When we turn on our television or when we flick through the pages of a newspaper, one of the things that very often catches our attention are the Terrorist attacks which take place pretty much everyday all over the world. As long as we talk about a violent action that could be seen as wrong or not acceptable by the public opinion and which is done in order to achieve an aim, either political, religious or ideological, we are talking about Terrorism. Normally, to have a clear view of what Terrorism is and whether it should or it should not be justified, we need to have a detailed look at the definition of Terrorism itself, “the systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective”1. Terrorism is a consistent factor in human history, and has been around since the dawn of man, From the persecution of the Christians in Rome in the first century A.D, which was seen as the first sort of Terrorism, of course, Terrorism has developed during this time period. The growth of Terrorism and the change in ideology has caused many radical changes in what Terrorism is nowadays and how it is seen from the public opinion. during the time period of what we define as ‘modern Terrorism’, starting with the IRA (Irish Republican Army), who wanted a new Northern Irish republic, free from the United Kingdom in 1969, in 1979, after the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan, Terrorism has then modernised into what people of think of it nowadays, and therefore a more extremist way of acting. Terrorism has evolved so much since the beginning of this new, more radicalism era, as we can see from the subsequent events, 9/11 was a Terrorist attack against the Western World Centre, on that day, four planes were hijacked by Al-Qaeda, of which two hit The Twin Towers and one fell on the Pentagon under instructions of their leader Osama Bin Laden.
But, it’s been about 2 years so far, where a new ideology has been originated, and which has developed into a new way of thinking about Terrorism, this new Terrorist group who is ruled by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has nowadays entered our everyday life, and they claim to be called ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) or ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant). In this project, I will be focusing on terrorism in general but I will be referring to ISIS the most, because at the moment is one of our greatest enemies and the one we know the most about.
I chose this project because I believe that Terrorism should be prevented and I don’t understand why it is not, even though
Of course, in a world where there is freedom of speech and everyone therefore can have their own view, there is plenty of controversy on the justification of a phenomenon that is nowadays one of our biggest enemies and one to overcome. In order to be able to justify it, we need to have reason for seeing it as right or wrong and we need to know facts about it. Worldwide, there are more than 4200 religions2, among these, the most practiced are Christianity, Roman Catholicism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism. Therefore culture names our Gods, it tells us how many women we can marry. Culture names our joys and our pains, it takes our hand and leads us day by day, forever. Firstly, to justify any sort of violence, we need to look at history. What happens when our culture is not able to give us answers for existential questions? What happens when we are not able to capture the significance of our existence? There is the beginning of our existential crisis, our lives become miserable, and we go looking for a new life, one that can excite us and we look for a remedy. Some find love and revive, bonding in their love relationship, others join a sports team and find comfort in their team mates, other ones might be saved by their families, who act like they are a sort of protection shield from life and the outer world, full of traumas and dangers. But there are a few that find refuge in different ideologies, for example, the jihadist ideology, which gives their life a new meaning. It is an ideology that saves our lives by killing us. ISIS was first invented as an ideology on the 8th April 2013, in Syria. Step by step, this group has been increasing its power and has eventually reached about 30,000 militants, who are spread out from Northern Syria to Central Iraq, and, according to CNN, up to July 25th 2016, they would have been in control of or more 140 attacks in 29 countries. The propaganda from ISIS is quite effective in the way it tells people, mainly those with existential crisis, to join. It pretty much says: “ISIS is a state where arabs, non-arabs, whites and blacks, western and eastern are all brothers. It is a state that gathers everyone. Allah has united their heart and therefore we all become brothers, for his grace, loving each other and sacrificing ourselves for another. Their blood mixes and so they become one thing, under one flag and one aim.”
But, to actually be clear on the justification Terrorism, we need to look at their reasons for doing it and whether or not it matches determinate ideologies. Before an attack or a war, there should be some precautions taken, for example the Just War Theory, made by St. Thomas Aquinas. Just War theory then involves the claim that war is acceptable at times (unlike pacifism, which claims war is always wrong). This theory identifies a number of criteria for when it is appropriate to fight in a war. But, as many of us might have thought at times “When is war acceptable?”. In order for war to be reasonable, there needs to be some boxes ticked and therefore some principles should always be followed. There must be a reasonable chance of winning; it shouldn’t be vicious or aggressive, but it should only be self-defence, you must be aiming at something good; the damage caused by war should less than the good achieved by fighting; you’ve tried all peaceful ways of resolving the conflict but without any outcome; it shouldn’t be one-man choice; a lawful body must decide to wage war and the method of fighting must respect human rights, therefore without any sort of slaughter. There are two traditional aspects of ‘just war theory’, jus ad bellum – which explains the answer to the question ‘When is it acceptable to go to war?’ It is only right if it is self-defence, aid of neighbour, aid of citizens in a corrupt country, but nowadays we have a globalisation, therefore the question now is how do we behave to prevent that a third world war will follow just as the second world war followed the first?. jus in bellum – just in war, it explains how to behave while involved in war, and in particular how to behave towards non-combatants, therefore women, children and elderly.
The Middle East itself is made up of 14 states, of which, Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE and Oman have always been in very good relations with USA. At the same time, Russia has a real corridor made for them made by Iran, Iraq and Syria. But, in 2003, Iraq changed side, and allied with USA, so that it is not as easy as it was for Russia in the Middle East. The question that rises in everyone’s mind when the notice that, after all the work that the world’s power claim to be doing, ISIS hasn’t been destroyed yet is “If all the most powerful countries can’t hit ISIS down, who can and who will eventually?”. We have to say that leaving a terrorist group with such extremist ideologies without destroying it, is very dangerous indeed. Thinking about this phenomenon, doing such a thing (not killing them with their ideology) would be like employing someone who has no clue in what he is doing and not firing him; of course, with time and a bit of luck, he will eventually become better at what he is doing and specialise in his job. This is the exact same thing as what is happening in the East at the moment,
Of course, if we define terrorism as not justifiable, we have to affirm that the countries that claim to be trying to prevent it and oppress it as much as possible, but not only fail, they also do not do their best to attack it even though they have the capabilities and they do know how to, are effectively their partners in crime. History has taught us that all’s fair in love and war, and it is also moral to ally with a minor enemy in order to overcome a bigger one, like USA did with the USSR against Hitler to then return to fight each other. But in Syria nowadays, everything is different, and that is because everyone has different interests; however the Paris attack and all the other attacks that have been claimed by ISIS have shown that they can attack the West, and do it well. The only thing that can be done is for USA to explain to all the actors that take part in the conflict that once ISIS has been overpowered, the problems are solved. Roger Petersen, a Political Science teacher at MIT, has recalled a proposal made by an american general, proposing an alliance with al-Nusra, which is effectively the military force of Al-Qaeda in Syria, and in particular with those who don’t agree with Al-Qaeda for ideologies, but for lack of job or of a safe place in that land full of dangers. In this case, it wouldn’t just be immoral for USA to ally with al-Nusra, it will just be wrong. It will mean USA is verily allying with their own worst enemy, the TERRORIST group that has pretty much changed the history of one of the most powerful countries on the planet. Therefore, looking at it, USA are willing to buy guns for these people and work with them, indirectly supporting not only terrorism itself, what the entire Western world has been trying to fight since it first came to life, but also the terrorist group that has has hit those two towers down, the Twin Towers, 11th September 2001.
But, USA would only do that for a reason; which is mainly that the hostility between the other main countries involved in the conflict (Russia, Iran, USA, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and United Arab Emirates) is so big that not even the Paris attacks have made them understand that the only way to fight ISIS and destroy them is to join forces and attack them, not bomb them, and this has, so far, avoided the process of destroying the most immediate menace, but also because of the selfishness of these states, who are all seeking for the power in Syria. In my opinion, this is all playground behaviour in a seriously large scale, where people’s lives are affected and which will eventually influence us teenagers when we grow older.
There is one thing that always happens after these attacks, the fact that cities are hit by these terrorist attacks angers the governments a lot, which makes them want to bomb Syria as much as possible, trying to hit a target, but without any outcome. It not only happened to France, but it also happened to Jordan when they saw one of their pilots getting burnt in a cage on the 3rd February 2015; the rage of King Abdullah II mutated in a few days into bombings, but they do not solve the problem, they are not as accurate as bullets, they hit down houses, they don’t hit men.
As I stated before, everyone that is involved in the Middle East conflict has different interests and for this reason a real war against ISIS has never started, and if things go on this way, it will not commence for a while. Russia and Iran do not want to send their men fighting because they think that, while they are engaging in conflict, the rebels, with the approval of USA, will overpower the government of Bashar al-Assad. For the same “paralysing” reason, USA, as well as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and France, does not want to send army officers because if they do so they will keep Syria under the government of Bashar al-Assad, therefore under the influence of Iran and Russia. The situation in the Middle East at the moment just looks like a massive game of Risk and the two main world powers are trying to get as many countries as possible on their side. In my opinion, we can safely affirm that the Syrian war and this whole scenario in the Middle East has given life to a new Cold War, where Russia and USA are not only “fighting” to be the best/most developed country, but also to be in control of Syria, that is their main aim.
To make all of this simpler, let’s divide the countries involved in the “Middle East Business” in two blocks; Russia and Iran in Block A; USA, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and UAE.
For many reasons ISIS is the luckiest terrorist group ever, and this is mainly because those who are meant to be stopping it don’t due to the dynamics of the relationships between the two blocks, but as the reason why USA has joined the conflict in the Middle East was the one of creating an American government in Syria.
...(download the rest of the essay above)