By Michael Faulkner - January 24, 2010
Fortunately for the passengers on Northwest Airlines flight
253 to Detroit, 2009 did not go out with a bang. But it was a close shave. Had Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab
succeeded in detonating his device, the consequences would have been
incalculable. Chilling though the prospect is, further atrocities of this kind
are likely to be attempted and there can be no assurance that they will all
fail.
Renewed attention will now be given to improving airport
security to meet the threat of more sophisticated methods of smuggling
explosives onto planes. Recriminations against the intelligence services have
already started and the finger of criticism points to the authorities in Europe
- including Britain - and the U.S. for allowing this would-be suicide bomber to
escape detection until it was almost too late. It hardly needs saying that those motivated to carry out
such acts are unlikely to be deterred by one or two failures. It is also
obvious, as numerous precedents attest, that killing large numbers of innocent
people and causing widespread panic and disruption can be achieved by many
different means and do not depend on smuggling explosives aboard airliners.
The question that now needs to be addressed with the utmost
seriousness is how, if at all, can the likelihood of such acts be reduced and,
hopefully, prevented entirely from being repeated. Tighter security and
increased surveillance of specific groups considered likely to be recruited by
al-Qaida or similar organisations, do not go to the heart of the problem and
will not be sufficient to prevent further atrocities. Unless the motivation of those recruited
is understood and taken seriously, the prospects for the next decade do not
look good. As he was restrained by passengers and cabin staff of flight 253,
Abdulmutallab is reported to have railed against western forces in Afghanistan.
In Britain young Muslims, whether influenced by Islamism or not, invariably
express their sense of alienation from mainstream politics in angry criticism
of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and of the treatment of the Palestinians.
Is this a sufficient explanation of why some are prepared to identify with
al-Qaida and take the fateful step of sacrificing their own lives along with as
many others as possible in terrible acts of mass murder conceived as just retribution
for what is considered a western war on Islam? No, it is not. But contrary to
the glib denials by supporters of the Afghan and Iraq wars that there is any connection
between them and Islamist terrorism, it is a necessary part of the explanation.
What provides a sufficient explanation?
Here a short excursion into recent history is necessary.
Islamic fundamentalism is not a new phenomenon. Since the dissolution of the
Ottoman caliphate in 1924 and the emergence of the Sunni revivalist Muslim
Brotherhood in Egypt, various offshoots of Sunni fundamentalism have sought to
unite the Muslim world against infidel forces which include the Shia heretics
of Iran. Until the 1970s the influence of Islamism was limited. The dominant nationalist
movements in the Middle East after the Second World War were secular. First Britain and then the United
States worked in league with the Saudi Wahhabi fundamentalists to undermine the
secular nationalist movements and governments in the Arab world whom they
regarded as too close to the Soviet Union. Likewise, during the 1980s the
United States, in close association with the Islamic fundamentalist dictator of
Pakistan, General Zia, armed and trained the Islamist Mujahedeen to fight
against the Soviet army and the secular Afghan government it defended. The U.S.
consistently supported the corrupt and repressive government of the Shah of
Iran who they had installed in power following a CIA inspired coup in 1952.
When he was overthrown by the Islamic revolution in 1979, a new radical brand
of Shia fundamentalism was, not surprisingly, directed against the United
States. The anti-U.S. sentiment was intensified when, a year later the Reagan administration
supported Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran. Later the Israeli government
encouraged the growth of the Islamist Hamas as a counterweight to Arafat’s
Fattah which they sought to disrupt. In one way or another during the last
decades of the Cold War, the western powers were themselves responsible for the
emergence and growth of militant Islamic fundamentalist movements. They created a Frankenstein’s monster
that has now turned against them.
If we are to fully understand what motivates the suicide
bombers it is necessary to dispose of two partial and inadequate explanations. One
claims that such acts are motivated solely by anger against the United States,
Britain and other western powers involved in the invasion and occupation of
Iraq and Afghanistan and attacks on other Muslim countries and communities, and
western support for the actions of the Israeli government against the
Palestinians. This is a view held
by many western liberals and leftists. On the other hand, supporters of the
Afghan and Iraq wars claim that this has little or nothing to do with it. The
bombers and those who support their actions are motivated, they say, by hatred
for “western civilization” which they seek to destroy. In this view, even if
there were to be a complete withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan and the
Palestinians were to achieve a fully sovereign state, it would not diminish the
threat of Islamist terror attacks.
To deal with the latter case first, it is certainly true
that the ideological standard-bearers of various brands of Islamism are
possessed of a violent hatred for all secular societies and for those they
regard as “infidels”. Not only the spokesmen for the Sunni al-Qaida, but the
Shia theocrats of the Iranian Islamic Republic, describe their opponents as
servants of Satan. It was the Mujahedeen’s hatred for the “Great Satan” of
Soviet communism that endeared them so much to their U.S. backers. The wealthy
young Nigerian student who attempted to blow up flight 253 on Christmas Day,
was, apparently for a time, secretary of the University College London’s
Islamic society whose invited speakers indulged in violent tirades against the
emancipation of women and advocated death for homosexuals. Despite the
historical precedents for non-religious suicide-bombings (the Tamil Tigers come
to mind), there can be little doubt that Islamist bombers believe the promise
that their ultimate sacrifice as
Jihadi martyrs will guarantee their swift passage to paradise. But is this deluded
Manichean fanaticism sufficient in itself to explain their actions? It is not.
It is significant that in Britain many of those who have
been recruited for terrorist jihad against civilians, have been drawn from
British Muslim communities. They are all male and most of them are young. Some
of them have converted to Islam, though not seemingly from any earlier strong
religious belief. Others have been radicalized from Muslim families who appear
not to have been particularly observant. Some have criminal records; all seem
to have felt deeply alienated from the wider society. They have come from
different class and educational backgrounds though few of the university
students seem to have pursued courses in the arts or humanities. Like
Abdulmuttallab they are more likely to have pursued vocational courses in
business studies or engineering. Some were medical students. From the available
evidence it seems clear that their conversion to an extremely reactionary
Islamist terrorism which justifies the mass murder of civilians in the name of
jihad, has been primarily in response to the Iraq and Afghan wars and to the
plight of the Palestinians. It is true that the older conflicts in Bosnia,
Chechnya and Kashmir have also radicalized some young Muslims to become
jihadis, but these conflicts have not been the primary recruiting grounds for
al-Qaida in Europe.
In recent years those who have been converted to Islamist
terrorism and chosen to become suicide bombers have often been trained in
Pakistan. The most remote and benighted tribal regions of Pakistan and
Afghanistan, suffering extreme poverty and illiteracy, have provided the
training grounds for the jihadis. It is now apparent that al-Qaida has
established a base in the similarly blighted and benighted south-east of Yemen.
Like Afghanistan, Yemen suffers from extreme poverty and mass unemployment.
Illiteracy stands at 50%. The country is being torn apart by Shia-Sunni
conflict. Wahhabi fundamentalism, imported from Saudi Arabia, is rife here and
al-Qaida has established a firm foothold. It is from Yemen and Saudi Arabia that
many jihadis were recruited to fight with the Mujahideen in the CIA-backed war
against the Soviets in the 1980s. Abdulmuttalllab is one of perhaps thousands
who have recently found their way to Yemen. He has told his captors that many more
are undergoing training in al-Qaida camps for similar missions.
On the 28th of December Barack Obama, responding
to the failed attack on Christmas day, promised that “we will continue to use
every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the
violent extremists who threaten us, whether they are from Afghanistan or
Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia.” Can we now expect U.S. air strikes against Yemen and
Somalia? This is probably exactly what al-Qaida is hoping for. As in
Afghanistan and Pakistan, it will mean more civilian casualties and more
recruits for Islamic jihad. Is this the prospect facing us in 2010?
An alternative course is possible. There should be a
complete withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq and all NATO forces from Afghanistan.
Pressure must be put on the Israeli government to ensure the dismantling of all
the West Bank settlements and move towards the negotiated establishment of a
fully sovereign Palestinian state. This would not guarantee that attacks such
as that on Christmas day 2009 are not repeated, but it would mark such a
decisive change in U.S. and western policy toward the Middle East and the
Muslim world that they would be rendered far less likely. Such a change would
help to isolate the fanatics of al-Qaida and similar organizations and help to
eliminate their influence amongst vulnerable section of Muslim youth. This is
the objective towards which all progressive forces should be working. The
alternative for the year ahead is a fearful escalation of bombing by the U.S.,
NATO – and the Islamic jihadis. Every effort must be made to avoid such a
disastrous course. 