http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21246681-28737,00.html


Mates 'til the death


*       Terrorist cells are like cults whose members form close bonds and
attack their own communities, writes Sally Neighbour 

  _____  

*       February 19, 2007 


"HE seemed a really kind man. He taught the really bad kids and everyone
seemed to like him." So said a former pupil of Mohammad Sidique Khan, the
30-year-old teaching aide who led a cell of bombers who blew up three trains
and a bus in London in July 2005, killing 56 people.


"I know my son. He's honest, he's got a clean record, and he has never been
in trouble." These are the words of the tearful father of one of 22 men
arrested in Melbourne and Sydney and soon to face trial on charges of
belonging to a terrorist group and preparing for a terrorist attack. 

Testimonials like these are often repeated as families, friends and
communities struggle to confront the new face of terrorism - the emergence
of "home grown" terror cells around the world. 

The first wave of the Islamist jihad, masterminded by bearded fanatics
living in caves in Afghanistan, was shocking enough, but somehow simpler to
comprehend. 

Much harder to fathom is this second wave, a phenomenon the British
authorities call neighbour terrorism - middle-class family men from the
suburbs of London and Melbourne, Sydney and Toronto, willing to wreak death
and destruction where they were born and grew up. This troubling trend has
academics and counter-terrorism specialists around the worldwide redoubling
their efforts to understand the causes of radicalisation - in short, what
makes a terrorist. 

"There is much about the nature of Islamist terrorism that is not fully
understood, including in particular the fundamental question of the
'transmission belt' from religious belief to terrorism," Peter Varghese,
head of Australia's Office of National Assessments, told a security
conference in Canberra last year. 

ONA has teams of analysts working full-time to apprehend a threat that
Varghese describes as "growing and spreading to more countries", stemming
from a large, diverse and fluid network, that is more often inspired by
al-Qa'ida than directed by it. 

As Varghese pointed out, no study has been able to explain why some people
become terrorists. But a clear pattern is emerging. A key feature is what he
calls "socio-psychological factors and questions of identity". 

Terrorist cells have "striking parallels" to cults, Varghese explained. "One
thing we frequently see in the trajectory of terrorists is a conversion
experience that occurs within a small, tight-knit group. The dynamics of
such groups tend to reinforce personal conviction, especially among
individuals whose other social networks have frayed or can't match the
intensity of bonds forged in what is for them an existential struggle." 

This assessment is echoed by former CIA field officer turned psychiatrist,
author and government adviser, Marc Sageman, in his book Understanding
Terror Networks. Cutting through the jargon, Sageman uses a simpler term -
he calls it the "bunch of guys" theory. 

Sageman knows Islamic extremists better than most, having worked with the
Afghan mujahidin in the late 1980s during the anti-Soviet war, the crucible
for the present global jihad. 

After studying the lives of 172 terrorists, Sageman found the most common
factor driving them was the potent social bonds within their terrorist cell.
Most started as friends, colleagues or relatives - just "a bunch of guys"
drawn ever closer by bonds of friendship, loyalty, solidarity and trust, and
rewarded by a powerful sense of belonging and collective identity. 

Sageman cites a string of cases to demonstrate his theory - Mohammed Atta's
Hamburg cell of 9/11 bombers; the three brothers at the core of the Bali
bombing team - Muklas, Amrozi and Ali Imron; and the would-be millennium
bombers who planned to attack Los Angeles airport in 2000. 

These and other cells reveal a three-step process in becoming a terrorist.
First comes social affiliation through friendship, kinship or discipleship
(as in the followers of Abu Bakar Bashir). Next comes progressive
intensification of beliefs and faith within the group. The final step is
encountering a link to the jihad, and then joining it. This is usually a
"bottom-up" process; most are "enthusiastic joiners" not brainwashed
recruits. 

Sageman's study shows, as others have, that the common stereotype of the
terrorist as poor, desperate, naive or just plain "mad" is a myth. There is
simply no psychological profile of a terrorist and no evidence that mental
illness, personality disorder or childhood trauma feature among their ranks.


Three-quarters of the terrorists in Sageman's sample were upper or middle
class. They were typically more educated than average, skilled, upwardly
mobile and married with children. Many, especially the leaders, were
educated in the West, multilingual and cosmopolitan. (The late Azhari Husin,
the Australian-educated PhD professor who became Jemaah Islamiah's master
bomb-maker and his colleague from the University of Technology in Malaysia,
JI's current operational leader Noor Din Mohammed Top are two examples). 

Another key finding of Sageman's work is that most of the terrorists went to
secular schools. Only 23 per cent had exclusively Islamic education. (The
exception is Indonesia, where the level of religious schooling was much
higher.) 

Furthermore, only about half were religious in childhood. The rest
experienced a "shift in devotion" later - a crucial factor in their
transformation, but not the cause. This concurs with Varghese's observation
that most terrorists have little history of extremism, or even religious
piety. Contrary to popular belief, religion is clearly not the driving
force. 

These themes are explored further by Harvard Law School professor and
long-time terrorism specialist, Louise Richardson, in her book What
Terrorists Want. Richardson has studied dozens of terrorist groups, from the
Palestinian zealots of antiquity and the assassins of medieval times to the
IRA in her native Northern Ireland where she grew up a child of the
troubles. Richardson's starting point is that terrorism is neither a new
strategy nor the work of a bunch of mad fanatics, but rather "an age-old
political phenomenon that can be understood in rational terms". 

Richardson writes: "Group, organisational and social psychology are more
helpful than individual psychology in explaining terrorist behaviour." 

Drawing on interviews with dozens of terrorists, she says many speak of an
"intense feeling of camaraderie within the group" and "an overarching sense
of the collective", which consumes the individual. Richardson identifies a
"lethal cocktail" of three key ingredients that make a terrorist: a
"disaffected individual", an "enabling community" and a "legitimising
ideology". 

The idea of the "disaffected individual" resonates strongly in Australia.
Think of the troubled Sydneysider Mamdouh Habib, who spent nearly three
years in Guantanamo Bay; the alcoholic divorcee Jack Roche, currently
serving nine years for conspiring to bomb the Israeli embassy in Canberra;
or the Adelaide cowboy turned Taliban fighter, David Hicks. 

Converts such as Roche and Hicks are drawn to Islam by its empowering ethic
of egalitarianism, brotherhood and social justice. For a young man in search
of meaning, Sageman says fundamentalist Islam offers "elegance and
simplicity" and "a single solution devoid of ambiguity". As interpreted by
the extremists, it also offers a justification for acts of violence. 

As for the cause of the average recruit's "disaffection", alienation is a
powerful recurring theme. Out of Sageman's group of 172 terrorists, 115 (70
per cent) joined the jihad movement while in a country other than their
homeland, as students, refugees, workers or fighters living abroad, while
cut off from their family, friends and culture. Another 14 were
second-generation immigrants. 

These figures add up to a total of 78 per cent who were "socially alienated,
or temporarily disembedded, from their societies of origin". Sageman
concludes that "this absence of connection is a necessary condition" for
joining the global jihad. 

After joining, the cell becomes the new recruit's world. As the bonds within
it grow ever stronger, his ties to all other groups grow weaker. This
"in-group love" is strengthened by what Sageman calls a "common bond of
victimhood based on Islam". And it is paralleled by growing "out-group
hate", which in turn is sharpened by the identification of a common enemy -
such as the US and its allies. 

The internet plays a pivotal role in strengthening the sense of belonging
and collective identity enjoyed by those who join, and enhancing their
disconnection from the outside world. In cyberspace they become part of a
much larger virtual community, without the constraints of earthly society.
As Sageman writes, this "ideal virtual community" has strong appeal for
alienated youths living in immigrant communities in the West. 

This process of disconnection helps explain how a young man takes the final
step to carrying out a terrorist act. "They become embedded in a socially
disembedded network, which, precisely because of its lack of any anchor to
any society, is free to follow abstract and apocalyptic notions of a global
war between good and evil." 

Much the same conclusions can be found in the Report of the Official Account
of the Bombings in London on July 7 2005, which describes how the kind and
dedicated teaching aide known as Sid organised the London cell with his
friend Shehzad Tanweer, a "friendly, mature and modest" university graduate,
who worked in the family fish and chip shop, drove a red Mercedes Benz
bought for him by his father and played for a local cricket team. 

The report finds that the process of indoctrination for the London bombers
was principally through "personal contact and group bonding". While
sometimes attendance at a radical mosque or contact with an extreme
spiritual leader can be influential, a more critical factor is the role of
personal mentors and then bonding within a group, in which members "begin
feeding off each other's radicalisation". 

The report notes, "There is little evidence of overt compulsion. The
extremists appear rather to rely on development of individual commitment,
group bonding and solidarity". 

The notion of cultural and social alienation also applies to the London
cell. Clive Walker, a terrorism specialist of the University of Leeds, home
town of the bombers, has expanded on this theme. He sees the London cell as
"a group of young men caught between the conservative and unreplicable
culture of their parents and the apparently unappealing culture of the
West". 

Walker writes: "The problem may not lie in mosques at all, but in the
problems of a second generation ethnic minority". A minority whose members
feel alienated from the social and cultural values of the larger community
around them. This certainly rings true in Australia, where most of the men
charged with terrorism have been second and third generation Australians,
brought up in the displaced cultures of their parents. 

While religion is clearly not the main driver, it does play a crucial role
for the terrorists who embrace it. In Richardson's words, "it provides a
unifying, all-encompassing philosophy or belief system that legitimates and
elevates their actions". 

Richardson cites Osama bin Laden, whose oft-repeated demands are clearly
political - the removal of foreign forces from Saudi Arabia, an end to
hostilities in Iraq and Afghanistan - but who utilises religion to
legitimise his actions and persuade followers that their struggle is
sanctioned by God. 

It is this conviction that makes the terrorist who claims to be inspired by
his religion the most terrifying of all. 

"Islamic fundamentalists tend to see the world in terms of an enduring and
cosmic struggle between good and evil," Richardson writes. They are
therefore less prone to compromise, "more fanatical, more willing to inflict
mass casualties more absolutist, more transnational and more dangerous". 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------
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/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> 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/
 

Reply via email to