Roots of Modern Terrorism - Essay Example

Do the roots of modern terrorism lie in political powerlessness, economic, hopelessness, and social alienation? Terrorism is perhaps one of the most potent global threats that the human society faces from its own actions, playing roles either directly or indirectly. World governments have spent fortunes with the US on the leading at the battle front to fight off the threat posed by terrorist networks and related insurgencies. Using the affirmative position to the question as it appears in Mitchell and Mitchell (2006 and 2008 editions) the following discourse relates with Lieven’s work and attempts to illustrate how terrorism is derived from omission or commission of world history players. An opposing position held Juergensmeyer is however visited towards the end of the discourse as obiter dictum. Yes (Lieven) It is to a large extent right to portray the unprecedented rise in terrorism and similar threats to lack of political power and hope as well as economic and social alienation experienced by the terror perpetrators. For a long time, the United States has been struggling with the realities of bearing tough responsibilities that are begotten through being the world’s strongest country; care and criticism. This is can be manifested by the lack of coherence in balancing these two responsibilities. While America feels the automatic need to care and rise to the rescue of the gravely oppressed across the globe, a similar magnitude of resistance by the perpetrators who translate America’s actions as blow to their political power, socio-economic development as well as loss of hope of overcoming challenges1. America and her allies have set the agenda to build an understanding of political development throughout the world based on peace and tolerance since the World War II. Democratic leadership was enshrined in the political platform on which the US and the allies hold and vowed to uphold to avoid violence such as the one witnessed during the World Wars. In my view, the political control that the US rose to on the United Nations establishment ideology is the cause of all the terrorist threats that is has since been targeted to the allies. Similar sentiments have been held by Lieven to the effect that since of the cold war, American ideologies have had a huge bearing on international policies touching on political developments out of the American boundaries2. In order to facilitate the appropriate standing in terms of international interests, success in the political ground needed, the US had to apply ruthlessness. The desire and willingness demonstrated by the US and allies in hunting down perpetrators of major terror threats in the Middle East has been in the news for a long time. Rallying of international support to weed out possible resistance to the American ideology of peace within her borders and those of the allies sounds positive but offensive at the same time to the perpetrators and their allies. Apparently, the dominion over these regions renders them powerless since the feeling of losing territorial sovereignty to foreign forces in quest of such an important “international” matter. Sharing in the wisdom of Lieven and Hulsman, much of the American campaign against terror is based on the policy stance developed by the country regarding political lessons of the Cold War3. Political positioning and the global image held by the US with regard to terror threats can be ascribed to the Cold War policies. Reaction of major terror attacks on the US for instance is replica of action from the military to academic reasoning that the US needed within a backdrop of political lessons dating back to the Cold War. The authors particularly find striking features of resemblance between policies of the Cold War and 9/11 terror reaction. Domination of America as a giant player in world politics regardless of the opinion held by critics regarding creation of powerless image of the perpetrators’ nation aggravated terrorism situation. It is in the reaction that the roots of modern terrorism get conspicuously projected. Protection of the nation of Israel against aggressors is synonymous with the fight against terrorism in the Middle East. According to Lieven, America support for Israel must meet the burden of unpopularity that the nation has in the region and a face-off must exist4. Due to the military might possessed by these tow partners, the “war against terrorism” finds momentum since rather neutral sympathisers find a common enemy in the partnership. Politics of whether the nation of Israel has a right of existence in the Middle East finds its way in the shaping up terrorism. In my view, hardliners in the opposition of American and allies foreign policy that is infamously referred to as Westernization poses as a possible cause for existence of terrorism. Socio-economic development under the backdrop of Western influence and civilization proves to be a hard battle in the terrorism hit areas. Economic sanctions are usually almost unanimously imposed to regimes opposed to support the allies’ common policy of economic cooperation. Globalization and unification of trade holds the key to the rise of modern economies but cultural and religious mentality of these regions act as equality barometers for the terror perpetrators. Faced with social challenges such as population increase and poorly developed infrastructure to handle the needs of the population, terror groups retreat to apportion blame regarding their adversaries to beneficiaries of global trade. One way how this is manifested is the treatment of trade opportunity with foreigners causing serious failures in the operation of economic activities. Retreating to a collective mentality of exploitation by western powers only attracts violence against the developed world. Apparently, there exists some form of complete alienation to the retreated terror groups who openly declare their intention of perpetrating terror. Withdrawal from the rest of international community appears to be the only comfort zone where training for actions of terror can thrive. Just as observed earlier, the Islamic religion plays a major role in creation of Muslim brotherhood ideologies that assist to strengthen terrorism activities. Besides fighting the holy war, the Jihad against common “enemies” of the brotherhood, the general mentality of the West against the Arab world finds ground. This is because the perpetrators of terror suffering from the resulting hopelessness of the failed socio-economic and political organization find solace in groupings. Terror groupings provide identity and livelihood to fighters through obtaining financial support from illegal acts of violence. Continued retreat coined together with the above socio-economic and political circumstances that the perpetrators of terror are exposed to worsen any hope of a conclusive end to violence. Insurgency against West-backed regimes is an illustration of how hopelessness and bitterness against socio-economic and political conditions compel terror groups to continue with terrorism. No (Juergensmeyer) Taking a different view in the role of religion as a reason to back violence and terrorism could be admissible as opposed to any other human related issue5. I concur with this position mainly because the teachings of the Islam religion to the effect that believers have a right to instigate violence against infidels or non believers have a deep foundation in the religion. With the Muslim and Arabic world being home to major terrorist hideouts, it follows that the war against terrorism will always brush shoulders with Muslim believers. Despite an apparent freedom of worship existing in the Western world, there is some level of accidental connection between the main perpetrators of terror and Islamic followers. Relating several incidental factors influencing the presence of terror in the Middle East and Arabic countries with terrorism therefore becomes almost impossible for Jihadists to match up their interests with earlier observed brotherhood ideologies for a terror cause. Radical Islamism appears to offer a solution to more than one problem facing the terrorism prone regions of Asia. Bibliography Lieven, Anatol, & Hulsman, John, C. “Neo-Conservatives, Liberal Hawks, and the War on Terror: Lessons from the Cold War.” World Policy Journal, 23, no.3 (2006):64-74 Buss, Mitchell Hellen & Joseph, Mitchell Taking Sides: Clashing Views in World History, vol. 2: The Modern Era to the Present. Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Burr Ridge: IL, (2008) Buss, Mitchell, Hellen & Joseph, Mitchell Taking Sides: Clashing Views in World History, vol. 2: The Modern Era to the Present. Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Burr Ridge: IL, (2006) Read More