Terrorism is as old as the institution of the state itself which was conceived in violence. More than any other period in history, violence and terror have become integral components of the philosophy, structure and practices of the modern state system.

The grisly attacks on the Manhattan Island and the Pentagon on Black Tuesday have united the world in grief and solidarity, barring odd celebrations in parts of Iraq and Palestine. The apocalyptic events exceeded the terror imagined in Hollywood movies like Independence Day, The Siege, Die Hard with a Vengeance, Black Sunday etc. They were too dreadful to believe and generated mixed emotions of anguish, anger, numbness, disbelief, shock, racial backlash, revenge, jingoism and fear of the future among Americans. Their leaders reacted like wounded tigers.
US No Longer Immune

September 11 dealt the biggest blow since the assault on Pearl Harbour in December 1941 to the power, prestige and status of the US as the mightiest state on earth. It has never been attacked on its own soil in the last sixty years, and never like this in its entire history. The collapse of the WTC towers and a part of the Pentagon awakened Americans to the reality that they too live in this violent and wretched world, and that what they thought happens to others elsewhere - in Kosovo, Kashmir or Palestine - could happen right in the heart of America, in spite of the countless nukes and F-22s. From

By hitting the most towering symbol of global capitalism and the most sheltered edifice of the strongest military power, the terrorists achieved more than mere loss of lives and buildings. They undermined an already weak and slowed-down American economy causing cumulative monetary loss running into billions of dollars. The media and the Bush administration have also mythologized Osama bin Laden and made him some kind of a cult figure among sections of Muslims all over the world by projecting the problem as an unequal war of the entire world against one man.

As President George W. Bush expects, we merely have to choose at this juncture if we stand for civilization or barbarism in this first war of the twenty first century. However, this professed struggle between good and evil has produced many unanswered and examined questions.

The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

International affairs expert Walter Laqueur interprets it as "the sub-state application of violence or threatened violence intended to sow panic in a society, to weaken or even overthrow the incumbents, and to bring about political change. It shades on occasion into guerrilla warfare (although unlike guerrillas, terrorists are unable or unwilling to take or hold territory) and even a substitute for war between states." Terrorism is highly political in nature. Indeed, it is a form of politics, a pursuit of politics through other, maybe abnormal, means. It exploits and uses in various ways the inbuilt fear in the human mind. It can take the form of a coup d'etat, insurrection, reckless killings and destruction of property, genocidal massacres, guerilla warfare or hijackings.

Characterizing terrorism as use of force by non-state actors excludes state-sponsored as well as state terrorism which are sometimes more lethal and violent than sub-state terrorism. Could not the following actions also be considered as cases of terrorism _ the annihilation of Red Indians in America and of the so-called aborigines in Australia by European settlers; the Gulag Archipelago narrated by Alexander Solz-henitsyn; the Israel-inspired massacre of 1800 Palestinians in Shatila and Sabra refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982; the American navy's downing of an Iranian civilian airliner killing more than 200 people on board in 1988; the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens, including about five lakh children, in the '90s due to American sanctions; death of hundreds of Chechens in Russian bombing, mining and artillery attacks against Chechnya; large number of civilian killings in Serbia and Bosnia as a result of NATO strikes etc.?

Terrorism _ A Brief History

Terrorism is as old as the institution of the state itself which was conceived in violence. More than any other period in history, violence and terror have become integral components of the philosophy, structure and practices of the modern state system. Ironically, though modernity has furthered democratic and nonviolent methods of political change and representation, it is also distinguished for being the most violent phase of human history.

Many groups have practised terrorism through the centuries. Militarily weak groups have employed terror to achieve political ends against more powerful adver-saries. The anarchists, nationalists, leftists, communists, revolution-aries, Fascists, Nazis, communalists, religious fundamentalists - all have used terror to accomplish their ideological and political objectives in the past. We also find an echo of bin Laden's ideas in the writings of some medieval Christian theologians. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, anarchist thinkers like Proudhon, Bakunin and Kropotkin favoured violence, including killing of civilians. Between 1894 and 1901, their followers assassinated the Presidents of the US and France, a Prime Minister of Spain, an Empress of Austria and a King of Italy. The Irish Republican Army let loose a reign of terror in Britain between 1918 and 1921. The Nazi and Fascist savagery remains etched in the most awful memories of the human race.

The Terrorism of the Left

Notwithstanding the fact that belief in peaceful change has been criticized by Karl Marx as a symptom of utopian and un-scientific socialism, some modern Marxist writings have vainly attempted to exonerate Marxism of its violent content as manifested in the Marxist methods of revolution and advocacy of annihilation of class enemies. For communists, the use of terror and violence sharpens class-consciousness and organi-zation. Lenin, of course, did speak of the futility of individual and reckless terror, but in principle he was not opposed to the destruction of the enemy class and the imperialist states. West Indian Marxist psychiatrist Frantz Fanon, stating that extensive violence is desirable and inevitable in any process of social or political change, glorified violence as useful and good for cleansing the minds of revolutionaries even if it does not produce any concrete political change.

Communists' Record

Little wonder then that the long spell of communist terror in Europe and Asia nearly equaled Nazism in brutality. The Russian and Chinese revolutions were completed through extermination of countless people. Subsequently Stalin and Mao massacred thousands, including rivals within the communist party, for consolidation of their power. Mao's political ideologue Lin Piao talked of the use of irregular violence and terrorism against the states of North America and Europe to defeat them. The leftist terrorism, in particular of the Maoist the variety, has been plaguing the Third World, including India and Nepal in South Asia. Ernesto `Che' Guevara converted Maoist philosophy and tactics into anti-American and anti-capitalist guerrilla warfare in Latin America. Brazil, Argentina, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Colombia were swept by guerrilla onslaughts under his inspiration.

Religion-based Terrorism

In contemporary times, apparently religion-based terrorism seems to have filled the ideological and strategic vacuum created by the retreat of leftist terrorism following the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Most of the religion-based major terrorist organizations _ al Qaeda, Lebanese Hezbollah, LTTE, Hamas, various terrorist groups active in Kashmir valley, Moro Islamic Liberation Front in Philippines, Basques Fatherland of Liberty if in Spain, IRA etc. _ claim to advance the interests of Islam and Islamic people through their activities. They are unlike earlier terrorist outfits inasmuch as they are not fighting for a specific and negotiable goal like territory, independence or release of prisoners. They just want to destroy America, the West and the whole Judeo-Christian population and culture.

Transnational Terrorism

Today's terrorism is transnational and is less bound to, or sponsored by, any one state. It operates through loosely affiliated terrorist groups in several countries which also target several countries at the same time. Technology has proved to be of enormous advantage to the terrorists. The publicity generated by modern media in the aftermath of terrorist attacks helps focus attention on their problems. Future terrorist strikes using biological, chemical and other weapons of mass destruction are in the realm of the possible. Production of a fissionable nuclear device out of the pilfered materials from unsafe nuclear installations in the provinces of the former Soviet Union is believed to be on bin Laden's agenda.

Why Terrorism?

What are the fundamental causes of terrorism? The terrorists do not descend from sky. They arise and operate very much from the societies in which we live and derive sustenance from the human psyche. The conditions, ideas and cultures around us produce and legitimize violence and terror. Elements of terrorism _ hatred of the other, violence, racism, fanaticism, bigotry, irrationality and xeno-phobia _ are present in the collective psychology of all societies. We all bear a little dormant terrorist in our hearts. Most of us demand an eye for an eye some day against someone.

There are several reasons for terrorism - political, ideological, religious, social and psychological. The role of state terrorism in begetting private terrorism is considerable. Many times it is the crisis of the state's authority and legitimacy that breeds terror as a societal response. Generally terrorism is never induced by a single factor. Several interconnected reasons might cause terrorism in different cases. Some terrorists might be just hired criminals and mercenaries, though their number is never very large. Most terrorists take to terrorism out of conviction, of right or wrong kind. Terrorism often thrives on poverty, under-development, social injustice, discrimination and alienation. The asymmetrical international system and the cultural and economic effects of globalization prove a catalyst in the process that breeds terrorists. All terrorists are by nature anti-status quo aiming to bring about radical transformation of society and politics according to their ideological tenets. They mani-pulate the grievances of people and attribute them to one identifiable enemy whose elimination would bring about transformation in their lives, or at least in their children's lives.

US Responsibility

The US cannot wash its hand off the liability of supporting and in some way breeding terrorism. It is much too deeply involved in world affairs to feel safe or to be able to avoid risks of violent backlash. Overbearing power brings in its wake enormous enmity. Its support to backward, fundamentalist or authoritarian regimes and sheikdoms in the Middle East to ensure free flow of oil; its unconditional backing to Israeli policies vis-à-vis Palestine and heavy positioning of American forces (between 20000 to 25000), military equipment and arms in the bases located close to holy Muslim shrines engender negative reactions among Arabs in particular and Muslims in general. Osama bin Laden is also a Frankenstein created by America itself.

The CIA also made use of all sorts of characters in its anti-communist missions during the Cold War, including drug dealers, death squads, mafia, people whom it calls terrorists today etc. In central and South America - in Honduras, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala - its involvement in the toppling of elected governments and assassination of leaders could easily be dubbed as state terrorism. Ironically, September 11 marks the anniversary of the assassination of the democratically elected ruler Salvador Allende in Chile and the inauguration of the reign of terror under General Pinochet. The CIA is believed to be involved in both these events. The American attack on Panama to arrest General Noriega also resulted in the killing of hundreds of civilians.
The prevalent notion of national security has to be reconceived in the light of recent events. What could ultimately provide security to nations in the contemporary world is a moot question. If even the world's most "secure" power can be attacked with such impunity and abandon, what kind of security could smaller nations hope for? The logic of deterrence that rests on the rationality of actors also collapses in the face of suicide terrorism.

Short Term Solutions

The havoc at New York and Washington D.C. would certainly precipitate a major policy review in the US. Calls for refashioning the priorities of foreign and security policies have already been made. Isolationist voices pleading for American withdrawal from global commitments and entanglements would become stronger. America might look inwards, slowing down its campaigns for human rights, democracy and nuclear non-proliferation abroad. US foreign policy and external interventions have exposed ordinary Americans to excessive risk. Their rulers mistakenly thought that they are covering this risk through conventional and nuclear weapons, and intelligence network. The US should now follow a risk-minimizing external policy.

Other knee-jerk reactions are also expected. Sporadic attacks on terrorist organizations and states supporting them, more stringent anti-terrorism laws, freezing of bank accounts of terrorist organizations, stricter anti-immigration measures, tighter airport security and so on would follow. These would be supple-mented by higher budgetary allocation for defence, intelligence and counter-terrorism activities and research into the techniques and possibilities of future terrorism. However, such measures cannot certainly root out terrorism, even as they go some way in controlling it. Retaliatory violence and strikes or posters of "bin Laden dead or alive" will not guarantee security for Americans. It is universally proven that terrorism cannot be overcome by recourse to military or administrative measures alone.

Most countries' methods of eradicating terrorism in fact produce more terrorists. Israel has been using brute force against Palestinian ultras for the past four decades without significant benefits. India too witnessed terrorism in Kashmir getting bloodier and bolder in Kashmir despite employing all its military might after 1989. Missile reprisals against bin Laden's network following US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 did not deter the strikes on September 11. Applying political, ideological and psychological measures in conjunction with military force could rein in the monster of terrorism more effectively.

Long Term Solutions

Short-term military strategies to fight terrorism should not detract attention from the long-term policy transformations that advance democratization, disarmament, human rights, sustainable and eco-friendly development, greater justice in the international economic system and fair distribution of global resources. The US also needs to recognize terrorism as a global problem and adopt a multilateral approach to alleviate the conditions that create it. The UN could be the forum where multilateral agreements and covenants could be deliberated upon and implemented.

Terrorism cannot be controlled unless all nations endorse the value of a non-violent and peaceful world and stop militaristic, aggressive, unjust and exploitative policies within their territories and among themselves. Rather than talking about clash of civilizations, appropriate climate of tolerance and synthesis of the good among all civilizations needs to be cultivated.

Last but not the least, America only needs to revive in their true spirit the pristine liberal values that it originally espoused - the rule of reason, tolerance, peaceful resolution of conflicts, freedom, and respect for plurality and diversity everywhere. An authoritarian and fanatical imposition of its way of life upon all peoples and the desire to remake all societies on the American pattern are sure to back fire and cause more violent backlash. If this is a clash of civilizations, as many want us to believe, it should be fought in a civilized manner.
MR. AMIT DHOLAKIA is Senior Lecturer in Political Science, M. S. University, Baroda.