Towards a global war against terrorism

By C. Raja Mohan

IT OFTEN takes a single spectacular event to force the world to come to terms with a clear and present danger. Nations do not respond even to a well-understood threat unless it is fully demonstrated in reality. The shocking Super Terror Tuesday in the United States should now force the international community to wake up to the enormity of the challenge the modern world faces from international terrorism. It will be a while before the gruesome terrorist attack on American cities this week is digested by Washington and the rest of the world capitals. It will be even longer before the perpetrators of this barbarity are brought to book. Meanwhile, the world should fully recognise the kind of vulnerability it faces from the forces of international terrorism. Given the global spread of terrorist networks, there is no way of nations on an individual basis dealing with this threat. The time has come for open societies of the world need to pool their resources and define a radically different strategy to counter international terrorism.

One of the important lessons from this attack is that no one is immune to the kind of threat the international community today faces from terrorism. Few countries spend the kind of intellectual, physical and other resources in monitoring and assessing the activities of the various terrorist organisations around the world that the U.S. does. Few Governments take as much care as the U.S. in warning and preparing for terrorist attacks on the basis of intelligence reports. Yet, this Tuesday, America woke up to one of the gravest challenges to its national security since Pearl Harbour.

On the eve of the new millennium less than two years ago, the U.S. Government had warned against a single dramatic attack, most probably from the vaunted terrorist Osama bin Laden and his international network. But all that happened was the hijacking of IC 814 from Kathmandu to Kandahar. The U.S. had assessed that a few terrorist groups would be using the occasion to make their political points in a telling manner. Even those who envisaged such an attack at the turn of the millennium could not have anticipated an attack of such a gigantic proportion as the world saw this week.

Tuesday's attacks are radically different from the ones America has faced before. The U.S. is no stranger to terrorism. Its citizens abroad, embassies and globally dispersed assets have long been the principal targets of international terrorism. It is a threat that the U.S. has coped with for nearly three decades. But never before has the vulnerability of the U.S. mainland to terrorism been shown up so tragically. To be sure there was an attempted attack on the World Trade Center in the early 1990s. And there was a successful attack on Oklahama city in the same period. But that was done by a small group of domestic malcontents rather than an international group that most likely carried out Tuesday's outrage.

The U.S. had also recognised that since the end of the Cold War, the principal source of threat to its security was no longer from another major power like the Soviet Union equipped with nuclear weapons. As America basked in the absence of any challenger to its pre-eminence and strode across the world like a colossus, it understood instinctively that future wars against it would be conducted in an asymmetric manner. No one is better placed than terrorists (with the new exception of cyber warriors) to wage unconventional warfare against even the most powerful states.

Those opposed to the U.S. were not going to fight it against its strengths. They were expected to target its weaknesses. Few approaches other than terrorism give its practitioners the choice of time and location to spring the surprise. Democracies are specially vulnerable to terrorism, given their justified reluctance to curb the freedoms of their citizens and the built- in opposition to draconian methods in countering terrorism.

Given the many groups across the world that have nurtured grievances against the U.S. and its policies, there was no shortage of those with motivation to harm America and its interests. Modern technology and innovative ways of financing, and global connections have given terrorists extraordinary capabilities that were demonstrated this week. The simultaneous attack on so many different targets imply substantive preparation and coordination. The rise of suicide bombers has given terrorism a new edge and has made nations that much more vulnerable.

The U.S. had also pointed, in the recent past, to the fundamental change in the nature of terrorism over the last decade. In the past, left wing ideologies were the principal sources of inspiration for international terrorism. Whether it was those fighting the U.S. and Israel in West Asia or the various fringe groups all across the world, the use of violence against innocent people was in pursuit of ``progressive causes''. Many of these left-wing groups had exhausted themselves either ideologically or were contained by the early 1980s.

From the 1990s, right wing ideologies, particularly those that sought to use either ethnic or religious hatred, became the dominant sources of international terrorism. Given the baggage of emotion attached to matters of faith, right wing terrorism is likely to be more enduring than the left-oriented ones of the past. As the world began to witness the rise of identity politics, groups that sought to promote their interests at the expense of other groups they had long lived with, terrorism and ethnic cleansing had become common across the world.

The rise of religious extremism in the last few years in many parts of the world brought in another dimension to new right wing terrorism. In West Asia, extremist groups acting in the name of Islam had risen, nursing ideological and other complaints against the U.S. and the West. It threatens not just America but also many of the regimes in the region itself. Terrorism was of course no monopoly of those misusing the name of Islam. The Subcontinent itself has been witness to various extremist groups of many different religious orientations.

The various administrations in the U.S. have been more than careful, and rightly so, in not identifying Islam with terrorism. With the growing number of American citizens following the Islamic faith, the White House has tried to reach out to the leaders of the international community and convince them that its counter-terrorism policies are not directed against any particular religion.

As a new spectre of terrorism haunts the world, no one has captured attention more than Osama bin Laden, the exiled Saudi- born millionaire, who has proclaimed far-reaching political objectives and has pursued them across the world with unusual vigour. His alliance with the Taliban in Afghanistan reflects another important shift in the nature of international terrorism. The headquarters of international terrorism has moved from West Asia to the Subcontinent. Although violence and terrorism have been on the rise again in West Asia, the Subcontinent has become the principal haven of international terrorism. The Taliban- controlled Afghanistan has become a sanctuary for international terrorists as well as a breeding ground of extremist ideas that are driving the new scourge.

All these trends have been well known and exhaustively debated in the U.S. The U.S. has also recognised the importance of international cooperation with many countries, including India, in countering terrorism. But this cooperation has been too little in comparison to the scale of the threat that confronts the world as a whole. Despite the accurate assessment of the new sources of threat to international and regional security from terrorism, most states, including India and the U.S., have often had to compromise their counter-terrorism goals in the face of other political and economic interests. But the war against the evils of terrorism and fanaticism cannot be fought by accommodating them and their sponsors, however tempting that course may be. It can only be won by intensive cooperation among the major powers. There can be no separate peace with the terrorists.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : An attack on the civilised world
Next     : What next for India's Dalits?