http://independent-bangladesh.com/news/aug/23/23082005ed.htm
What does terrorism mean? FORREST COOKSON Although the world is screaming over events in Iraq, Afghanistan, New York, Madrid, London, Indonesia and elsewhere, in fact the present level of violence in the world is rather low. The greatest areas of violence are in Africa in Dafur, Sudan and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Over the past four years violent deaths caused by Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are probably of the order of 10,000 outside of Iraq and 15,000 inside Iraq. Violent deaths by the US led coalition in Iraq have been of the order of 25,000 with another 75,000 dying from general causes associated with the war. In Afghanistan the numbers are less well understood but are probably about 20,000. Violent deaths in Africa are harder to estimate but are of the order of 40,000 with indirect deaths more than 200,000. Over a four-year period we are then talking about 35,000 deaths per year in the Middle East and elsewhere from violence and its associated impact in the "war on terrorism." In Africa the total is somewhat greater. Nature, of course, is far more cruel. Witness the starvation in Ethiopia and Niger, the tsunami in the Indian Ocean basin; or the tidal wave that struck Bangladesh in 1991. Nor is this World War II where deaths were of the order of 10 million per year. Nor of the catastrophes that Mao brought to China or Stalin to the Soviet Union where deaths were of the order of 1 million per year. Nor of the Pakistan repression of Bangladesh where hundreds of thousands lost their lives in less than a year. In terms of destruction of human life the "war on terror" is pretty limited. But, of course, human groups perceive their own members as being more important than others. We extend sympathy to our own group while being less concerned about others. Since 2001 following the destruction of the World Trade Centre there has emerged a war on "terrorism" which unhappily is becoming a conflict between Islam and non-Islamic societies. [The Western world, China, India, Russia, Thailand, India, Philippines.] What is this war about? What is terrorism about? Why the response that is being made by those societies that perceive themselves under attack by Islamic terrorists? It is time to take an objective analysis of "terrorism" and the war on terrorism. I begin with four observations. 1. The form of social organisation that has dominated human affairs throughout the historical period is control of any human group by a small sub-group of persons who have obtained power, including most important control of the police power of the group. This small elite group usually comprises about 5 per cent of the total. There is a vast literature protesting this and many political movements established to change such arrangements but none has been successful for any sustained periods. It seems to be the way we manage living together. 2. The second characteristic of human group organisation is the method of determining who in the small (5 per cent) elite group is in control of the society. These methods comprise a vast array of schemes - monarchies, military dictatorships, democracies in all forms. But uniformly these schemes deal with who in the elite group is going to have control. The rule may be kingship handed down to heirs or elections. 3. The third characteristic is how access into this elite group is determined. These arrangements are an important part of the structure of a society. Sometimes there is fairly open access to the elites through ability, luck, military accomplishment, or achieving sufficient wealth. More often access is very difficult. Arrangements for access vary widely. In many Middle Eastern societies access is very restricted. More and more all over the world, access is becoming more restricted to the children of those who are already there. 4. Occasionally there are dramatic changes in the ruling elites, what we call revolutions. For example we have the four great revolutions - French, Russian, Chinese, and English in each of which the ruling class was decimated and replaced by a new elite group. Much the same happened in Bangladesh in 1971. As a consequence of the liberation from British imperialism and the heavy hand of Hindu elites in 1948 and, subsequently, the elimination of the Pakistan elites in 1971, Bangladesh has really started from scratch to identify its elites. Inherited wealth was not so important; historical upper class status is not so important; accomplishment in the bureaucracy or the military or the business world lies behind the rise of most current elites. In Bangladesh thus was created a new elite class, largely merit based. Much of the turmoil and political immaturity come from this new inexperienced elite. Future access to elite status is not clearly determined. If you believe that the way that a society is organised into a small elite is wrong and that another approach is needed, it is almost impossible to bring about a shift in the elite group participation except by violence. In France, Russia, China and Bangladesh the change in elites was very violent. Democracies do not change their elites rapidly. What has this to do with terrorism? Terrorists represent those that are trying to establish a revolution to throw out of power an existing elite group and believe that to do so it is necessary to use violence to so disequilibrate the society that the existing elites can be destroyed. Not an easy undertaking. Whenever a revolutionary group is outgunned by the existing establishment, they use violence and methods of conflict that are difficult for the state to counter. What else would you expect! The ruling elite groups always describe this as "terrorism" and as part of their self defence try to paint this as evil and wrong. The objectives of terrorists are usually painted as unrealistic but appearances are deceiving. No one expected the anarchist's terrorist activities in Russia would be successful even Lenin himself objected to this approach as ineffective. No one expected the IRA's activities in Ireland to lead to its joining Ireland. The Basques' efforts seem futile. Yet in each case there is often a response to the underlying point of the terrorism. The Tsarist regime collapsed; the political power in Northern Ireland is probably slowly shifting towards Ireland. The Basques are making progress towards some degree of autonomy. The political turmoil in the Middle East is one of the many reactions to the emergence of the dominance of Western civilisation over the rest of the globe. This dominance began to emerge in the eighteen century and has grown steadily until today when the influence of the West is overwhelming in economic, military, and cultural terms. Reactions to this growth of power and influence have been varied. The very successful response from the Japanese was to adopt the underlying commitment to industrial development. Their first level of response was to challenge the West through military conflict. That proved unsuccessful. The second was to build a strong and powerful economy - that has indeed been achieved by Japan and the result is another version of Western culture. Perhaps it provides evidence that it is not Western culture that is the point but the culture that emerges from an industrial society. China has struggled with its response, angered that its once great dominant culture and society has been so poor and so humiliated by its powerlessness. Now China having tried a series of bizarre approaches developed by Mao Tse Tung has shifted to a more rational approach accepting elite rule focused on the development of an industrial society. On the margin of the West, Russia tried in communism a different approach that failed. The Middle East has responded to the West by missing the point that only developing an industrial society will provide the basis for standing up to the civilisation that the West has built. Those trying to change Middle East elites have opted for a closed religious social vision. This is really another version of communism, the Cultural Revolution; or the early ideals of the French Revolution: The attempt to impose universal values by revolution. It just never works. The breakup of the Ottoman Empire led to the creation of a number of Arab states each headed by a king or a military ruler. The emergence of oil as a critical resource for the West meant two things. First, the West established and supported elites willing to maintain stable regimes that would allow the pumping of the oil; second, the emergence of vast wealth in the hands of these rulers of Middle Eastern countries. The great wealth concentrated in the hands of the elites and made the development of an industrial society impossible. The existence of a powerful compelling religion in the region provided solace but also became the vehicle for protest. In Asia religion has been a much weaker influence in shaping the response to Western dominance. But in the Middle East the consequences were dramatic. Inevitably the rejection of Western civilisation focused on moral issues of behaviour, sexuality, and excesses and failed to recognise the centrality of technology and industrial development as what the West has accomplished. Islamic ideas were hijacked to support the rulers. Of course, religions are regularly captured by the elites and used to preserve their dominance and Islam is no different. The moral content of the great religions have ideas, which can be useful to elites, who have the cunning to emphasise the literal meaning rather than the actual to allow them to maintain their dominance over the other 95 per cent of the population. But the militant Islamic vision sought to destroy regimes perceived as corrupt and at odds with Islam. What the West calls Islamic terrorism arises directly from this. Unable to stand up to the West's military power, angry at the corruption of the Middle Eastern societies that leads to the acceptance of Western domination and remembering the great historical achievements of Arabs under Islam's banner some men have sought a way to reclaim this past greatness. The model is the creation of a complete Islamic society faithful to the teachings of the Holy Koran. It is like communism, an attempt to create a perfect society. This is the typical response to the industrial society that the West has created, the search for something else that is better and more human. Communism, Christian evangelicalism, Zionism all had this idea. The only instrument available in closed Middle Eastern societies to start this process of reform is terrorism. The strategy is clear. Drive a wedge between the West and Islam, drive out the West as a cultural and political influence, and build a great Islamic society. The means is to attack the West - both its presence in the Middle East and as much as possible in its centre. The later will create anti-Islamic feelings and make the position of the Arab governments more difficult. This programme will fail as it does not address the real issue of developing an industrial, technology-oriented society. The West's response is to demonise Islamic terrorism and to argue that this is a serious threat to the stability of the West. This response is just what one expects - first every society engages in self-defence; second, this is a convenient political cause to adopt. War against terrorism attracts the military industrial complex, provides a basis for increased military expenditures, feeds hungry bureaucracies, and becomes, in the United States at least, a powerful political platform. The Israeli Government's behaviour in Palestine simply amplified all of this. This is where we are with Islamic terrorism. The war is expanding. On both sides each incident increases support for the war on the other side. These events will dominate the Middle East for the next decade. Each terrorist action and counteraction fuels the anger. The terrorist attacks result in amplified counterattacks. The terrorist organisations and the armaments industries in the West along with British and US military all are waxing fat on the war on terrorism. Where will all of this go? Well, who knows! The underlying issues are there. It is not clear that a modern industrial economy is consistent with strict Islam. Two countries are testing this: Turkey and Malaysia. But in the Middle East there is no progress whatsoever in this direction. It is unlikely that conservative Islam is compatible with a modern industrial society. The current rage of terrorism will probably fail in its main objective to overthrow the Saudi state. Eventually these issues will fade away and the children of today will wonder what this was all about. Terrorism will always be with us as some idealists will lead violent revolt against the ruling elites. Idealists see unfairness, exploitation and discrimination. The concept of an ideal society is formulated. Some take up terrorism to attack the elites. The elites call foul, brand this is terrorism and fight back. Sometimes the rebellion is successful and the elites are displaced. Usually the rebellion fails and fades away quite promptly. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> <font face=arial size=-1><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hnf7k60/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705323667:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124813394/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992 ">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font> --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
