting for control of ill-defined territories, leaving the country devastated. Esposito also revealed that Toward the end of the Soviet military mission in Afghanistan, some mujahideen wanted to expand their operations to include Islamist struggles in other parts of the world, such as Israel and Kashmir.6 A number of overlapping and interrelated organizations were formed to further those aspirations. One of these was the organization that would eventually be called al-Qaeda, formed by Osama bin Laden with an initial meeting held on August 11, 1988. Bin Laden wished to establish nonmilitary operations in other parts of the world; Azzam, in contrast, wanted to remain focused on military campaigns. After Azzam was assassinated in 1989, the MAK split, with a significant number joining bin Laden's organization. In the words of Arnaud Blin, “From around 1992 to 1996, al-Qaeda and bin Laden based themselves in Sudan at the invitation of Islamist theoretician Hassan al Turabi.” 7 The move followed an Islamist coup d'état in Sudan, led by Colonel Omar al-Bashir, who professed a commitment to reordering Muslim political values. During this time, bin Laden assisted the Sudanese government, bought or set up various business enterprises, and established camps where insurgents trained. Due to bin Laden's continuous verbal assault on King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, on 5 March 1994 Fahd sent an emissary to Sudan demanding bin Laden's passport; bin Laden's Saudi citizenship was also revoked. His family was persuaded to cut off his monthly stipend, the equivalent of $7 million a year, and his Saudi assets were frozen. His family publicly disowned him. In 1996, al-Qaeda announced its jihad to expel foreign troops and interests from what they considered Islamic lands. Bin Laden issued a fatwa, which amounted to a public declaration of war against the United States of America and any of its allies, and began to refocus al-Qaeda's resources towards large-scale, propagandist strikes. Also occurring on June 25, 1996, was the bombing of the Khobar towers, located in Khobar, Saudi Arabia. Arnaud Blin also recorded that On February 23, 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, a leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, along with three other Islamist leaders, co-signed and issued a fatwa (binding religious edict) calling on Muslims to kill Americans and their allies where they can, when they can. 8 It was this declaration of the Fatwas and the call for jihad against the US and Israel that instigated other attacks by the Al Qaeda which got to its height on September 11, 2001.
AL QAEDA ATTACKS
Al Qaeda attacks started in 1992, just as Chossudovsky recorded, “Al-Qaeda attacks (also al-Qa'ida) began in 1992, with coordinated bombings of two hotels in Aden, Yemen, killing one Australian tourist.”9 He also asserted that Bin Laden has claimed al-Qaeda responsibility for the 1993 attack on U.S. troops in Mogadishu, the bombing of the National Guard Training Center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in 1995, and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.10 However, there is no solid evidence to support these claims from Bin Laden, though he may have provided financial support along with inspiration for the attackers.
Wright highlighted Al Qaeda alleged major attacks as follows;
• On December 29, 1992, the first attack by Al Qaeda was carried out in Aden, Yemen.11
• The 1993 World Trade Center bombing occurred on February 26, 1993, when Ramzi Yousef parked a rented van full of explosives in the parking garage beneath the World Trade Center.12
According to David Johnson, “In 1996, bin Laden personally engineered a plot to assassinate Clinton while the president was in Manila for the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation. However, intelligence agents intercepted a message just minutes before the motorcade was to leave, and alerted the United States Secret Service. Agents later discovered a bomb planted under a bridge” 13
He also stated that In October 2000, al-Qaeda militants in Yemen bombed the missile destroyer U.S.S. Cole in a suicide attack, killing 17 U.S. servicemen and damaging the vessel while it lay offshore.14
The September 11 attacks were the most devastating terrorist acts in American history, killing approximately 3,000 people. Two commercial airliners were deliberately flown into the World Trade Center towers, a third into The Pentagon, and a fourth, originally intended to target the United States Capitol, crashed in Pennsylvania. Wright recorded that the attacks were conducted by al-Qaeda, acting in accord with the 1998 fatwa issued against the United States and its allies by military forces under the command of bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and others. 15
He also revealed that evidence points to suicide squads led by al-Qaeda military commander Mohamed Atta as the culprits of the attacks, with bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Hambali as the key planners and part of the political and military command. 16
Messages issued by bin Laden after September 11, 2001, praised the attacks, and explained their motivation while denying any involvement.[ Bin Laden legitimized the attacks by identifying grievances felt by both mainstream and Islamist Muslims, such as the general perception that the United States was actively oppressing Muslims.
According to David Johnson, “It is thought that al-Qaeda was responsible for the bombing of the Madrid commuter train system, 911 days after the 9/11 attacks.”17 However, the group did not claim any responsibility of this attack. He also asserted that Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb claimed to have been responsible for the April 11, 2007 Algiers bombings.18
In the words of Chossudovsky, “Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the bombing of the Danish embassy in Pakistan on 2 June 2008.”19 He also reported that On June 1, 2009, Muslim convert Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad opened fire in a drive-by shooting on a United States military recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas, killing one US soldier and wounding another. At the time he stated that the act was "for the sake of Allah, the Lord of the entire world, and also retaliation on U.S. military" and law enforcement authorities concluded "there doesn't appear to be a wider conspiracy or, at this point in time, any indication that he's a part of a larger group or a conspiracy". However he later professed that he had conducted a "Jihad attack" as part of Al Qaeda.20
Shortly after the arrest of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in the December 25, 2009 bombing attack on Northwest Airlines Flight 253, the suspect reportedly told officials he had traveled to Yemen for training by Al-Qaeda, although British counterterrorism officials dismissed the claims. According to David Johnson, “Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula claimed responsibility for the attack.”21
He also revealed that group released photos of Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab smiling in a white shirt and white Islamic skullcap with the Al Qaeda in Arabian Peninsula banner in the background.22
Al Qaeda network will continue to soar as long as there are devoted Islamic Fundamentalists who are willing to sacrifice their lives in order to actualize what they perceive as a just cause.
REFERENCES
1) Michel Chossudovsky “Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism",
globalresearch.ca, web, January 20, 2008
2) Ibid.
3) Wright, Lawrence. "The Rebellion Within". The New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com, web, September
15, 2009
4) Ibid.
5) Esposito, John L. Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam.
(New York: Oxford University Press, 2002)
p.36
6) Ibid.
7) Arnaud Blin “A history of terrorism: from antiquity to al Qaeda”
books.google.com, web, Nay 28, 2006
8) Ibid.
9) Michel Chossudovsky, op cit.
10) Ibid.
11) Wright, Lawrence. Op cit.
12) Ibid.
13) David Johnson, op cit.
14) Ibid.
15) Wright, Lawrence. Op cit.
16) Ibid.
17) David Johnson, op cit.
18) Ibid.
19) Michel Chossudovsky, op cit.
20) Ibid.
21) David Johnson, op cit.
22) Ibid.
GRIEVANCES OF OSAMA BIN LADEN AND HIS AL QAEDA NETWORK AGAINST THE UNITED STATES AND HER ALLIES
Most liberation fighters of Arab origin trace the roots of their grievances against the US and her western allies to the Arab- Israeli conflict in the Middle- East, and Al Qaeda is not an exception to this fact. The support that US has continued to give the Israelis in respect of this conflict has brought anger and hatred against US and her allies by the Arabs. Consequently, the Arabs who perceive the war in Palestine as a holy one have continued to show all forms of retaliation against the US and her allies in order to seek redress.
In his 1998 fatwa entitled, "Jihad against Jews and Crusaders” Bin Laden identified three grievances against the US:
First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.1
If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.
Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once again trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.
So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.2
Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper state lets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.3
In respect to Bin Laden’s grievances against the Jews, He warned against alleged Jewish conspiracies: as Wright recorded it in his exact words, “These Jews are masters of usury and leaders in treachery. They will leave you nothing, either in this world or the next.4 He revealed that Osama has also made at least one clear denunciation of Christians: "Every Muslim, from the moment they realize the distinction in their hearts, hates American, hates Jews, and hates Christians. This is a part of our belief and our religion.” 5
As events of 9/11 unfolded, the first question asked was, “Why would anyone do this terrible thing?” The fact is that Usama bin Laden tried to explain, but few were listening. In 1996, bin Laden issued a “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places." This statement set forth a number of his grievances. In 1998, his so-called World Islamic Front released a call for “Jihad against Jews and Crusaders.” And in November 2002, he tried again to make his points in a folksy sounding “Letter to America.” These statements outline the basic complaints:
• The US, Israel and Western Allies support Israel and persecute Palestinians • The US violates the sanctity of Muslim Holy Lands by placing troops in Saudi Arabia • The US undermines Islam by supporting secular regimes • The US undermines Islam by exporting Western values • The US obstructs establishment of Shariah (Islamic law) • The US, Israel and Western allies plunder the Middle East oil at paltry prices • The US and its allies are killing Muslims with impunity • The US and UN sanctions and bombing starved Iraqi children • The US has attacked us [Muslims] in Somalia, and supported the Russians in Chechnya, the Indian oppression in Kashmir, and Jewish aggression in Lebanon • The US imposed sanctions on Pakistan for developing nuclear weapons, but takes no action against Israel for developing nuclear weapons, missiles and submarines. 6
When you consider these grievances as outlined by Osama Bin Laden himself, you can agree with me that the end of terror or Al Qaeda oriented activities is not in sight as all parties involved in this new form of conflict are unlikely to surrender anytime in the near future.
REFERENCES
1) Osama Bin Laden, "Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders"
infoplease.com, web, February 13, 1999.
2) Ibid.
3) Ibid.
4) Wright, Lawrence. "Declaration of War against the Americans
Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places",
mideastweb.com, web, December 15, 1996. 5) Ibid.
6) Osama Bin Laden, “Letter to America.” mideastweb.com, web,
November 25, 2002
OBSTACLES TO ERADICATION OF AL QAEDA ORIENTED TERRORISM BY THE US AND HER ALLIES
Whenever an established government is confronted with terrorism they try to stop it (1) by imprisoning or killing terrorist leaders, (2) by bribing or appeasing terrorist leaders, or in extreme cases (3) by killing every male belonging to the group on behalf of which the terrorists operate (genocide).
It has been proved by the history of mankind, and it logically follows from the nature of terrorism, that it is impossible to stop terrorism by killing or imprisoning terrorist leaders. As long as the cause of terrorism (the feeling of injustice) remains, new terrorist leaders appear and replace those killed or imprisoned. Deutch was quite right when he stated that the very fact of killing or imprisoning terrorist leaders increases the feeling of injustice and hatred that feeds terrorism and arouses desire for revenge.1 He also noted that the killed terrorist leaders become symbols, martyrs, saints and role models for their followers. Occasional terrorist incidents become regular and increasingly frequent part of daily life, until they reach the proportions of a full scale civil war.2
It has been proved by the history of mankind, and it logically follows from the nature of terrorism, that it is impossible to stop terrorism by bribing or appeasing terrorist leaders. In line with this fact, Nicholas Berry stated that as long as the cause of terrorism (the feeling of injustice) remains, the bribed or appeased leaders will lose the support of their followers and will be replaced by new leaders.3 He also noted that the very fact of bribery or appeasement increases the feeling of disdain towards the established government and the resolve to continue the struggle.4
Theoretically genocide appears to be an effective way to eradicate terrorism: kill every terrorist and all the people on whose behalf terrorists fight their war, and terrorism will disappear. In practice such solution could be extremely difficult or even impossible to implement.
The very fact that terrorists have sanctuaries in most part of the world makes it difficult for the United States and her allies to track down all possible attacks against them.
The willingness of perpetrators of this act to sacrifice their lives in the process of carrying it out, and the belief in fighting for “a just cause” by these fundamentalists ensure the sustainability of the terrorists’ struggle. Osama Bin Laden and other Islamic leaders are aware of this fact as it could be noticed in the extract from Bin Laden’s 1996 Fatwa as recorded by Wright; “Those youths know that their rewards in fighting you, the USA, are double their rewards in fighting someone else not from the people of the book. They have no intention except to enter paradise by killing you. An infidel, and enemy of God like you, cannot be in the same hell with his righteous executioner. Our youths chanting and reciting the word of Allah, the most exalted: {fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace, and assist you against them and heal the heart of a believing people}…5
Finally, as a result of the fact that the root causes of this violence has not been properly addressed by either the United Nations or anybody who has the power to do so, the end to this very act of violence does not seem to be in sight.
REFERENCES
1) Carter Deutch, “Truth, Honesty and Justice: The Alternative to Wars,
Terrorism and Politics” worldjustice.org,
web, July 14, 2002.
2) Ibid.
3) Nicholas Berry, “Eliminating Terrorist Sanctuaries” worldjustice.org,
web, December 10, 2001.
4) Ibid.
5) Wright, Lawrence. "Declaration of War against the Americans
Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places",
mideastweb.com, web, December 15, 1996
RECOMMENDATIONS
The problems associated with terrorism are quite enormous. The term itself has also been subjected to overheated debates without arriving at a reasonable conclusion as to what it constitutes. In order to address this new threat to world peace, I hereby recommend that:
1. The United Nations should come up with a good definition of terrorism which will include all forms of violence directed against non- combatants and other civilians by both state and non state actors which should be done without sentiments or special preferences, and devise means of punishing perpetrators of the act accordingly.
2. The UN Security Council should re- visit the issue of Arab- Israeli conflict in the Middle- East and address the problem squarely without the involvement of either the US or Great Britain. It will be considered wise to bring in neutral bodies in respect to this.
3. The US should stay clear off the Middle- East crises in order not to attract further acts of aggression against its citizens or try as much as possible to maintain a neutral position in respect to these crises with particular reference to Palestinian- Israeli conflict.
4. The US should try as much as possible to respect the sovereignty of other states by allowing the UN to do its work in respect to conflict resolution and other related matters instead of carrying out series of invasions against weaker nations which is against International law.
5. All the Moslem world and Islamic Fundamentalists should not be allowed to use “Jihad” to instigate youths and direct acts of violence against non Moslems even when they are not involved in any conflict with them thereby threatening global peace and security.
6. Arabs and other Moslems should allow other existing religions to have their own freedom to accept their belief without striving to spread Islam to other states forcefully through Jihad or other means. They should be made to understand that this constant call for a global Jihad is a serious threat to world peace, and should be dealt with accordingly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
