Dr Mohamed Kirat
By Dr Mohamed Kirat
According to Brian Jenkins, the potential causes of terrorism include “rising population; increased poverty and scarcity; racial tension; inflation and unemployment; increased tension between the have and have-not nations; waves of refugees shoved about by wars and repression; immigrants moving from poorer states to wealthier ones, often bringing with them the conflicts of their home country, sometimes causing resentment among native citizens; rapid urbanisation; the disintegration of traditional authority structures; the emergence of single-issue groups, the rise of aggressive fundamentalist religious groups or religious cults”.
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent terrorist bombings in Bali, Mumbai, Casablanca, Baghdad, Istanbul, Riyadh, Madrid, London, and elsewhere have intensified concerns about the terrorist threat and renewed calls to better understand the roots or causes of terrorism. Historically and today, there have been divergent views on this question, which reflect philosophical, religious, political and other differences.
Terrorism is too complex and diverse a phenomenon to lend itself easily to causes. But we may be able to discern underlying conditions, factors contributing to the risks of terrorism and perhaps even the causes of specific acts. Responses to emerging threats may not be affected by our knowledge of terrorists’ motivations, but our understanding of terrorism’s determinants, including conditions that create support for terrorism and aid recruitment, is critical. If for example, one believes that terrorism has political roots, that it emerges during certain political conditions such as ethnic or nationalistic conflict, to combat the scourge requires changing the political conditions from which it emerged.
Democracy is frequently held out as the solution in this context. Democracy, on the other hand, is not an overnight process. It takes years and decades to be implemented and to make the population benefit from it.
Each manifestation of terrorism needs to be understood in context and we may be able to discern underlying conditions, factors contributing to the risks of terrorism and perhaps even the causes of specific acts. Addressing causes may not be possible and will not in any case end terrorism; addressing the wrong causes can be counterproductive. Responses to emerging threats will be affected by the understanding of terrorism’s causes, including conditions that create support for terrorism and help recruitment. If one takes a simplistic view of the causes, one is led to a simplistic and narrow set of counterterrorism options rather than complex, multifaceted responses that reflect the real nature of the terrorist threat.
Terrorism is the threat or use of violence against civilians to draw attention to an issue. Those searching for the causes of terrorism — why this tactic would be selected, and in what circumstances — approach the phenomenon in different ways. Some see it as an independent phenomenon, while others view it as a tactic in a larger strategy. Some seek to understand what makes an individual choose terrorism, while others look at it at the level of a group.
In fact, the question, “what causes terrorism?” is not quite the right question to ask, because we will never be able to answer it. We cannot say about a cause triggering terrorism with the certainty with which we can talk about toxins causing diseases. If you listen closely to the explanations that are usually given as answers to the question, “what is terrorism?” you will find that they actually answer the question: “What are the conditions in which terrorism is most likely to take place?” Sometimes these conditions have to do with the people who become terrorists (they are described as having certain psychological traits, like ‘narcissistic rage’) and some conditions have to do with the circumstances they live in (a poor society; a formerly colonised society, for example).
Though many people today believe that religious fanaticism “causes” terrorism, it isn’t true. It may be true that religious fanaticism creates conditions that are favourable to terrorism. But we know that religious zealotry does not ‘cause’ terrorism because there are many religious fanatics who do not choose terrorism or any form of violence. So, there must also be other conditions that combine to lead some to see terrorism as an effective way of creating change in their world.
There are two more reasons why asking, “which conditions create a favourable climate for terrorism?” is better than asking about the causes. The first is, it makes it easy to remember that there are always at least several conditions.
Terrorism is a complex phenomenon. It is a specific kind of political violence committed by people who do not have a legitimate army at their disposal. A second reason that has been useful for researchers, is that thinking in terms of ‘conditions’ helps remember that people have a choice about whether to use violence.
There is nothing either inside a person or in their circumstances that leads them directly to terrorism. Instead, there are certain conditions, some of which make violence against civilians seem like a reasonable, and even necessary option. Despite this, and some of the deeply unforgivable circumstances that foster terrorism, people always have the free will to seek another course of action.
Crenshaw, for instance, argues that terrorism is grounded in an “evolving historical context.” In the last generation, that context has included the rise of religiosity, the politicisation of religion, and the tendency to speak politics in a religious idiom in mainstream, as well as violent extremist, circles, both in the East and West.
The Peninsula
The writer is a professor of Public Relations and Mass Communication at the College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University.
By Dr Mohamed Kirat
According to Brian Jenkins, the potential causes of terrorism include “rising population; increased poverty and scarcity; racial tension; inflation and unemployment; increased tension between the have and have-not nations; waves of refugees shoved about by wars and repression; immigrants moving from poorer states to wealthier ones, often bringing with them the conflicts of their home country, sometimes causing resentment among native citizens; rapid urbanisation; the disintegration of traditional authority structures; the emergence of single-issue groups, the rise of aggressive fundamentalist religious groups or religious cults”.
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent terrorist bombings in Bali, Mumbai, Casablanca, Baghdad, Istanbul, Riyadh, Madrid, London, and elsewhere have intensified concerns about the terrorist threat and renewed calls to better understand the roots or causes of terrorism. Historically and today, there have been divergent views on this question, which reflect philosophical, religious, political and other differences.
Terrorism is too complex and diverse a phenomenon to lend itself easily to causes. But we may be able to discern underlying conditions, factors contributing to the risks of terrorism and perhaps even the causes of specific acts. Responses to emerging threats may not be affected by our knowledge of terrorists’ motivations, but our understanding of terrorism’s determinants, including conditions that create support for terrorism and aid recruitment, is critical. If for example, one believes that terrorism has political roots, that it emerges during certain political conditions such as ethnic or nationalistic conflict, to combat the scourge requires changing the political conditions from which it emerged.
Democracy is frequently held out as the solution in this context. Democracy, on the other hand, is not an overnight process. It takes years and decades to be implemented and to make the population benefit from it.
Each manifestation of terrorism needs to be understood in context and we may be able to discern underlying conditions, factors contributing to the risks of terrorism and perhaps even the causes of specific acts. Addressing causes may not be possible and will not in any case end terrorism; addressing the wrong causes can be counterproductive. Responses to emerging threats will be affected by the understanding of terrorism’s causes, including conditions that create support for terrorism and help recruitment. If one takes a simplistic view of the causes, one is led to a simplistic and narrow set of counterterrorism options rather than complex, multifaceted responses that reflect the real nature of the terrorist threat.
Terrorism is the threat or use of violence against civilians to draw attention to an issue. Those searching for the causes of terrorism — why this tactic would be selected, and in what circumstances — approach the phenomenon in different ways. Some see it as an independent phenomenon, while others view it as a tactic in a larger strategy. Some seek to understand what makes an individual choose terrorism, while others look at it at the level of a group.
In fact, the question, “what causes terrorism?” is not quite the right question to ask, because we will never be able to answer it. We cannot say about a cause triggering terrorism with the certainty with which we can talk about toxins causing diseases. If you listen closely to the explanations that are usually given as answers to the question, “what is terrorism?” you will find that they actually answer the question: “What are the conditions in which terrorism is most likely to take place?” Sometimes these conditions have to do with the people who become terrorists (they are described as having certain psychological traits, like ‘narcissistic rage’) and some conditions have to do with the circumstances they live in (a poor society; a formerly colonised society, for example).
Though many people today believe that religious fanaticism “causes” terrorism, it isn’t true. It may be true that religious fanaticism creates conditions that are favourable to terrorism. But we know that religious zealotry does not ‘cause’ terrorism because there are many religious fanatics who do not choose terrorism or any form of violence. So, there must also be other conditions that combine to lead some to see terrorism as an effective way of creating change in their world.
There are two more reasons why asking, “which conditions create a favourable climate for terrorism?” is better than asking about the causes. The first is, it makes it easy to remember that there are always at least several conditions.
Terrorism is a complex phenomenon. It is a specific kind of political violence committed by people who do not have a legitimate army at their disposal. A second reason that has been useful for researchers, is that thinking in terms of ‘conditions’ helps remember that people have a choice about whether to use violence.
There is nothing either inside a person or in their circumstances that leads them directly to terrorism. Instead, there are certain conditions, some of which make violence against civilians seem like a reasonable, and even necessary option. Despite this, and some of the deeply unforgivable circumstances that foster terrorism, people always have the free will to seek another course of action.
Crenshaw, for instance, argues that terrorism is grounded in an “evolving historical context.” In the last generation, that context has included the rise of religiosity, the politicisation of religion, and the tendency to speak politics in a religious idiom in mainstream, as well as violent extremist, circles, both in the East and West.
The Peninsula
The writer is a professor of Public Relations and Mass Communication at the College of Arts and Sciences, Qatar University.
