Terrorism, France and Beyond

Paris Attacks

The Parisians awoke in 13^th of November in to a terror stricken world. Paris terror attacks have killed more than 130 people and left many injured, some are still in critical condition. The jihadist group ISIS has claimed responsibility. Now it is the 3^rd attack beyond ISIS controlled territory after Russian airliner bombing and Lebanon attacks. After the Second World War, it was the biggest attack in French Soil and most probably the deadliest terrorist attack since 9/11 in any western country except Spain.  The events unfolding in the middle-east and mainland Europe shake us with the deadly realism that we are not safe.

Now the whole world is in mourning, condolence messages and Facebook profile pictures changing it to French Tricolors. They want us to pray for Paris only to Pray for some other city later if we don’t understand the root-cause of the threat of international terrorism and dealt with it once in for all. We can look immediately to the Syrian civil war but it is important to look beyond that particular conflict to understand why, the so called Islamic State Militants have dared to commit suicide killing many unarmed civilians who were not connected to their cause at all.  

Terrorism 101

There were many terrorist groups in the world, most of them fighting to overthrow a government in order to establish their own state with an ideology of their own. Most of the groups belong to the minority of a country; ethnic, religious or political. They were either get wiped off or drawn in to agreements to stop their acts of terror. There is no clear word to define a terrorist because, a person may appear as a terrorist for someone or a freedom fighter to some other.  But for the record, we can identify terrorist as a person who inflict terror through violent method to achieve his goal. He has an ideology on which his acts are governed. They can be religious, ethnic or political such as Marxism. Now most of the international terrorist groups have a religious ideology.

The world is heavily globalized with increasing travel opportunities and communication methods. Thus a terror organization is not limited to one particular country but to the whole world if its followers are scattered globally. Before World War 2 There were rouge nations with sinister ideologies but they have the characteristics of a state and comes with it the responsibilities of a state even at warfare but terror organizations have no such constraints.

As we have previously mentioned, a terrorist organization has

• Operating region
• Ideology
• Specific goal
• An adversary
• Followers
• Support network and
• Sympathizers (sympathizers may turn into followers later)

How it Happen?

Majority of the terrorist organizations born out of the last couple of decades were from the middle-eastern region. Religion plays an utmost part of their ideology. The usual adversary is the western world and governments who are supportive to west. Their goal rages from gaining control of a specific territory to world domination. They have followers, supporters and sympathizers throughout the world. Since their religion is widespread and rapidly growing, they are in no shortage. Not every religious person is a follower of supporter but most of the people have a soft spot in their subconscious mind towards the people of their own religion trying to dispose the enemies of their religion and to propagate it no matter where they live either in a desert in Syria, in a slum in Pakistan or a suburb in England.  

Who to Blame?

It was happened in many Abrahamic religions, sometimes spreading in to the people of different sect of their own religious resulting Spanish inquisition, Catholic-Protestant problems in Europe and Problems among ultra-orthodox Jewish sects. The world has moved away from inquisitions, religious persecutions in Europe and Antisemitism (at least in the western world) but the crusades have never been ended yet.  Blood still spills furiously in the same crusade battlefields where Richard III and Saladin fought. Although battlefield is the same, tactics differ. In a standard warfare, the mightiest military power wins but in a guerrilla war, standard armies and states were pushed in the brink and rouge groups gain the upper hand.

Who Stormed the Hornets’ Nest?

It is not wrong to say that most of the international terrorist groups have born as a result of the interventions from their enemies itself. Colonization in the 17^th-19^th century, aftermath of the WW2 in the middle-east, Israel-Palatine problem, Soviet Intervention, Gulf War, Invasion of Afghanistan, Gulf War 2 and finally the Arab Spring aftermath gives ample evidence of who have driven the first blood. Once incident was linked to another and to another. The list goes on and on with attacks and retaliations only to spill more and more blood on those forsaken lands and beyond.

It is a viable question to ask that even though the so called colonials and socialists have done the exact same thing in Asia, Africa and Latin America, why global terrorism never immerged from those regions. Even if it did, it was in small scare and usually subdued. This is the million dollar question! What is so special with the middle-east? Religion plays a major role and tribalist sentiments dominate people’s ideology. Heavy unequal distribution of wealth, poverty and most important of all, the lack of education to train the mind to be logical are the main causes. It is of utmost importance to note that one cause alone won’t create the situation in middle-east. And blaming religion ONLY won’t solve the problem at all.

What Shall We Do?

There are short-term, medium-term and long-term remedies to battle the wave of international terrorism.

Short-term -  Security has to be tightened. An intelligence services have to run on full alert. Border security and surveillance need to be enhanced. Refugees are one of the biggest threats to Europe and to the rest of the world; unpopular but drastic measures have to be taken even if it is disappointing for the refugees. Balkan states and Eastern-European states have to regulate if not close their borders stopping the influx of refugees to the Western-Europe. ISIS has to be dealt with somehow. Shaking hands with Russia and if possible with Assad, is to be done no matter how unpopular it is. Any enemy is better than ISIS now.

Medium-term – The European dream need to be shattered. Open borders, Multiculturalism and immigration policies need to be changed. Dealing with the middle-eastern governments no matter how unappealing they are, is the way to go. If the west had dealt with Assad differently, ISIS would never have immerged this strong. Assad might get defeated but at least the replacement would never be ISIS.

  

Long-term – Addressing the root cause. Why the west need to be interested in the middle-east so much. One reason is the Israel-Palestine problem. It is a tricky problem. United States and west are always Israel’s allies. Neither Palestinians nor Israelis ready for negotiations. Next one is oil. Oil will run out eventually. Soft diplomacy and international umbrella combined with long term alternative energy plan shall be enough to keep the oil problem at bay. That’s why working with the middle-eastern governments is the key.

Conclusion

What the western world did for decades was make the middle-eastern problem their own. Deal with it politically rather than economically. China was doing the opposite thing and gained profits from it. It is up to the people in the middle-east to decide what they want, either to collapse or thrive as a civilization. West shall take live-and-let-live stance and grab the spoils from it rather than engaging in a regime change for like they did and failed every time. 

Read More

Once Upon a Time in Syria; Analysis on Syrian Conflict.

The human civilization was never free of problems and chaos in which war and destruction was common. In human history, there is no point in time which was free from conflicts and warfare. In the last century, the world was plagued with two world wars, struggles for independence, cold war which was fought as a set of proxy wars and countless other internal and external conflicts. In the turn of this century, a new form of war; international terrorism has emerged. The newest ongoing conflict is the conflict between the government of Syria and its opposition groups. Although it can be categorized as a civil war its effects are anything but confined to Syria. It is now evolved in to a regional conflict and who knows; it can be the spark for the World War 3. Most of the public got to know about the Syrian conflict because of the involvement of opposition group, ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) or commonly known as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) and their actions such as kidnapping, beheading, burning and drowning but, there is far more to the Syrian conflict than ISIL thus it is important to go into the  root of this conflict to get a clear idea of why Syrians had turned against their ruler and why factions such as ISIL are so successful. As the ISIL had wowed to carry on their struggle to control much of the middle-east and a substantial portion of Europe and Asia, it is for everyone’s benefit to understand what had happened in Syria and the neighboring Arab world.

This all started with the Arab Spring, the popular uprisings against leaders in the Arab World. Started in Tunisia, it swept across a good portion of the middle-east. It starts with small protests in the name of democracy and usually escalates in to armed conflicts between the government forces and the opposition groups and eventually leads to the downfall of the government and leaders. The outcome of the subsequent power vacuum is different from country to country. Having overthrown so called oppressive dictator was no guarantee for democracy or stable government. Only a handful of countries had transformed in to the state that the protesters hoped for while the majority slid in to chaos and anarchy. Libya, Yemen and Egypt are examples.

Like the other Arab Spring affected countries, in Syria, the opposition backed by Syrian opposition started as a wave of protests against the President Bashar Al Assad. It soon escalated in to an armed conflict where countless rebel factions (both pro-Assad and anti-Assad) fighting each other only to further erupt in to a regional conflict where even the world’s superpowers involve.

Syria is now a melting pot of different rival factions fighting each other for achieving their respective goal broadly categorized in to pro-Assad, anti-Assad and Kurdish. The anti-Assad can further be categorized into secular/democratic and religious ideology.

Even though we tend to look for the starting point for the civil war in Arab spring, the root is not there but further back in time for more than a two millennia. This whole area of middle-east containing Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Israel/Palestine is unique. It was influenced by Islam (both Sunni and Shiite), Christianity and Judaism. Moreover due to its changing hands several times starting from Romans, Arabs, Ottomans, and Franco –British to Baathist, Secularist and Islamic forces.

Originally occupied by the nomadic Bedouin people, Islam had swept across the region and managed to unite majority under a one religious ideology, but this is not without problems. Ideological sectarian tensions between Sunni, Shiite and Alawite were common throughout the middle-east. It had multiplied in the second half of the 20^th century. There is a particular reason; almost all of the countries in this region were claimed from the Ottomans after World War 1 by either French or British. When those countries became Independent, the ruling elite of those countries were the minority in most of the cases. Absolute monarchies in some of those countries were abolished either by armed conflicts or leftist revolutions lead by the minority communities. This was apparent in Iraq where Saddam Husain who was a Sunni took control of the Shiite majority Iraq and where the President Bashar Al Assad who is an Alawite Muslim controls Sunni Majority in Syria. This had happened in Libya (tribalism took hold there, not sectarianism). In Lebanon, after the independence from the British, the rule went to Christians who were the minority in a Sunni and Shite majority state resulted in a bloody civil war in 70s and 80s costing thousands of lives and brought the country to an irrecoverable anarchy which still plagues the country. Not to mention Israel where the Jews who were the refugees consisting only about half a million where given the best portion of the land of Palestine from the partition plan of 1948 leading to the biggest crisis the middle-east.

The occupying Franco-British colonials had done an irreparable mistake of alienating the rule from the Majority and giving privileged positions to the minority communities. It seems that this had happened in most of the countries under French or British colonial occupation. If that occupied country couldn’t build a nation state after independence due to various reasons including the divergent ethno-religious factions, soon the majority discontent on the governing minority emerge. This has to do with economic factors also. The ruling minority groups will get wealthy while depriving the majority with economic opportunities. Above situation is no other than a ticking time bomb.

Since this region is once belong to the Ottoman Empire and was a melting pot of different ethnicities and religious groups. Those differences were highlighted when the French and British took control and more prominently after independence. Creation of modern nation states from the former Ottoman Empire was mostly under the British and French discretion making the European colonials, the architects of the middle-east. The problem was that the Europeans had hardly any idea of the Ethnic composition and culture of the people when creating new states. One of the best examples was creating Kuwait from the historical Iraqi territory. They might have done that considering its massive oil wealth and it was easier to manage and make post-independent relations with a small country with virtually homogeneous population. Iraq always claims Kuwait as their territory. This led to the first gulf war in 1991.

Let’s turn our attention to Syria once more. Minority Alawite faction is controlling the state and economy. Assad, like many other Arab nationalistic leaders tried infrastructure development and religious tolerance. It is the only secular state in Arab world. Christians in Syria felt relatively safe. Assad has a strong eastern bloc inclination like Gamal Abdul Nassar in Egypt. When the Arab Spring started, from the beginning Syria was a targeting point. People driven by economic and social inequality was to riot against the regime. Demonstrations were about to happen but, what wasn’t expected is this kind of full time armed insurgence but either a peaceful transition like in Tunisia, riots and violent civil uprising not amounting to armed conflict like in Egypt or a small scale insurgence only by the opposition within that country like in Libya. None of that happened in Syria but a civil war dragging sovereign countries, opposition groups, international terrorist organization and home-grown militias. USA and its allies want Assad to go while Russia wants Assad to prevail. Kurds in Iraq and specially Syria want to win autonomy from Syrian regime. Meanwhile the ISIL want everyone to lose and to establish an Islamic Caliphate spanning from Syria and Iraq into global domination. It is natural that in Arab Spring many rival factions clash to grab power but in Syria, the outside influence from USA and its allies in the name of ‘humanitarian aid to restore democracy’ has led to the escalation of this problem. Russian president Vladimir Putin accused USA directly for creating ISIL, it might not be so but a failed US foreign policy surely helped the ISIL to gain lot of support from neighboring countries. Even though USA didn’t directly supply ISIL any aid, the factions who got US support granted or sold provisions to ISIL. Since ISIL controls a considerable amount of oil production throughout their territory, those petro-dollars can surely be a steady income. USA had and still has an unsuccessful foreign policy in the middle-east. They fund a faction to grab power in a region then those who gained US support double-cross them every time. This had happened with the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan.

Whenever USA directly support a government in the middle-east regardless of how oppressive or how blackened its human rights record or how undemocratic it is, USA stays in the winning side. Best example is Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Qatar. Whenever they support the opposition, they tend to lose. It cannot be said that the USA didn’t anticipate the consequences for backing an opposition who surely turned in themselves in to oppressors and fanatics more fearsome than the previous regime in terms of religious tolerance and democracy.  They took a risk in supporting the Syrian opposition because, Assad is a close ally of Russia and Russia has assets in Syrian. Toppling Assad would surely weaken the Russian presence in the middle-east greatly. That would have been the US plan but now it had backfired. Russia is now determined to keep the opposition at bay from toppling Assad and with the recent air strikes possible ‘boots-on-the-ground’, they will surely succeed. The difference between Russian and US decision making is that the boldness in Russian decisions. USA has much to lose in taking rash and unpopular decisions than Russia. USA is a democracy after all!!!

However, what was done has been done. Syria was in turmoil. Half of the Syrian population is either internally or externally displaced. Mass immigration resulted in the worse refugee crisis in Europe after World War II; not to mention the incoming long-term demographic changes and cultural imbalance in the European Union. ISIL will continue to gain support unless they are defeated once in for all. Even Assad took control of Syria eventually, ISIL threat will not pass. They’ll operate as a global terror force much fearful than even the Al-Qaeda. They will gain supporters worldwide including countless followers in the western world.

Now it is too little too late! If USA stayed out of the trouble in Syria, none of this would have happened. The opposition might topple Assad eventually. ISIL would not have born even if they, they will be a mere shadow of the power they are now. The resulting government would be religious fundamentalist like the succeeded government after Egypt’s Mubarak but it would never have escalated in to the brink of World War III.

Now, it is not sure where the Syrian conflict is heading. USA will now stay out of the trouble after all they have done to ignite the kindle. ISIL should be prevented from pouring in to Lebanon or Jordan at all cost. With the incoming US Presidential Election, Syrian policy of major candidates both Republican and Democratic should be closely scrutinized. One of the possible candidates in US election, business magnet Donald Trump expressed Assad is a person with whom they can ‘do business with’.

                                

Middle-east was and always will be a violent and volatile place. With its oil, its influence is crucial in global politics. The best strategy for middle-east is dealing with the legitimate governments regardless of how oppressive, undemocratic and religious extremist they are. Let the people of middle-east handle their own problems. The only thing the rest of the world can do is to contain the spread of fanaticism is to keep a close watch and help the governments who keep the terrorists at bay and to resist all temptations for a regime change regardless of how profitable for western foreign policy is, given that helping the opposition will always be counter-productive for the west in the long run.

Read More