Today I want to explore the epistemology of terrorism. This seemingly vague term simply means that terrorists exploit the fact that we cannot know enough about them, in order to do what terrorists do: Kill.
The way terrorists operate is by becoming embedded in a civil society while causing as much damage to what they see as their enemy. When the enemy wants to strike back at them, it finds it very difficult to single out the culprits out of the innnocent majority. This leaves the persecutor of terrorism with two options: To employ force only once accurate and reliable information is obtained on the targets, or to employ as much force as it deems necessary to obliterate the threat. This second option requires to disregard the damage and casualties sustained by the civil society that hosts the perpetrators of terrorism.
This model fits what happens with the Palestinians, it fits what happened in Lebanon and it also fits what goes on in the United States and in the United Kingdom. It has proven to be very problematic for anti-terror forces and very useful for terrorism. It causes Kafka's world to pale in comparison to the horrors of human rights violation in what the "Free World" does when feeling threatened. The Free World would like to think it operates on the first option, but it is in fact very much guided by the second option.
The current dead-end faced by terror-persecuting nations will not continue. Like Bush just said yesterday, either terrorism will win or the Free World will. This is not to say that terrorist have got it all mapped out for themselves. Not at all. Their wrath and envy of the West are not conducive to a prosperous existence. If and when they win their war they will find out the Islam is far from being a solidarity. Clashing interests will turn the weapons against internal rivalries and opposition. But we'll put this long-term prophecy aside for the moment because it is less relevant to this current discussion.
Now, here is my point: Terrorism's big break lies in the maintnence and proliferation of this current epistemology. The war between black and white, light and darkness will erupt if civil societies are given every reason to refrain from expunging the terrorists in their midst. The West will not win by trying to overcome this epistemological barrier with more information, because terrorism has done it's homework. Terrorists know how intelligence services operate, they too know how to use computers and the internet for their purposes. Most important of all, they know that as long as they don't imitate the structure of the systems that are after them, those systems will fail in their quest.
What the world that despises terror should do is change its ways. It should break the barriers by letting go of the belief that it is fighting in a battlefield, whereas it is fighting in a neighbourhood. The world should seek out not the terrorists, but their silent allies and befriend them. Give them every reason to help form an open society on the ruins of the current closed society.
These are big words, I know, and they sound like empty slogans. So let's just take one small example to end this train of thought.
Think of Denmark: The blonde kingdom. If you are not white, tall and speak Danish, you stick out and you are a foreigner. Out of a population of five million , some 270,000 (five percent) are Muslim . Now that's a a large town in a small country like Denmark. And those people cannot integrate because they are not given the opportunity to do so. They walk in groups to feel more comfortable, even just to feel safe. They become isolated and bitter - they are away from their home countries cannot call their new country their home. Wouldn't a separatist, radical militant group find a wonderful hotbed for assimilation in such an environment? Would it be a surprise to read in the paper that Danish police have arrested would-be bombers in Denmark's second-largest city, Odense? Would we be able to KNOW for sure that those detained are terrorists?
No. Because of epistemology.
The way terrorists operate is by becoming embedded in a civil society while causing as much damage to what they see as their enemy. When the enemy wants to strike back at them, it finds it very difficult to single out the culprits out of the innnocent majority. This leaves the persecutor of terrorism with two options: To employ force only once accurate and reliable information is obtained on the targets, or to employ as much force as it deems necessary to obliterate the threat. This second option requires to disregard the damage and casualties sustained by the civil society that hosts the perpetrators of terrorism.
This model fits what happens with the Palestinians, it fits what happened in Lebanon and it also fits what goes on in the United States and in the United Kingdom. It has proven to be very problematic for anti-terror forces and very useful for terrorism. It causes Kafka's world to pale in comparison to the horrors of human rights violation in what the "Free World" does when feeling threatened. The Free World would like to think it operates on the first option, but it is in fact very much guided by the second option.
The current dead-end faced by terror-persecuting nations will not continue. Like Bush just said yesterday, either terrorism will win or the Free World will. This is not to say that terrorist have got it all mapped out for themselves. Not at all. Their wrath and envy of the West are not conducive to a prosperous existence. If and when they win their war they will find out the Islam is far from being a solidarity. Clashing interests will turn the weapons against internal rivalries and opposition. But we'll put this long-term prophecy aside for the moment because it is less relevant to this current discussion.
Now, here is my point: Terrorism's big break lies in the maintnence and proliferation of this current epistemology. The war between black and white, light and darkness will erupt if civil societies are given every reason to refrain from expunging the terrorists in their midst. The West will not win by trying to overcome this epistemological barrier with more information, because terrorism has done it's homework. Terrorists know how intelligence services operate, they too know how to use computers and the internet for their purposes. Most important of all, they know that as long as they don't imitate the structure of the systems that are after them, those systems will fail in their quest.
What the world that despises terror should do is change its ways. It should break the barriers by letting go of the belief that it is fighting in a battlefield, whereas it is fighting in a neighbourhood. The world should seek out not the terrorists, but their silent allies and befriend them. Give them every reason to help form an open society on the ruins of the current closed society.
These are big words, I know, and they sound like empty slogans. So let's just take one small example to end this train of thought.
Think of Denmark: The blonde kingdom. If you are not white, tall and speak Danish, you stick out and you are a foreigner. Out of a population of five million , some 270,000 (five percent) are Muslim . Now that's a a large town in a small country like Denmark. And those people cannot integrate because they are not given the opportunity to do so. They walk in groups to feel more comfortable, even just to feel safe. They become isolated and bitter - they are away from their home countries cannot call their new country their home. Wouldn't a separatist, radical militant group find a wonderful hotbed for assimilation in such an environment? Would it be a surprise to read in the paper that Danish police have arrested would-be bombers in Denmark's second-largest city, Odense? Would we be able to KNOW for sure that those detained are terrorists?
No. Because of epistemology.
posted by Orr at 12:45 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home