Hs103 blog entry 6 (Response to 'War and Terrorism') Revised

Conflicts marked by terrorism have, unfortunately, a terrific shelf-life. The conflict between Israel and the various militant groups has ceased to end in any significant way since 1948. Conflicts between Indonesia and different separatist groups started as early as 1969, but have carried on till today. World Wars 1 and 2 lasted between 4 to 6 years. What element of terrorist conflicts enables them to persist for decades on end?

One reason is the access to means of conflict. Weapons manufactured in the past by Soviet and US industries were used by the respective countries they supported during civil wars and regional conflicts. It is speculated that there may even be 50 million AK-47 rifles still circulating in the world by both legal and illegal means (Sernau, 2006). It is an inexpensive rifle that can be purchased in large numbers. Beyond that, terrorists can also create carnage with even simpler means. Shrapnel-filled, home-made explosives and car bombs can be produced without the need for any kind of advanced technology. Furthermore, the civilians who are the targets of terrorists have little to no physical protection, unlike military personnel who wear protective vests and ride armoured vehicles.

Means are not enough to explain the prevalence of terrorist action. Suicide bombers do not give their lives up for a cause simply because they have the means to do so. Research has little to show about links between poverty and terrorist action (although the financial care of the suicide bomber’s family is one of the provisions made by some terrorist groups). It may be a factor, but I think that the deciding factor is one of religious indoctrination. Christian and Islamic literature has explicit accounts of holy wars. The Old Testament which the Jews (having no belief in the validity of New Testament books) use as their main religious text has several chapters where the Israelite nation was given a direct mandate from God to utterly annihilate every single person in the foreign lands they planned to move into.

I am not suggesting that this is the attitude of Jews today. However, the presence of such elements in religious doctrine can be, and are easily employed by terrorist groups to validate their ideologies. Suicide bombers are the best illustration of this; a great part of their motivation lies in the promise of a glorious afterlife which has been earned by their zealous devotion to their faith. Furthermore, it becomes even easier for them to take the lives of others as religious indoctrination objectifies foreigners, reducing them to one-dimensional ‘enemies of the faith’.

The targets that terrorists choose may be the most important factor of all. Terrorist attacks target people who have not consented to engage in any form of warfare, and unlike soldiers these civilians do not have the benefit of armoured vests or vehicles. Terrorist acts come without warning and it seems impossible for bereaved families to make sense of the deaths of their loved ones. The ruthlessness and blatant disregard for lives, combined with proud declarations made by the responsible parties, is only bound to engender a deep and pervasive hatred among the victims. It can be compared to the way criminals who target children are considered by their fellow criminals to be the worst human beings.

But is it really true that terrorists always choose violence over peaceful solutions? Is there a choice? I guess the answer is highly dependent on the context… hmm. I don’t know. Haha. I guess there are also other reasons for the perpetuation of terrorist violence, but these were the first few that came to mind…

Reference list

Scott Sernau. (2006). “Global Problems: The Search for Equity, Peace, and
Sustainability”. Chapter 6: War, States of Terror. Pearson.