Collaterals of Terrorism
The recent acts of terrorism in several parts of the globe shook the world, but the victims of the terror acts were not confined in the cities where these acts took place. The direct victims may be those who died in these sordid actions, but the other collateral victims are from the community to which the perpetrators apparently belonged.
Muslims all over the globe, at least the overwhelming majority, were obviously shocked and ashamed that people from their faith could launch such cold-blooded acts of terror on innocent people. But they have been shocked several times before by similar incidents of terror that were unleashed on innocent people in various parts of the world including Muslim-majority countries. And like before, they are the ones forced to bear the backlash of these acts.
Terrorism is not a new phenomenon, it has shook the world many times in the past. The most common kind of terrorism is by an organised group fighting for independence or to advance a cause such as by the Maoists in the subcontinent, Basque nationalists in Spain, Sean Fein in Ireland, etc. The other type is lone wolf acts where the individuals have gone on mass shooting of people because they have personal grievances against their government or because they simply snapped. In the US, 934 people died in the last seven years from mass shooting by individuals. Significant among these incidents were the killing of 32 people by a student in Virginia Technical Institute in 2011, killing of 26 elementary school students and teachers in New Hampshire the same year by a single gunman, killing of 12 people by an individual in Navy Yard, Washington DC, in 2013 and the killing of a dozen people in a college campus in Oregon in 2015. In 2011, two sequential lone wolf attacks killed a total of 77 people.
What is the difference between these attacks and those that we witnessed recently in Europe or elsewhere? Why are the perpetrators of these attacks not identified by their religious persuasion or ethnic identity? Why are the causes for these acts, at least most of them, attributed to a deranged state of mind of the executors and their sociopathy and no other association is investigated? Do the horrific acts of these individuals make their families and neighbours guilty by association?
Dalia Mogahed, co-author of the book Who Speaks for Islam? recently echoed some of these thoughts in a TV interview. She said, "When you look at the majority of terrorist attacks in the United States, according to the FBI, these. . . attacks are actually committed by white male Christians. When those things occur, we don't suspect other people would share their faith and ethnicity of condoning. We assume that these things outrage them just as much as they do anyone else. And you have to afford that same assumption of innocence to Muslims."
These are some questions that the recent tragedy in Paris and previous such acts raise. Why should the adherents of the faith to which the lone wolf terrorist belongs be viewed differently?
A simple answer would be that in recent lone wolf acts of terrorism or politically sponsored terror events of the past, the executors did not carry out their acts to uphold a religious mission or objective. The lone wolf terrorists or mass shooters in the US or Norway were not claimed by any radical religious group and hailed as heroes or martyrs by any radical group.
The terrorism that we are now facing is posed by a highly committed group of people who are determined to bring about changes based on their idea of religion and its laws. These changes that they seek are first for their 'religionists', and later for others. They do not care if their actions turn their 'co-religionists' into collaterals. In fact, it is a part of the strategy of this radical group.
The terror acts of France, and more recently Mali, have turned the attention of all countries, particularly the West, not only on the terror groups and their affiliates but also on Muslims. In many countries, Muslims now find themselves not only defending their faith but also themselves. They find themselves as suspects in their country of adoption which they love and are loyal to. Two Republican Party Presidential candidates in the US have gone on record to demand that all Muslims in the US be subjected to some kind of surveillance. Some members of the Congress and several State Governors have demanded that refugees from certain parts of the Middle East, mainly Muslims, not be allowed entry to the US. These may be rhetoric during an election season, but the words uttered by them do not speak of a benign view of Muslims and the view was formed only because some terrorists are misusing Islam to be their main driver.
The suspicion and hatred that Muslims face today cannot simply be removed by condemnation of the terror acts and dissociation from these acts by calling them un-Islamic. It will not be achieved by simply defeating the militant groups. The real action that needs to be taken is to reform the thought process of people, and make people aware about real Islam.
This phenomenon is a result of the failure of most Muslim countries and Muslim leaders to provide a broad-based education to their people that not only exposes them to the correct interpretation of their religion but also teaches them values of human rights, diversity of opinions, and equality of human beings. Our leaders will do well if they inculcate these teachings in people they know and ask them to turn to the future instead of harking back thousands of years back for inspiration. Otherwise our youths will continue to be attracted to false prophets who are darkening the horizon and engaging them, directly or indirectly, to many more such disasters.
The writer is a political commentator and analyst.