This has always been the case. Large scale attacks have always been the exception.
B
Smaller-scale, locally conceived attacks may be the future of terrorism
Diffuse, homegrown terrorism like that believed to be behind the Boston
Marathon bombing may become more common in future.
But does the recent spate of terrorism cases indicate a worrying new trend?
Or is the real worry that the high-profile incidents will incite political
opportunism and a dramatic reshaping of Western foreign policy and domestic
laws?
By: Jennifer Pagliaro Andrew Livingstone, Wendy Gillis and Michelle Shephard
Staff Reporters, Published on Fri
From his hideout in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden detailed what he hoped would
become of the group he created and chastised those who had veered off
course.
"We need to extend and develop our operations in America and not keep it
limited to blowing up airplanes," states a 2010 letter from bin Laden to an
ally in Yemen, which was uncovered in his Abbottabad compound after the Al
Qaeda leader was killed.
Striking the tone of a perturbed CEO, bin Laden continued: "I need to remind
you about the general politics of Al Qaeda . . . Al Qaeda concentrates on
its external big enemy before its internal enemy."
This was part of his vision - concentrate on hitting the U.S. and its allies
at home in small-scale attacks that create panic, weaken the economy and
force the U.S. to withdraw from Muslim lands.
Bin Laden would have been pleased lately.
On April 15, two bombs exploded within seconds at the finish line of the
Boston Marathon, killing three and injuring more than 200.
On Monday, RCMP arrested Raed Jaser in Toronto and Chiheb Esseghaier in
Montreal, following allegations they were planning Canada's first known Al
Qaeda-directed terrorist plot: an attack on the Toronto-New York VIA train
route.
Then there are the recent cases of Canadians going abroad to fight. Two men
from London, Ont., - Xristos Katsiroubas, 24, and Ali Medlej 22 - were
confirmed as participants in a deadly, Al Qaeda-linked terrorist attack in
Algeria.
And Somali authorities believe Mahad Ali Dhore, a former university student
from Markham, was among the suicide bombers who attacked Mogadishu
mid-month.
But does this spate of terrorism cases indicate a worrying new trend? Or is
the real worry that the high-profile incidents will incite political
opportunism and a repeat of what followed the 9/11 attacks - a dramatic
reshaping of Western foreign policy and domestic laws?
"First and foremost, keep calm, carry on being resilient; (those) are things
we can do as a society," says Ray Boisvert, a former assistant director at
Canada's Security Intelligence Service.
"If we do overreact, it will lead to empowering those who want to do stuff .
. . I think there is value in that view to say, 'Let's not go ballistic and
rewrite all the laws.' We do have to be a little smarter."
Evan Kohlmann, a U.S. terrorism analyst, agrees. He bemoans that our views
of terrorism swing from one extreme to the other.
"When we are in the immediate wake of a terrorist attack or an uncovered
terrorist plot, there is a surge of interest and concern in the problem of
international terrorism," he wrote in an email to the Star.
"Then, when nothing happens for a while, public interest gradually fades,
and consequently any suggestion that there is a genuine threat from
terrorism is pooh-poohed and dismissed out of hand as unjustified paranoia
on the part of law enforcement."
Says Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, director for the Center for the Study of
Terrorist Radicalization: "There have been spikes in domestic terrorism in
the U.S., and it's then receded. We're not experiencing an epidemic, but
definitely we should be looking for implications that we can draw from . . .
incidents like these."
So what can be learned?
Boisvert says the Canadian case may prove to be an example of what he calls
"Jihad 3.0." - not an attack planned on the scale of 9/11, nor directed by
Al Qaeda's core, but a local plot that drew inspiration or some sort of
support from Al Qaeda.
Michael Zekulin, a political science instructor at the University of Calgary
and specialist in terrorism and radicalization, said that although this case
may be considered Canada's first taste of organized terrorism, he notes the
country has always been a target, along with other western democracies.
He wonders if the alleged train plot could reveal that Al Qaeda's connection
here is limited, considering one of the accused is a Tunisian doctoral
student with a history of erratic behaviour, and the other is a permanent
resident with a lengthy criminal history.
If a large terrorist organization were directing the effort, "You would
think that they'd have more to choose from," Zekulin said.
He agrees that attacks in future will be less organized and perpetrated more
by "self-radicalized" individuals. "They're simply doing things on their
own.
"There is no way of telling how many of those there are . . . That's a
curveball for us."
Although each case is distinct and probably motivated by a different
grievance, at their most basic, such attacks are part of Al Qaeda's legacy -
what Wesley Wark, a national security policy expert at the University of
Ottawa, says has been dubbed the "Al Qaeda Narrative." Its distinct message
of jihad and destruction of the West by whatever means continues to resonate
with a fraction of Muslims around the world, Wark said, including some in
Canada.
"It's resonating and providing the problem of homegrown terrorism -
individuals without any direct connection to organized terrorist groups," he
said. They not only believe the message, but "they're prepared to act on it.
That's the common denominator between the London group, the VIA Rail bombers
and the Boston bombing."
While it seems clear the past week's events will provoke renewed discussion
on who is allowed into Canada and how they're tracked, Zekulin said it's
imperative that we examine the individual motivation and rationale of people
who seek to commit terror at home.
"The bigger concern is the homegrown people who have been here, born and
raised, if not for extended periods of time," he said. "That's something
that requires us to more fundamentally look at ourselves as a society and
start asking ourselves how we . . . (have) to make an effort to make sure
that multiculturalism is not just a buzzword."
The risk, he said, is ending up with people who feel like isolated outsiders
in a country that provides refuge but not acceptance.
Zekulin said it's important for societies and governments to deplore
individual attacks, but help deter future dangers.
"You absolutely have to condemn these attacks," he said. "But that's only
one part of the equation. And that removes the existing individuals. It does
nothing to address those who might come to replace them.
"This is what you have to be concerned about," he said. "They are going to
learn. They are going to, unfortunately, get better at this."
==========================================
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this
message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to
these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed
within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with
"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The
Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain
permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials
if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria
for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies
as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four
criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is
determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not
substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS
PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment