Introduction
We live in times when the application of conventional social, economic, and political terminology, to describe the realities of living in the post-industrial world, can no longer be thought of as fully adequate. Nowadays, politics is much better described in terms of economy, social trends – in terms of psychiatry, and the economy itself – in terms of criminology. In its turn, this comes as a result of a process of Globalization changing the very essence of socio-political reality as generations and generations of people before we used to know it. The validity of this suggestion can be best illustrated by the fact that nowadays, the problem of international terrorism has acquired fully independent qualities while becoming a major headache for the governments of Western countries; whereas, as recent as thirty years ago, terrorist organizations’ activities were thought of as being simply the by-product of geopolitical confrontation between U.S. and Soviet Union.
One does need to go far to find proof for what is being said earlier – the terrorist group Hamas, with the membership of fewer than 1000 men, has been keeping the whole region of the Middle East (and consequentially, the whole world) in the state of permanent political tension for the duration of last 10 years, even though it does not even exist officially. Osama bin Laden (single individual) has declared a war on the U.S. in 2001, which continues even today with no end in sight; whereas, it has only taken four years for America to defeat both: Germany and Japan, during WW2. Islamic fundamentalist organizations officially exist in Britain, even though the members of these organizations never skip the chance to publicly express their hatred towards the country that provided them with citizenship, while financing those who bring explosives in London’s subway. And, as practice shows, the British government is being impotent to do anything about the situation, due to its adherence to the ideals of “multiculturalism”.
In its paper, we will aim at discussing the particularities of modern terrorism as such that directly correspond to the three most important characteristics of “globalized” socio-political reality: 1). The process of independent countries being deprived of their national sovereignty by promoters of Globalization, closely associated with the international Jewish lobby 2). The process of Western societies’ demographic fabric undergoing a dramatic transformation, due to the policy of “multiculturalism” has acquired an official status 3). The fact that political dynamics in the international arena are now best described in terms of communities vs. states, rather than states vs. states, as it used to be the case, before the advent of Globalization.
The definition of terrorism
In his book “Understanding Terrorism and Political Violence: The Life Cycle of Birth, Growth, Transformation, and Demise”, Dipak Gupta provides us with the insight on purely relativist meaning of the term “terrorism”: “Terrorism is a political term. All of us use it as a tool to label those with whom we conflict. Therefore, it should be no surprise to learn that while Osama bin Laden is despised as a crazed killer and a quintessential terrorist in the West, he is revered as a hero by many in the Islamic world” (Gupta, 2008, p. 8). Apparently, the saying “one man’s terrorist is another man’s fighter for freedom” is not altogether deprived of rationale. For example, even though, throughout his terrorist career, Nelson Mandela had participated in 15 attacks on South-African officials, which resulted in the deaths of 23 innocent bystanders, it is not only that he is now being commonly referred to as a “fighter for freedom”, but citizens in Western countries are being encouraged to think of him as a role model.
US State Department defines terrorism as “politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets”, yet this definition does not bring us closer to understanding why it was named during recent decades when citizens in Western countries had learned to think of international terrorism as such that represents a clear and present danger to their lives. After all, it should not present much of a challenge for law enforcement agencies to effectively deal with such “sub-national groups”, simply because these agencies have proven themselves quite capable of doing it in the past. For example, it had only taken 3 years for German police to eliminate such a notorious terrorist organization as RAF (Rote Armee Fractionen), the members of which had participated in bombing supermarkets, hijacking planes, and killing politicians they did not like.
Also, as we are all aware of – it is namely Islamic terrorist organizations that are now being discussed within a context of how international terrorists undermine the world’s security, even though the ideology of these organizations can be referred to as anything but “international”. In its turn, this creates a certain paradox – even though Marxist terrorist organizations, such as RAF, did proclaim in the seventies their goal to be the “liberation of the proletariat in the whole world”, these organizations’ activities have traditionally been thought of as such that only represented a threat to the countries of their origin, rather than to the international community. On the other hand, such Islamic terrorist organizations as Al-Queda, which had repeatedly proclaimed its operating agenda to be strictly concerned with the liberation of Palestine from Israeli’s unlawful occupation, are being commonly discussed as part of the “global jihadist movement”.
In her book “Beyond Al-Qaeda: The Global Jihadist Movement”, Angel Rabasa, brings our attention to truly global subtleties of Islamic terrorism:
“No informed observers believe that al-Qaeda will be eliminated anytime soon. Indeed, in some respects, al-Qaeda has metastasized into an even more formidable adversary—dispersed across the global South, Western Europe, and North America, largely self-sustaining, and despite intense government countermeasures, able to mount devastating operations, such as the railway bombing that killed nearly 200 people in Madrid on March 11, 2004, and the London bombings of July 7, 2005. The United States itself continues to be threatened by large-scale attacks, as suggested by heightened security alerts” (Rabasa, 2006, p. 1). How did it happen that Islamic fundamentalists, who as recently as 20-30 years ago were only in the position of abusing camels they rode, have risen to such an international prominence? How was it possible for people, who seriously believe that women should be wearing black cloaks over their faces at all times, to become citizens of the countries which they strive to destroy?
The answer to this question directly relates to socio-political trends that have been defining the world’s geopolitical reality during the last few decades. In its turn, this reality came about as the result of 1) The fact that governments in Western countries had chosen to associate themselves with Israeli’s genocidal policies in the Middle East 2) The introduction of the concept of “multiculturalism” in Western countries. Let us discuss our thesis at length so that we will be able to formulate this answer in rather a thorough manner.
American point of view
Nowadays, Americans are being told that evil Islamic fundamentalists cannot physically stand the sight of American women wearing short skirts and walking around with their faces uncovered. In its turn, this causes them to hate America so much that they are willing to sacrifice their own lives and the lives of many innocent Americans, to spread terror. Is it so? Those who promote such a point of view cannot grasp the simple fact that hatred does not just appear out of blue – it is being caused by frustration.
If there is a consequence, there also has to be an initial cause to it.
America has traditionally been considered Israeli’s best ally, because of the powerful Jewish lobby in this country. Even though Israeli diplomats have been repeatedly caught, while spying on America’s state secrets, even though Israel makes a point in most blatant violation of UN’s resolutions, despite the policy of racial apartheid being officially practiced by Israeli’s government, and despite Israel’s admitted possession of at least 200 illegal nuclear warheads, mainstream American politicians can never get tired of praising Israel and pledging its support to this country. In his article “A Look at The Powerful Jewish Lobby In America”, Mark Weber states: “Most of the world regards Israel’s policies, and especially its oppression of Palestinians, as outrageous and criminal. Only in the United States do politicians and the media still fervently support Israel and its policies. For decades the US has provided Israel with the crucial military, diplomatic and financial backing, including more than $3 billion each year in aid” (Weber, 2003). This is the reason why Islamists consider the U.S. and its allies as legitimate targets for its attacks. Therefore, if we assess the issue of Islamic terrorism through the eyes of its perpetrators, there will appear nothing “global” behind these people’s motivations to spread terror to those they consider their enemies. Had America changed its foreign policy, in regards to the conflict in the Middle East, it would be so much more effective, as the mean of preventing terrorist attacks from taking place on American soil, then taking toothpaste away from people, before they board the planes.
Islamic terrorists’ activities
Nevertheless, it would also be wrong to think of Islamic terrorists’ activities as being solely inspired by their stance on the issue of conflict in the Middle East. And the reason for this is simple – Muslims constitute the fastest growing racial minority in Western countries. For example, even today, the number of mosques in London equals the number of Christian churches in this city. Some “progressive” British politicians and religious leaders go as far as suggesting that Islamic law of Sharia should be incorporated into British common law. The article “Sharia Law in the UK is “Unavoidable”, which is available on the web site of BBC, contains excerpts from Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams’ public speeches, during which “holy father” had proven himself as having the same agenda with Islamic fundamentalists: “Adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion. Muslims should not have to choose between the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty” (BBC, 2008). In its turn, this provides us with insight as to why Islamic terrorism has become a truly global phenomenon in recent years – the promoters of neo-Liberal “multicultural” agenda in Western countries had created objective preconditions for this to happen in the first place, by allowing millions and millions of Muslims to immigrate to these countries. Upon their arrival to Western countries, Muslim immigrants had instantly realized themselves being put in an advantageous position, as compared to native-born White Westerners because: 1) they are not burdened by the notions of Western/Christian morality 2) unlike Whites, they possess an acute sense of racial and religious solidarity, which allows them to proceed with the creation of “societies within societies” in the newly acquired “homeland” to exploit it. This is the reason why Muslim terrorist organizations that operate in Western countries often use “Palestinian genocide” as simply an excuse for perpetuating the acts of violence against Whites – these organizations strive for nothing less than increasing the political and social weight of Muslim communities in the West. Today, in such cities as Paris, London, and Berlin, not a single night goes by without at least a few cars being set on fire by Islamic youth. And, as practice shows, this benefits French, British, and German Muslim communities in a very practical manner – while yapping away on “dangers of international terrorism”, neo-Liberal governments in European countries actively contribute to these dangers being increased by continuously providing Muslims with special rights and privileges (“celebration of diversity”), which will eventually result in turning Britain into “Northern Pakistan”, France into “Northern Algeria” and Germany into “Northern Turkey”.
The future terrorism
As we have mentioned earlier, the realities of 21st century’s living will be defined by the confrontation between communities, on one hand, and bureaucratic apparatus, on the other, rather than by geopolitical confrontation between states, as it used to be the case in the past, due to hawks’ of Globalization clearly defined intention to eliminate national borders, as the obstacle on the way of speculative capital being freely transferred from one corner of the globe to another. In his book, “The Next Global Stage”, one of Globalization’s most famous ideologists Kenichi Ohmae makes no secret of what represents Globalists’ ultimate agenda: “The global economy ignores barriers, but if they are not removed, they cause distortion. The traditional centralized nation-state is another cause of friction. It is ill-equipped to play a meaningful role on the global stage” (Ohmae, 2005, p. 15). And, as we all know, even the activities of neo-Marxist terrorists in the seventies were being marked by communal rather than by ideological spirit – such famous left-wing terrorists as Andreas Baader, Ulrika Meinhof, and Gudrun Ensling, who were born in rich families, could not have possibly been concerned about “workers’ cause”. The reason they participated in violent acts against their co-citizens is that they simply wanted to feel “special”.
Given the fact that Liberal politicians in Western countries continue to encourage the representatives of racial minorities to think of their ethnic and religious affiliation as such that constitutes these people’s “uniqueness”, it will only be natural, on the part of “ethnically unique” citizens, to strive towards initialization of such their “uniqueness”. And, as people who possess plenty of biological vitality and who recognize the Liberal concept of “multicultural tolerance” as being nothing but the myth, based on wishful thinking, they will inevitably realize that it is only by resorting to violence that they will be able to achieve their agenda.
As Chairman Mao had once said, “law comes out of gun’s barrel”.
Therefore, in the future terrorism will assume racially communal subtleties. Even today, police officers in Western countries are being unofficially forbidden to enter ethnic ghettos, in order not to provoke racial riots. Even today, the members of ethnic gangs can often get away with committing a crime, simply because their lawyers refer to defenders’ crimes as an essential part of their clients’ “exploration of their ethnic roots”. Even today, ethnic communities can well afford to have their representatives in Western countries’ legislative bodies. And, as practice shows, “communal” formations usually end up having an upper hand in confrontation with governmental institutions and even with the whole countries.
In the post-industrial world, it is namely White person’s willingness to conform, to suppress its individuality, which accounts for his or her chances of gaining social prominence, while being associated with governmental institutions. This is why today’s White politicians resemble each other to such a striking extent – the same grey suits, the same conniving smiles, the same politically correct rhetoric, the same ability to lie most convincingly However, for the people with strong political and religious beliefs, such as the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Western countries, politically-correct “progressiveness” simply cannot account for their existential mode – these people are being just too real. This is why, unlike decadent Whites, they do not conform to society’s demands, but actively resist them by becoming members of religiously and racially secluded communities – thus proving the strength of their determination to win their place under the sun.
Conclusion
In this paper, we tried not to apply labels of “good” or “evil” to what we consider objective preconditions for the threat of international terrorism to become even more acute in the future. From our point of view, there is no difference between American planes bombing innocent civilians in Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan and Hamas’ militants shooting rockets at innocent civilians in Israel – both activities account for terrorism of the worst kind. However, if there is anybody to be held accountable for the escalation of terrorist violence in recent years, it would be the members of the world’s financial elite and “progressive” politicians on their payroll, who promote Globalization with such a passion.
Bibliography
- Gupta, D. (2008) Understanding Terrorism and Political Violence: The Life Cycle of Birth, Growth, Transformation, and Demise. New York: Taylor & Francis Routledge.
- Ohmae, K. (2005). Next Global Stage: Challenges and Opportunities in Our Borderless World. Upper Saddle River: Wharton School Publishing.
- Pierce, W. (2000) The Club. The Nationalist Coalition.
- Rabasa, A. (2006). Beyond Al-Qaeda: The Global Jihadist Movement. Santa Monica: CA RAND.
- Sharia Law in UK is “Unavoidable”. 2008. BBC News. Web.
- Walt, S. (2002). Beyond bin Laden: Reshaping U.S. Foreign Policy. International Security. 26(3): 56-78.
- Weber, M. (2003). A Look at the Powerful Jewish Lobby in America. Rense.Com. Web.