Don’t Give In To Terror: New Age Islam's Selection, 26 March 2016
New Age
Islam Edit Bureau
26 March 2016
• Don’t Give In To Terror
By Harun Yahna
• Ending Terror Needs A Shift In Political Thinking
By John Bell
• Terror Attacks Indicate Our System Is Malfunctioning
By Iason Athanasiadis
• Toward Restoration Of Peace
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
• Khamenei’s Heightened Anti-Americanism And Criticism Of Rowhani
By Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
-----
Don’t Give In To Terror
By Harun Yahna
26 March 2016
Last week, terrorists struck Turkey one after another. Only three days after the Ankara blast, Istanbul was hit by a suicide attack. Within days, Brussels became the target of terrorist attacks. We offer our condolences to the family members of all those who lost their lives in those attacks.
The Turkish nation, all too familiar with terror attacks, has started to question other issues since last July: Why would terror organizations ever target large cities?
Various countries may have a different perspective on these incidents. Here we will address the issue from Turkey’s perspective.
All the governments that have ruled in the history of the Turkish Republic have been subjected to fierce criticisms by their opposition, which has often been the reason why coalition governments could not be established — and at some certain times left the country without a government; sometimes, this process even led to military coups. Despite all the dissent, there is one particular issue on which all politicians and military officers agreed: Not allowing the fragmentation of Turkey. That is the reason why combating terror has always been Turkey’s top issue.
The major reason why terror has spread to Turkish cities is the failure of terror organizations to achieve their goals in rural areas. A terrorist exemplifies the perfidious face of terror even more by targeting civilians in the cities; he attempts to instill insecurity in the public. He believes that people will resort to uprisings with which states would be unable to cope. That is why in combating terrorism in cities, the best response would be not to deliver what terror and terrorists want.
Then the question is what does terror want?
Terrorists mainly want to instill feelings of fear and to spread panic among the masses. Terrorists seek to demoralize the masses. They want to set people and institutions against one another. Their ultimate goal is to affect the fabric of a society by means of violence and intimidation; by generating hatred, paranoia and mistrust.
Feelings of fear create uneasiness among masses. A terrorist considers an uneasy people as a potential mass that will react against its own state or stage an uprising and likely to lay the backdrop for hatred.
Nonetheless, terrorist organizations believe that messages of unity and solidarity in the face of suffering would not last long due to the frustration experienced by the society. Indeed this thesis is largely accurate.
A few days before the Istanbul terror attack, Germany closed its consulates and schools in Turkey. This was exactly what the terrorists sought. Being an unusual practice, this measure baffled the Turkish nation. Although there were some who agreed with Germany’s approach immediately after the attack, the Turkish public mostly viewed this practice as “desperate fear against terror.”
Immediately after the attack, a minority that could not get over its fear of terror took every opportunity to voice its concerns about going out. Acting upon a reflex of pain, they were actually delivering what the terrorists wanted through illogical and incoherent warnings. Perhaps they were unaware that terrified people shut up in their homes was exactly what the terrorists were looking for. They didn’t notice how irrational and wrong it was to leave the public spaces of the people to terrorists.
Once terror hits a metropolis, evacuating schools, official buildings and streets like the German government did would be tantamount to “defeat.” So is leaving public spaces to terrorists and creating an image of “being daunted” and thus making terrorists feel that their efforts have made impact. Though unintentional, this is a helpless reflex; it serves the purpose of terror. Combating terror is not only the responsibility of police officers and military officers; it is an all-out struggle that must be carried out together with people: It must have zero tolerance for fear.
If terror has not made people weep, if it instead brought forth a sense of solidarity among them, if people are resolute about not leaving their homelands to fall into the hands of terrorists, then the acts of the terrorists have failed. That is why assuming a timid stance and avoiding going out is unbecoming to those states combating terror, especially Turkey.
Surely caution is needed at crowded places and due measures must be taken; nevertheless, we need to keep in mind that death will find anyone at any moment. The Turkish military and police officers are brave in their struggle; they neither fear nor deliver what the terrorists want. In the same way, it is necessary for the people to be a part of this show of strength and not feel afraid. The collaboration of the security forces with the people signifies that terrorism — and terrorists — can never take shelter in that country. People’s will, their resolve and courage always frighten a terrorist.
At this stage granting certain rights to people is of primary importance. Especially in countries where terror has become a part of life, citizens must be granted the right to defend themselves against terror, and this must be legislated. Passing new laws to such effect are crucial. Meanwhile, an intellectual campaign must be launched: National awareness must be solidified and a counter-ideological campaign must be developed against the ideology of terror.
Source: arabnews.com/columns/news/901001
----
Ending Terror Needs a Shift in Political Thinking
By John Bell
25 Mar 2016
Another terrible terror attack has happened; it follows Istanbul and less reported events in Baghdad, Libya and elsewhere. Their frequency and regularity tell us this that is a global phenomenon, and people are scared, frustrated and fed up, as witnessed by the Facebook posts of "je suis sick of this s**t". Many are naturally asking what needs to be done.
Everyone wants quick answers or a silver bullet, but the tough news is that these may simply not exist. Security measures will continue, and they can and have done much to prevent other acts of terror. However, as we all know, if they succeed hundreds of times but fail only once, the terrorists win.
Why Was Brussels Attacked?
There are leaders in Europe, the United States and elsewhere who believe the answer is to double down on security, and on whole target populations.
But tougher security measures risk alienating many more than they deter, including many who are innocent today, but who will not be once they are made victims of blind prejudice. This can only lead to further violence and a destructive battle of testosterone.
No swift answers
It took a long time to reach this dangerous point, and it will take a while to get beyond it. This is because extremism, along with many other political ailments, involves commitments to mental states, ideologies that are not easily shifted.
The reality, which many simply don't want to hear, is that there are no swift answers and this is a long-term battle, and we might as well get used to the idea. The more important question lies in which direction we now go.
The rub that people don't want to consider is that violent extremists think that they are acting towards a perceived good.
The beginnings of an answer lie in what UN Envoy Staffan de Mistura said on Tuesday: "The tragedy in Brussels ... reminds us that ... we have no time to lose ... We need to extinguish the fire of war in Syria ... to fight terrorism, the best formula is to find a solution for political transition in Syria."
A political transition - a more stable Syria - is a necessary framework but it is only a beginning. Even then, new ways of operating politically will also be needed.
The rub that people don't want to consider is that violent extremists think that they are acting towards a perceived good. This may sound like a harsh statement given the violence but, believe it or not, like many other extreme idealists, they believe that the breakdown of order is necessary to build up another - in their mind, more positive - dream. It is for this reason that they commit these acts.
Through the prism and logic of their ideology, they are achieving something virtuous. The same can be said of the pursuit of any ideology, even if, in most cases, this does not lead to dramatic and random acts of violence.
Powerful And Basic Motivations
Whatever political framework is set up in a future Syria, indeed anywhere, we will have to take this hard fact into consideration: Humans are driven by powerful and basic motivations, material and emotional. If their society does not provide them with natural and constructive paths to meeting those needs, they will pursue them in other ways, sometimes nefarious, destructive or irrational.
Syrian children play outside a tent at the Greek-Macedonian border station of Idomeni, Greece [Al Jazeera]
If a manipulator convinces people to follow his or her Pied-Piper path to achieve those needs, they will follow him or her to the ends of the earth, and the end of history.
You can take this basic law of life to the bank. This is the elephant in the room, and the source of many of our troubles from the rise of Donald Trump to the troubles with ISIL (also known as ISIS).
A future Syria will have to be built to meet not only people's rights, but also their basic needs. This is a shift in political thinking, but a required one. A sense of legitimacy, autonomy, belonging, and intimacy are among these crucial human needs. We thrive and calm down if they are met: All hell is to pay if they are not, or if they are thwarted.
Above all, however, we need to pay attention to our powerful need for meaning and purpose in life. Extremists do a good job of convincing many, and especially the impressionable young seeking excitement and belonging, that they can have that need met through deeply ideological and idealistic groups.
Once committed, it is very difficult to escape from the inner logic of this system.
A new Syria, or, for that matter, new banlieues in France and Belgium, will need to address these basic needs of young men, create new useful and interesting paths for them, otherwise they will join whatever gang, group or activity that does.
If young Muslim French men and women, or non-Muslim for that matter, believe that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group offers an exciting and meaningful project, shocking as it is, they will join it.
What are the answers? A new Syria will have to treat its citizens with respect, not just through rights, but through the daily and organic workings of government and of society, by avoiding daily oppression, abuse and corruption, not just righting them once they occur. Only by so doing will the world avoids massive pools of new recruits for ISIL.
Disenfranchised Youth
Disenfranchised youth in France and Belgium and elsewhere will need to be involved in projects that are meaningful and exciting to them, and yet constructive. As an example, why not a global peace corps where these very youth work to combat extremism at the community level in other societies?
In international relations, I often meet well-educated, often elite, young people seeking employment but unable to find an entry point. The system is not set up to work with the incredible amount of talent out there, and instead cycles vested interests round and round.
There are armies of them, and we need find a way to pay them. What about involving the disenfranchised in such efforts? There is much meaning and excitement in working internationally, and I suspect the disenfranchised from France will better understand the disenfranchised in Syria than anyone else.
This is all a long-term project, a realignment of our priorities away from an excessive materialism and its attendant greed, back on to our basic human needs, away from ideological fixations, whether religious, national or intellectual, to the basic functional politics that are at the same time, critically, not boring.
There is much work ahead to right our societies, to rebuild Syria. It is a long-term process, but we might as well bite the bullet and get at it, at the basic human level where we are all, including the terrorists, driven. We need to work at the bedrock level of motivations and the pathways for their fulfilment, not just at the froth of media-driven politics.
There isn't really much choice because the other avenues available are partial or will not work. We can also take comfort that, like the fable of the tortoise and the hare, in the long run it is the tortoise that wins.
Source: aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/03/terror-shift-political-thinking-brussels-attack-isis-160323120907576.html
---
Terror Attacks Indicate Our System Is Malfunctioning
By Iason Athanasiadis
25 Mar 2016
Late on the night of the Brussels bombing, regulars sitting in a cafe built under the brick arches of a medieval gate in the Medina of Tunis stared blithely at the CCTV and cellphone video scenes of carnage that had been flitting across the cafe's television screen all day. They refocused their interest only when two Europeans also paused before the screen
"All these innocents," one client commented to the Europeans, pointing at the scenes of destruction. "Yet their politicians are the ones who created ISIL."
Such passive aggression - blithely implying to two Westerners that the pigeons are coming home to roost as a result of several decades of alternatively disastrous policies and inaction - is hardly unusual in a small country that both exports militants and is on the front line of confronting Islamism.
In 2015, Tunisia was battered by three major terrorist attacks. This month, its army fought off a team of more than 50 gunmen assaulting a border city with the alleged intention of proclaiming an Islamic emirate.
Little Tunisia - more used to catching a cold whenever its mightier neighbours sneeze - pioneered the wave of Arab uprisings that swept the region in 2011.
Yet the country paid for its Libyan neighbour's revolution and subsequent destabilisation dearly, and is struggling to contain the shockwaves emanating from the resulting civil war.
Democratisation of Havoc
Squeezed between the Mediterranean to its North, Libya to the East (where the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group has declared an emirate), and Algeria to the west (where the military regime drowned an Islamist insurgency in blood in the 1990s), resource and population-starved Tunis is a prisoner of its neighbourhood.
But as Brussels and Istanbul discovered last week, violence is not just a function of location. Efficient transport networks and video-conferencing have reduced distance, lowered the threshold for disruption and democratised the opportunity to cause havoc.
As Brussels and Istanbul discovered last week, violence is not just a function of location. Efficient transport networks and video-conferencing have reduced distance, lowered the threshold for disruption and democratised the opportunity to cause havoc.
Like-minded, self-selecting online communities can shape real-time information flows into seemingly coherent, agenda-setting narratives, then act upon them within hours.
Digital interconnectivity is so all-pervasive that it has given the butterfly theorem of chaos theory - whereby an event as seemingly insignificant as the fluttering of a butterfly in one country can scale up to defining the parameters of a typhoon in another - a technological boost.
Earlier this decade, European and North American technocrat politicians who were fortunate enough never to have experienced crisis and war in their lifetimes, sought to subcontract away the instability at the edge of the European Union at a time when action could still have been taken.
Instead, a number of regional state actors hoping to fill the American vacuum in the Middle East fuelled crises in already failing neighbours so as to promote their own interests, ideologies and prestige, transforming Iraq, Libya, Bahrain, Yemen and Syria into proxy battlefields.
By then it was too late for the Western politicians and United Nations bureaucrats to adapt to the realities of the moment. As a generation of frustrated Middle Eastern youth went from protesting against dictators to fighting for armed groups, the EU and UN opted for containing the fallout.
Old World politicians stuck to old ways of doing things, while others struggled to process what was happening by adopting politically correct or incorrect theories as ideological crutches.
Domestically, nothing but cognitive lag and the fear of coming across as illiberal can explain the lackadaisical way in which the West handled the phenomenon of its own radicalised Muslim citizens fighting in Syria, then returning home unchallenged, or last summer's spasmodic, hot-then-cold reaction to the refugee crisis by Angela Merkel.
We have entered a perfect storm
A set of systemic factors has contributed to the eruption of the spectacular complex emergency we witness.
People leave tributes at the Place de la Bourse in Brussels following the attacks [Getty]
Many of the revolutions, civil wars and extreme politics happening now are unrelated to the whimsy that Arab populations suddenly discovered dignity after four decades of living under oppression.
They are much more rooted in the collapse of the unspoken social pact struck between every dictator and a critical mass of their people, whereby the populace agrees to surrender its civil liberties in return for a guarantee of stability, nourishment, shelter and education.
Globally, human population numbers are at historical levels and rising parabolically even as extreme weather and overheating ecosystems drive agricultural yields down and their price up. Meanwhile, global inequality is the worst it's ever been just as we arrive at the mass automation of most jobs.
But before self-driving vehicles and industrial 3D printers strip away millions of already precarious factory and service industry jobs, we ought to consider tweaking our economic system to allow for the growing number of unemployed to live in dignity even in the absence of an income.
Unless we do that, radicalisation and acts of terror will continue multiplying while electorates in democracies such as India, Turkey and the US will go on being seduced by radical authoritarians peddling soothing identity narratives of a return to imaginary roots.
If we look at the terrorist attacks in Brussels, Istanbul, Bamako and Paris as being frantic alerts from an overheated system that our hyper-networked world can no longer tolerate current levels of inequality and cultural dissonance, then perhaps we can avoid the dystopian and imminent fate of a decoupling of the centre from its periphery.
Wealth-producing urban areas - not just in the West but around the world - will safeguard their privilege through the building of inaccessible, high-technology fortress cores.
Citizens will consent to intrusive electronic monitoring. Beyond the unbreachable digital walls, chaotic hinterlands will lie, populated by self-organising groups of those who were either excluded or opted out of the dominant system - imagine a mixture of rejected migrants, right-wing survivalists and back-to-the-roots leftists.
It is a lurid vision worthy of a sci-fi film, yet it is already happening in Syria, Libya and parts of the Turkish Southeast. It is not too late to stop it and re-inject some levity into a world going mad, but a total reframing of our approach to each other and our world is necessary as a first step.
Source: aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/03/terror-attacks-system-malfunction-warning-160324121455096.html
---
Toward Restoration of Peace
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
26 March 2016
Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed, the United Nations Special Envoy for Yemen, deserves appreciation for preparing a comprehensive plan to end the war in the country. The plan will take shape with cease-fire on April 10.
Ould Cheikh has laid down a road map for the three committees of the parties involved and has set the foundation for dialogue between the warring factions under Security Council resolution 2216.
Eight days after truce takes effect on April 10, negotiations will be held in Kuwait. Ould Cheikh has defined five themes to be discussed: The withdrawal of militias, handover of heavy and medium weapons to the state, agreeing on temporary security arrangements, enabling state institutions through public dialogue between Yemenis and the formation of a committee to resolve the issues of detainees and prisoners.
Of course, no one can guarantee that things will work out exactly as per the detailed plan developed by the international mediator. However, it is clear that Ould Cheikh has reached out to all stakeholders in Yemen and then announced his plan in New York after they were onboard. He has also received support from various powers, including the US and Russia.
That at the least constitutes the political plan for the future. However, on the ground, today’s map shows that the rebels — i.e. Houthi militia and the isolated forces of President Ali Abdullah Saleh — have lost control and have started defending their areas of origins, in the capital Sanaa and governorates like Saada. The new important development on the ground is that many of the local forces are being formed and are joining the military alliance; rebels can no longer return to fight in areas they lost or withdrew from.
That raises the question as to why rebels would negotiate knowing well that they will lose. The reason is simple: Because it is their only chance. After failing to take over the country, they had two choices: Either participate and get a stake in the governance or get nothing.
Similarly, why would the coalition accept to negotiate if they are set to emerge victorious? One of the participants in the plan asked: “Why doesn’t the campaign continue as most of the 22 province that make up this great country have been liberated — considering that the area of Yemen is bigger than Syria, Lebanon and Jordan combined?” He said that the goal of the military campaign was not to neutralize any party but rather the restoration of the legitimacy.
“We did not want Yemen to be left in the hands of Yemeni groups by force of arms,” he added. If they accept to negotiate in accordance with the Security Council resolution that means that we have achieved the desired objective. It is surely better to resolve the conflict through negotiations and by making compromises. It is much better than a military victory without a political solution.
Ould Cheikh’s plan is based on the re-adoption of the GCC initiative, based on which Saleh had tendered his resignation and given the Houthis a chance to participate in the government. If stakeholders in Yemen travel to Kuwait next month and agree on the essentials, I reckon they will come up with reasonable solutions that can end the war and restore legitimacy. Yemeni people would then reconstruct the country and resume normal life. At least that is our hope.
Source: www.arabnews.com/columns/news/901016
------
Khamenei’s Heightened Anti-Americanism And Criticism Of Rowhani
By Dr. Majid Rafizadeh
26 March 2016
Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who previously gave his blessing to Rowhani’s nuclear team and congratulated them for reaching a nuclear deal with the P5+1, is now turning the trend around. Khamenei’s latest speech significantly contradicted that of Rowhani. Rowhani told the Iranian people that “I am hopeful and I am certain that with cooperation and domestic efforts and constructive engagement with the world, we can follow the path of prosperity, work and growth in economic activity.”
In his hometown of Mashahad, where Khamenei gives a speech every year on the Persian new year, he heavily criticized President Rowhani, Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, and he explained that how the United States remains the preeminent enemy of the Islamic Republic.
“When I say the enemy, I mean the US government”
Khamenei’s harsh criticisms of the US government seemed contradictory, but were well-crafted. On the one hand, he seemed agitated that the US department of Treasury was using intimidation tactics on other banks and countries for dealing with the Islamic Republic.
He believes that the US is not allowing Iran to fully engage in business with Western countries and reach its economic potential. He demonstrates that the removal of sanctions are superficial to him, even though Tehran has received billions of dollars and all major UNSC sanctions against Iran have been lifted.
On the other hand, Khamenei’s message that Iran’s economy should be self-sufficient indicates that he clearly does not desire the Islamic Republic to fully join the global economy. He fears that forces of globalization will endanger the tight grip of his office on the political and economic life of Iran.
In addition, Khamenei also warned the Iranian youths not to be trapped by President Obama and the White House’s last week message to the Iranians. He argued that Obama’s latest message and the White House creation of a haft-sin sofreh [the traditional Nowruz food] were methods to deceive the Iranian youth.
By criticizing Rowhani, Zarif, and the US, Khamenei seems to be preparing the platform to pull out of the nuclear agreement after sanctions have been lifted
When it comes to Khamenei’s view on Rowhani, one of his main concerns was the increasing rapprochement between Rowhani’s government and President Obama’s administration. From Khamenei’s perspective, the US is using the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCOPA) to further cooperate with Iran on other regional issues causing the Islamic Republic to lose its revolutionary ideals by getting closer to Washington.
In addition, Khamenei tactfully criticized Rowhani for not delivering on his promises and for suggesting that if the sanctions were to be lifted, Iran’s economy will improve. He also criticized Rowhani’s team for telling the government before the nuclear deal that if the sanctions were not lifted, Iran would have faced a dangerous path. Khamenei argues that nothing would have happened to Iran if sanctions were not lifted.
Khamenei’s Shrewd Tactics
Khamenei has several tactics with his recent lashing out at Rowhani’s and Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif and the United States. The fact is that if it was not for Khamenei’s blessing, Rowhani would have not been capable of continuing with the negotiations and reaching the nuclear deal. Even before Rowhani came to power, Khamenei and senior cadre of IRGC were preparing the platform for a nuclear deal.
Nevertheless, in order to preserve his power, Khamenei has always attempted to switch between the moderates and hardliners publicly or behind the doors. While in public he shows his support for the hardliners, in private he gives the green light to the moderates.
In Mashhad, where a significant amount of the hardline clerics reside, Khamenei sends a message that he continues to respect the Islamic Republic’s ideological principles of opposing the United States and preventing rapprochement between Tehran and the “Great Satan”.
In addition, not only does he assure his hard-line social base in the Revolutionary Guards, the Basij and the army that he is on their side rather than on the side of moderates, but also he is empowering them to begin controlling the moderates and more freely criticizing Rowhani’s team.
Third, whenever a president gains popularity, Khamenei attempts to curb the president by empowering hardliners.
Fourth, Khamenei’s modus of operandi is to avoid any situation that holds him accountable for major issues. On the one hand he gives license to and instructs Rowhani to make a deal, on the other hand he tells the public that this is not what he wanted. Therefore, if Iran pulls out of the nuclear deal or people do not see the fruit of the sanctions relief, they would point fingers to Rowhani.
Finally, by criticizing Rowhani, Zarif, and the US, Khamenei seems to be preparing the platform to pull out of the nuclear agreement after sanctions have been lifted.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/2016/03/26/Khamenei-s-heightened-anti-Americanism-and-criticism-of-Rowhani.html
----
URL: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/don’t-give-terror-new-age/d/106760