What Does Mumbai Mean?
December 5th, 2008I don’t claim any particular expertise in Indian/Pakistani relations. However, given the horrific events of recent days, I think that certain conclusions can be drawn.
1. Terrorism will not go away any time soon: Given the strong probability that there will always be various groups around the world whose members perceive themselves to be the victims of injustice, and given that as few as 10 men, acting in tandem, and with scant resources, could wreak such havoc in a huge metropolitan city like Mumbai, the chances are good that terrorism is likely to persist, as a relatively inexpensive way of lashing out, making your grievances known, and effectuating change.
2. The recruitment and training of terrorists is not particularly difficult: From what I’ve read, the lone terrorist, who participated in and survived the attack, has a 4th grade education, and admits to having been trained in a training camp located somewhere in Pakistan. It is apparent, therefore, that recruiting prospective terrorists, and inculcating in them an ideological mindset which predisposes them to carry out suicide missions, is both feasible, and not particularly difficult. It is also obvious that there are, as we speak, organized training camps, operating with impunity, in places like Pakistan, and probably in a great many other places as well.
3. The governments of countries which host terrorist training facilities are unable or unwilling to clamp down on such activities: We must assume that if terrorist camps are operating in countries like Pakistan, then the government leaders must know about such activities, and are currently unable or unwilling to eradicate them. It is not difficult to fathom why. Clearly, such governments may lack the resources, or may lack the political will, since acting forcefully in this regard could well result in civil war, which may pose even more of a threat than the terrorism itself. It is also possible that corruption may be playing a part in the decision making process, whereby people are being paid off to remain silent and to do nothing to disturb the status quo. There are quiet understandings in place.
4. There is a limit to the outside pressure that can be brought to bear against a nuclear power: Even if India rightfully claims that the Pakistani leadership is not doing enough to curb the threat of terrorism, its hands may be tied when dealing with a nation that possesses some 60 nuclear weapons. A military reprisal from India against Pakistan, which will probably not occur, will not likely be strong enough to curb the terrorist threat, given the need to show restraint, in an effort to minimize the risk of a nuclear confrontation.
So given the realities on the ground, and the constraints they impose, what should the world do to contain the terrorist threat? My answer would be to Sell a Vision of Hope, by which we use a multi-faceted approach to undermine the enemy, by beating him at his own game, and by strengthening our resolve to meet the threats he poses:
1. Ideology: If the terrorist uses the divisive ideology of violent Jihad to win hearts and minds, we counter with the unifying Ideology of Common Sense, an ideology based on common sense principles, principles which have universal appeal, and which are therefore universally accepted as true. We will use a new ideological framework to speak to one another with common sense and with a sense of personal dignity. In a more perfect world, common sense, the collective wisdom born of shared experience, will inspire our thinking and inform our speech. In our fractured world, common sense is the common denominator.
2. Investment: If the terrorist uses charitable handouts to win hearts and minds, we counter by investing in jobs, green technology jobs which protect the environment, which grow our economies, and which help to neutralize the hold of extremist thinking.
3. Hope: If the terrorist wins hearts and minds by selling people on a vision of hope for martyrdom, or virgins, or paradise, or what have you, we counter by selling people on a Vision of Hope, a vision of Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom. People the world over need hope like air to breathe. Give the man on the street a sense of hope, and you will have turned the corner on world peace. Nothing more is needed and nothing less will suffice.
4. Public Diplomacy: If the terrorist wins hearts and minds by seeking to set us against one another, we counter by launching a series of Public Diplomacy Programs which are specifically designed to prop a Vision of Hope up and to carry it forward, including: a program to empower women, a media campaign, a student exchange, a cultural exchange, an expanded version of the Peace Corps, and a series of international conferences on education, religion and the environment. Take, for example, the program to empower women by financing female entrepreneurs, and promoting women’s rights. Who are women? They are the givers of life, and the caretakers of life, and as such are uniquely qualified to reconstitute their societies consistent with a Vision of Hope.
5. Fight: If the terrorist wins hearts and minds by launching terror attacks against us, we counter by fighting back, and fighting hard, but we position the fight within a Vision of Hope. We raise the fight on the ground to a higher moral plain by giving the fight a moral clarity of purpose. We give the fight a good measure of credibility. People will fight harder once they know what they’re fighting for. We’re not fighting a “war against terror.” We are fighting a war to realize a Vision of Hope. There’s a big difference.
To defeat terrorism, or at least to contain it, we have to become at least as smart, and at least as committed, as the terrorists themselves. We owe it to ourselves to know our enemy, and to beat him at his own game. In effect, we have to co-opt his strategy, to do what he does, only better, and thereby marginalize him in the eyes of his own people. We have to put him in the uncomfortable and untenable position of holding his people back from a better life. Even the terrorist will not be able to withstand that kind of pressure. He will become a pariah in his own land, walking out of step with the will of the people. Ultimately, the will of the people will not be deterred.
The terrorist derives his power from his ability to inspire his followers, even as he intimidates his enemy. Our path to victory will be to inspire our own people, and even people around the world who may choose to partner with us, because unlike the terrorist, we have something better to sell. We can win the war of ideas by showing that our ideas make more sense, and that we are willing to back our words up with new realities on the ground, realities which speak louder than words, and which point toward the promise that comes with hope. In the final analysis, the ideological extremists will not be able to capture the public’s imagination, once people begin to imagine a better life for themselves. It behooves the West to put that option on the table.
We, who are often on the receiving end of terror, can certainly coordinate our efforts better, and embolden ourselves with a vision that gives purpose to our cause. But we may also have to resign ourselves to the possibility that even with a better vision, and even with a more comprehensive and effective approach, the lure of extremist thinking will be hard for some to resist. Terrorism is jut too convenient and enticing a weapon for us to be able to eliminate it totally.
Therefore, even though we could do a lot better in this regard, we may just have to accept a small measure of terror as an unfortunate aspect of modern life, not unlike how we have come to accept the unfortunate realities of crime on our streets, or accidents on our highways. Selling one another on a Vision of Hope will not cure all our ills, but will help contain them, and will inspire us to realize our potential as a species, and to meet the challenges which lie ahead with vigor and resolve.
Loading ...
Loading...
1. Terrorism will not go away any time soon:
I think you’re right. Terrorism has become a form of demonstration for poor/uneducated/oppressed and always desperate societies. It would probably not go away until there will either be more social justice in the world or some superpower will totally control everything they do. That’s my assessment anyways…
Yarden, even a good measure of “social justice” will probably not make terrorism go away, and my guess is that the strongest superpower on earth would still not be able to eliminate it totally.
What may be possible, is to contain terrorism, and keep it in check. You can do this in two ways, by offering the man on the street a persuasive alternative, and by paying a little less attention to it. If we promote a new ideological framework based on common sense, if we invest in one another with good paying jobs, if we inspire one another with hope, if we sustain that hope with public diplomacy, and if we fight the terrorists where we find them, then we will go a long way to containing this threat.
But just as important, we should condition ourselves not to give the terrorists the attention they crave. Most of what they do is intended to defeat our spirit, and thereby to push us to give up our way of life. We should not accomodate them in this manner. We should learn to pay a little less attention, even as we organize ourselves to beat them at their own game.
In government controlled newspapers that would have worked but with the private newspapers that profit from ratings how could that be possible?
I see what you’re saying, that the profit motive in the media pushes them to sensationalize terror.
You have a point there. But let’s look at crime, for a moment. In the U.S., God bless her, we have as many as 15,000 to 20,000 homicides per year. The media covers these, and the average viewer or reader is interested. But these killings do not inspire the kind of interest as a terrorist attack. A terrorist attack, in today’s world, can shake a society completely, including its economy, its political system, and its ability to function properly.
We should do what we can to combat terror, but we should not confer that much significance to it, because if we do, we are giving the terrorists precisely what they want. We’re playing into their hands.
So I would say this, think of the terrorist as a common criminal, who has stepped outside the pale of human decency, and who should not be accorded excessive significance in the public mind.
In addition, Yarden, I would say that if we really do go about Selling a Vision of Hope, in a significant way, that this too would be newsworthy, and certainly of interest to the viewing public. It may not be as visually dramatic as an act of terror, but it would be much more in line with the aspiration of the man on the street.
Hi Nissim,
Here is where real people can fit in, they can protect others around them with being responsible, with caring for every one they can care for, the number of terrorists is nothing compared to the number of people, the wonderful people of the world who denounce terroris, with all their might, they will be heard, history will encrave on its stone chest the memory of those who will not give in to terror. People rock.
I think you’re right, Elinor.
There is a saying, “Perception is reality.” I think that what it means is that if you believe something, you’ll act accordingly, and after a while, you will have created the reality that confoms to what you believe.
For example, if you think people are out to get you, you’ll act accordingly, and after a while, people wearing white jackets really will be out to get you, to put you in the loony bin. And then you’ll say, “See, I told you so, people were out to get me.”
Perception is reality. The terrorists come to believe certain things, and act accordingly. Pretty soon, their perception becomes reality. There is no reason why the rest of us can’t do the same. If we come to believe that we should fight terrorism any way we can, but that we should also not accord it a great deal of attention, then we will act accordingly, and soon enough, terrorism will begin to be perceived differently, as something outside the pale of human decency, and our efforts in this regard will come to be like getting rid of a menace, not unlike getting rid of a serial killer.
It’s like you say, “…history will engrave on its stone chest the memory of those who will not give in to terror.” Ultimately, not giving in to terror means not giving the terrorists the attention they need to survive. We must figure out a way to deprive them of our sense of outrage, which only nourishes their sense of purpose.
Yes what happened in mumbai was very bad and evil man-slaughter. Nissim you’re talking from psychological perspective by putting forward the themes of believing in something and hence that belief would be put into action by Universal mind
. Yes it’s true that negativity can be countered by positivity. But we all have certain other responsibilities too. We shouldn’t overlook evil things done in whatsoever the cause, and we should stop admiring, celebrating evil people just because they share some of our values and beliefs. And very important thing is to bring perpetrators and masterminds —to justice regardless of their status, nationality or religion.
I would agree with most of that, al ameen. There is a saying, “The ends justify the means.” This holds true in many cases, but there is a point at which the means are so despicable, that they cannot be justified regardless of the ends. The killing of school children in Beslan would be an example. The killing in Dir Yasin would probably be another.
I also would agree that terrorism should not be celebrated, even if we identify with some of what the terrorists stand for. At most, even if we feel we have to resort to terror in order to survive, the act of terrorism should still be deplored, especially if innocent people were targeted. I may have to kill in self-defense, for example, but that is no cause for celebration. Once I celebrate death, then it is easy to lose perspective and to begin valuing death over life.
In terms of your assessmnet that terror is terror no matter who is doing the perpetrating, I would agree with that as well. An organized military can engage in terror just as easy as a group of hoodlums. Terror is terror no matter how we dress it up.
Happy Hanuka Nissim, by the way
A thousand candles in the dark, may open our hearts 
Thanks, Elinor, and happy holidays to you as well. I’m not sure which holidays Noahides celebrate, but I’m sure they’re good ones, and maybe one day, we can celebrate them together.
A thousand candles can light up the path, but it is up to each and everyone of us to take the first step. I hope that in the coming year, we find the wisdom and the courage to do what we know we must.
Don’t you think that THE TOTAL TERRORISM IN THE WORLD are initiated by the Israel based American decisions in the form of artificially created Pearl Harbor and World Trade Centre Accidents that finally results in the war against Vietnam and Afghanistan and also Iraq with still-unproved weapons.
The point to be noted is that why the people of world (especially Americans) are misguided with unproved responsible peoples for these attacks.
Does the above said article answer this question:
http://www.mideastyouth.com/2008/08/19/the-world-demands-to-know-what-the-us-government-did-to-aafia-siddiqui/