Tuesday, July 13, 2004
The Confusions of Terrorists
This morning's paper brings us a long discussion of the life and activities of the Jordanian who now goes by the name "Abu Musab al Zarqawi". The picture that comes across is that of a poor and confused young man who subsequently tried a number of avenues to make something of himself. He did poorly in school, being regarded by acquaintances as barely literate. He was not particularly religious; he drank heavily and had himself tattooed. In 1989 he went to Afghanistan to fight the Russians, but got there too late, so took to interviewing recent jihadists. At this time he was actually pro-American. Back in Jordan, he began associating with militants and ended up in jail. He also began to spend much of his time with the Quran. He became so attached to the Quran that he would attack those around him for reading anything else. In prison, he was into body building. Eventually he came to be seen as a leader, a "tough guy" who could boss others around simply because they were afraid of him. Released in an amnesty in 1999, he went back to Afghanistan where he set up a terrorist training camp. Soon he was forced to leave, ending up with the Ansar al-Islam in Iraqi Kurdistan. Subsequently, he is said to have slipped in and out of Jordan. He is accused of masterminding killings there and more recently in Iraq. He was sentenced in absentia in Jordan and we now have a $25 million reward out for his capture. However, our information is confused. Many doubt he is actually an al-Qaida agent, but then "al-Qaida" is both a meaningful and extremely loose designation. We do not seem to know whether he actually was the person who beheaded the American in the well-known video, or whether he actually wrote the 6700 word letter outlining a strategy for dragging Iraq into civil war. Those who know him say he was incapable of writing so well, and was also not a thinker able to conceive of grand strategies. Perhaps "Zarqawi" is a smoke screen obscuring someone quite different.
What I find enlightening is how Zarqawi's story fits in with the stories of other terrorists as described in the government report "Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?" (a staff report of the Library of Congress edited by Rex Hudson, 1999). The pattern that such studies find is in fact no pattern. Terrorists are well educated and poorly educated, at the top of their class, early dropouts. After a confused searching around for a direction, or, perhaps better, for a way to make something of themselves, they fall into terrorism almost by chance. Once they become involved, surrounded by a small group of persons similarly involved and similarly "wanted", they become emotionally trapped into a way of life from which there are few exits. Terrorists are not as a group distinguished by any distinctive deprivations or attacks on their egos by either "the system" or their families. They are not generally deep or consistent thinkers, people who have understood the world and chosen terrorism as the only way to "fight back". Of course, they do latch onto real or imagined "injustices" in society as a way to explain their actions to themselves or others. But it does not appear that fighting injustice is the best way to explain their actions.
We have a long way to go before we can figure out how we might reduce the incidence of such life stories in the world. An easier task is the reduce the number of people who are enticed in the short term into supporting their actions. Today in Iraq, this is what we must concentrate on.
(Incidentally, we should remember that in Iraq we are fighting both terrorists like Zarqawi and guerrillas or insurgents such as the Mahdi Army and the nationalists. Our discussion of terrorists is largely irrelevant when considering the latter.)
This morning's paper brings us a long discussion of the life and activities of the Jordanian who now goes by the name "Abu Musab al Zarqawi". The picture that comes across is that of a poor and confused young man who subsequently tried a number of avenues to make something of himself. He did poorly in school, being regarded by acquaintances as barely literate. He was not particularly religious; he drank heavily and had himself tattooed. In 1989 he went to Afghanistan to fight the Russians, but got there too late, so took to interviewing recent jihadists. At this time he was actually pro-American. Back in Jordan, he began associating with militants and ended up in jail. He also began to spend much of his time with the Quran. He became so attached to the Quran that he would attack those around him for reading anything else. In prison, he was into body building. Eventually he came to be seen as a leader, a "tough guy" who could boss others around simply because they were afraid of him. Released in an amnesty in 1999, he went back to Afghanistan where he set up a terrorist training camp. Soon he was forced to leave, ending up with the Ansar al-Islam in Iraqi Kurdistan. Subsequently, he is said to have slipped in and out of Jordan. He is accused of masterminding killings there and more recently in Iraq. He was sentenced in absentia in Jordan and we now have a $25 million reward out for his capture. However, our information is confused. Many doubt he is actually an al-Qaida agent, but then "al-Qaida" is both a meaningful and extremely loose designation. We do not seem to know whether he actually was the person who beheaded the American in the well-known video, or whether he actually wrote the 6700 word letter outlining a strategy for dragging Iraq into civil war. Those who know him say he was incapable of writing so well, and was also not a thinker able to conceive of grand strategies. Perhaps "Zarqawi" is a smoke screen obscuring someone quite different.
What I find enlightening is how Zarqawi's story fits in with the stories of other terrorists as described in the government report "Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?" (a staff report of the Library of Congress edited by Rex Hudson, 1999). The pattern that such studies find is in fact no pattern. Terrorists are well educated and poorly educated, at the top of their class, early dropouts. After a confused searching around for a direction, or, perhaps better, for a way to make something of themselves, they fall into terrorism almost by chance. Once they become involved, surrounded by a small group of persons similarly involved and similarly "wanted", they become emotionally trapped into a way of life from which there are few exits. Terrorists are not as a group distinguished by any distinctive deprivations or attacks on their egos by either "the system" or their families. They are not generally deep or consistent thinkers, people who have understood the world and chosen terrorism as the only way to "fight back". Of course, they do latch onto real or imagined "injustices" in society as a way to explain their actions to themselves or others. But it does not appear that fighting injustice is the best way to explain their actions.
We have a long way to go before we can figure out how we might reduce the incidence of such life stories in the world. An easier task is the reduce the number of people who are enticed in the short term into supporting their actions. Today in Iraq, this is what we must concentrate on.
(Incidentally, we should remember that in Iraq we are fighting both terrorists like Zarqawi and guerrillas or insurgents such as the Mahdi Army and the nationalists. Our discussion of terrorists is largely irrelevant when considering the latter.)
Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
