sinna manni

The flurry of unilateral and multilateral initiatives taken by the West in
the aftermath of "September 11" raises a few relevant questions: Has the
world moved closer to peace, stability and security after the West launched
its global war against terror in the wake of 9/11? Or is the West coming
under siege from terrorists more than ever before? To take the example of
Iraq, the rationale advanced by America for its invasion in Iraq was to
strike at the base of terrorism. Has America succeeded on the very grounds
on which it waged its first major war against terrorism?

The blasting of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad, the supreme symbol of world
peace, constitutes the most telling argument that terrorism, either moving
on four wheels of a truck laden with explosives, or walking on two legs
packed with explosives, continues to be an elusive (and sometimes even a
superior) force to the coalition of the willing partners of the West that
rallied round to form a consolidated front against terrorism. The car bomb
that killed the Shi'ite cleric, Ayatollah Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim in the
holy city of Najaf, signals that terrorism in Iraq is bound to grow worse
before it gets better, if at all. The American forces seem to be a sitting
duck for escalating terrorism in Iraq. It is a frightening spectre that can
lead to serious political repercussions both inside and outside America.

The grim reality facing the white knights who had donned the shining armour
to kill the dragon of terrorism is that the day after Saddam Hussein was
captured (December 14, 2003) two bombs went off in Baghdad killing and
injuring Iraqi policemen. According to the latest body count 480 American
have died on Iraqi soil. On December 15, 2003, President Pervez Musharaff of
Pakistan narrowly escaped a terrorist bomb that exploded second after he
crossed a bridge. And, above all, Osama bin Laden, is still hanging out
there waiting for his day. Is there any light at the end of the tunnel? Can
the West escape the horrors of terrorism by focusing primarily on protecting
its interests? Other than ad hoc adventures, does it have a road map to
tackle terrorism on a global scale? Can it contain terrorism by cornering
Saddam Hussein and leaving, for instance, Prabhakaran out?

Besides, the terrorist attacks in Bali, Jakarta and Riyadh targeting, in
particular Westerners, question the ability of the international community
to combat the determined terrorists. Neither the Western instrumentalities
nor its strategies have demonstrated a reliable and effective capacity to
either combat or contain terrorism in all its manifestations. Organized
terrorism, with its international network, is gathering momentum as a global
force with a surprising capacity to strike at will. Their far-flung global
network will continue to threaten the bases of West in the foreseeable
future.

Jittery reactions of the West indicate that they have a long way to go
before they can claim victory. Consider the Australian example - a new
target for the borderless terrorists. On August 13, 2003 the Australian
Prime Minister, John Howard, warned the shocked Australian nation to expect
an imminent attack by terrorists. Police with sniffer dogs patrolled Sydney
train stations on August 13, 2003, searching bags and inspecting bewildered
passengers after a peak-hour bomb scare, reported The Australian
(14/8/2003). America too is on high alert not knowing when and where the
strike would land. On August 13, 2003, a British arms dealer was arrested in
Manhattan for smuggling a surface-to-air missile with a capacity to strike a
plane coming within a range of four miles. All of which exposes the
weaknesses of the safety nets woven to trap the terrorists.

Defiant terrorist violence challenging the superiority of the Western powers
question the pieties on which Western strategies are based: How far has the
new political will of the West after September 11 gone to win the war
against terrorism? What impact has the new strategies and determination of
the West had on dampening the spirit or curtailing of terror tactics? Do\0
they have the intelligence network to get at the terrorists before they get
the West? Apart from ad hoc measures and the occasional capture of a leader
or two, can the West look confidently into future and guarantee its citizens
that the threat from terrorism is diminishing? Can their selected targets
aimed at safeguarding their immediate domestic interests ensure global peace
and security? Can the passing of new legislation, structuring of new
institutions and the beefing up of the existing forces meet the increasing
challenge from terrorism?

Above all, have the Western analysts sat down to consider the critical
sources from which terrorism derives its sustenance? The West coasted along
on the theory that terrorism is a legitimate political expression of
deep-seated grievances. This theory also claimed that terrorism is rampant
only in the underdeveloped world because the grievances have not been
addressed by religious, racist, nationalist, capitalist or state hegemonies.
They argue that if you talk to the terrorists, listen to them and address
their grievances it would disappear. They persistently believed that
terrorism was a disease of the poor and not the rich. September 11, of
course, changed all that. Hard on the heels of September 11 came the
invasion of Iraq - an attempt to export democracy on the grinding wheels of
tanks and B-52 bombers. Both events undermined the smug assumptions of the
Western theorists that there is a non-violent alternative to handle
terrorism. Both events underpinned the fact that terrorism is not a force
that can be tamed by civilized discourse, meaningful appeasement of their
grievances, or international or moral pressures, if the terrorists have
tasted a measure of success through violence.

By and large, modern terrorism has two faces: (1) as a militant force of the
Muslim fundamentalists radiating from its epicentre in Palestine and (2) as
separatist movements in different locales. There are, of course,
low-intensity attacks on globalization and Westernization and
neo-colonialism but these have not emerged as organized forces as seen in
the other two. However, in all three categories the West looms large, both
as a target and as a source of sustaining terrorism. There is no doubt that
external forces can exacerbate or be a catalyst for the latent forces of
political violence to explode in all its fury. The "external factors" can be
of two different varieties. First is the immediate external factor within
the contested geographical area that tends to interact with the latent
political culture waiting to pounce on an opportunity to burst out in
violence. Second is the far-flung network of globalized terrorism that is a
sine qua non to sustain and prolong terrorist campaigns. The most
significant force in modern terrorism is the second factor. Without the
external inputs the internal terrorist forces do not have a chance of
surviving for long or emerging as a formidable force to challenge the states
or the international community. These external inputs can come basically
from (1) sympathetic expatriates of the terrorist groups raising funds,
promoting their cause in various forums, and generally acting as agents
disguised as human rights activists and (2) neighbouring states, Western
powers, media, NGOs, Churches and other allied agencies in the West with a
vested interest or misguided notions of rights in validating violence of the
disaffected groups.

But to put the blame entirely on the external forces is to exculpate the
grassroot forces waiting for an excuse to run riot. Due recognition must be
given to the roots of terrorism that are buried in its own internal
dynamics. The subterranean forces of violence manifest in diverse forms in
various localities and times. Its modalities (e.g. suicide bombers) need not
necessarily come from grievances. Like the kamikaze pilots who dived into
allied ships in World War II they are a brainwashed product to believe in
violence as the best method of achieving results. Some consider terrorism to
be a weapon of the weak against the mighty. Some argue that terrorism is the
outlet for unattended grievances. If these arguments are correct then not an
inch of the globe would be safe from terrorism because every corner is
overpopulated with the weak and is overflowing with unattended grievances.

Though there is potential for the weak and the aggrieved to be organized
into terrorist groups, humanity as a whole has not taken to violence.
Invariably, terrorism is confined to certain selected pockets. And, as in
the case of Tamil terrorism in Sri Lanka, more than the grievances of the
weak the dispossessed elite (i.e vellahla caste who enjoyed feudal and
colonial privileges under the patronage of the Dutch and the British rulers)
too would use their resources to organize violence to recapture their lost
status, power and privileges. The rise and growth of terrorism in Sri Lanka
was engineered by the vellahla ruling class of Jaffna on a separatist
ideology manufactured in the fifties. It should serve as a unique case study
in which the existing violent culture of the vellahla Tamils, dressed up in
modern concepts, adapted terrorism as its basic political instrument to
retain its powers and privileges. It surfaced as an organized force with a
dynamic of its own in the hands of a power elite struggling to regain its
lost position. Behind the façade of Prabhakaran, a low-caste Clint Eastwood,
is the vellahla factor continuing to manipulate, organize, and direct the
operations. Without the privileged vellahla diaspora Prabhakaran canno
survive for long.

As opposed to this institutionalized violence, the indiscriminate violence
of the headless mobs and masses peters out as soon as it rises because it
has no directing or organizing force behind it. Terrorism, on the other
hand, becomes an effective instrument of violence only in the hands of a
power elite who knows how to organize and direct violence against selected
targets over a prolonged period. The success of terrorism depends on how
long it could sustain its campaign of violence. The longer it drags on the
more it gains confidence and skills on how to manipulate and conduct
violence as an effective political instrument. But most of all violence has
to be organized in the name of acceptable principles. Violence without
defined goals and manufactured ideals or commonly accepted principles,
orchestrated to defend the use of violence as a political instrument, cannot
mobilize the forces to sustain or refuel the energy it requires to pursue
violence to the bitter end. In short, violence without an ideology,
accompanied by justifications based on prevailing orthodoxies, has a very
short life.

Wrapping violence in high-sounding ideologies is a process that is vital for
the perpetrators of violence to transubstantiate their grab for power to a
sacred level of salvation for all. For instance, republicanism and freedom
were the catch cries of the Roman aristocracy when it was about to lose
power to Caesar who was drifting towards a one-man imperial role dressed in
royal ermine. There is also a symbiotic relationship with violence and
ideology: one reinforces the other. Terrorism is a cult that gathers
momentum with each killing. But this killing needs legitimacy in the eyes of
its followers and the world at large. Sympathetic intellectuals and
propagandists, mesmerized by the success of violence, step in to fabricate
ideologies and even theologies. Its increased capacity to destroy enhances
its faith in violence as the desperate answer to perceived grievances. The
icons of this cult of violence come out of death and destruction. It has its
local roots. But modern terrorism has grown in leaps and bounds because of
strength derived from external sources. This, briefly, is an exercise to
focus only on the critical sources from which the terrorists draw their
life-giving oxygen. The focus is on the West as a source of providing
ideologies, finance, safe havens for the agents of terrorism, black market
for procurement of illegal arms, bases for the propaganda arms of
terrorists, avenues for raising of funds to destabilize friendly nations,
and, above all, apologists to defend the violence of terrorists.

Living in a state of denial and reluctant to face the hard realities, the
West operates on the basis that terrorism is an export of the developing
countries into the developed countries. A scrutiny of the sources of
terrorism will reveal that the flow of terrorism runs in the opposite
direction. Where ever there is terrorism established as an intransigent
force the sources of its power can be traced invariably to the West.
Consider two examples that pinpoint the Western bases of terrorism. A recent
AFP report revealed that the separatist violence in Aceh is waged from the
suburbs of Sweden where about 50 Acehnes are overseeing the military
operations. These are mainly the commanders of the Free Aceh Movement (GAM).
Most of them have acquired Swedish citizenship. In effect, this means that
the Swedes are waging a war against a sovereign state of Indonesia and
Sweden is not lifting a finger to end terrorist violence in Indonesia. There
were pressures mounting to sever diplomatic connections with Sweden because
they were harbouring the key figures of the separatists. They are: Hassan di
Tiro, considered by the separatists as Aceh's head of state, Mahamood Malik,
who is regarded as the Acehnese prime minister and Abdullah Bakhtiar, the
chief spokesman. Many of the Acehnese too have found safe havens in Sweden.
(AFP - The Australian, June 3, 2003).

Then there is the Sri Lankan example. The chief spokesperson for the Tamil
Tiger terrorists, Anton Balasingham, has acquired British citizenship and
conducts propaganda campaigns from his base in London. His wife, Adele
Balasingham, an Australian nurse, was instrumental in training young Tamil
women into killing squads. Child soldiers abducted from schools, homes or
even festivals were brain-washed and turned into killers by Adele. She too
has acquired a British passport. Both have been given a safe haven in
London. No questions asked about crimes against humanity that came from the
International Secretariat of the LTTE, Eelam House, 202, Long Lane, London
SE1, 4QB. In contrast to this, today the London streets in which suspected
Muslims live are cordoned off and house-to-house searches are conducted
within hours of British authorities deciding that they are threat to British
national interests. A discernible pattern in the war against terrorism is to
launch instant hunts of terrorists that threaten white interests and not
touch the "safe havens" of terrorists that blow up non-white nations.

Terrorists are also quick to exploit the legal, political and social systems
to campaign for fascist terrorist masters back home. On August 5, 2003, a
Tamil-American physician in US, Dr. Jeyalingam, aided by the Center for
Constitutional Rights, filed a lawsuit against the US Patriot Act, in a Los
Angeles Court on August 5, 2003, challenging the law that criminalizes the
provision of "expert advice and assistance" to banned organizations like the
LTTE. He claims that the new Act has abridged his rights guaranteed under
the Constitution. Without buying into the pros and cons of this claim (which
would be lengthy) it could be seen that this is not a legal manoeuvre to
claim his rights under the American Constitution but a political exercise to
test the loopholes in the legal system for terrorists to legitimize their
subhuman violence.

Along with the other banned terrorists groups the Tamil Tiger terrorists
will continue to probe every loophole in the West because the power of the
terrorists is dependent essentially on their global network. Any weakening
of their bases in the West will be a severe blow to their strength. The
battleground at home cannot be sustained without a Western base. Lacking in
the necessary technology and finances to wage a war against a state, lacking
in ideological bases to sustain their long-term campaigns the terrorists
have opened two fronts: 1) terrorist violence in their chosen battleground
within a geographical space and, 2) a legally endorsed strategic base in the
heartland of the West. Number (1) cannot survive without number (2). This is
the simple logic that determines the course of global terrorism.

For instance, terrorists in their home bases cannot make a political impact
without hitting their local targets with the sophisticated technology
available only in the West. These deadly weapons can be purchased only with
the hard currency of the West. Besides, these weapons are purchasable only
from the underworld dealers known to Western intelligence sources. Thus,
fund-raising in Western bases becomes a sine-qua-non for the survival of
terrorists. Addressing the Sri Lanka Institute of Foreign Relations, Jean
Louis Bruguiere, the co-ordinator of the French anti-terrorism division,
said that the Tamil Tiger terrorists, banned by the international community,
collect $4 million every year in France alone.

He said that the LTTE was not involved in violent activities in France but
"controls the immigrant Tamil community in France and is involved, under
cover of legal associations and organisations, in underworld activities for
the guerrilla warfare in Sri Lanka".

Bruguiere said that since the LTTE was banned in the UK, they have shifted
their International Secretariat to Paris, and use the city as a base for
their operations in Europe. Besides, members of the LTTE are involved in
illegal immigration, tax evasion, hacking of long distance calls and drug
trafficking.

"It seems that a large part of these funds was extortions, but in the
absence of denunciations, it has not been possible to prove that these funds
have been obtained forcibly," he says. (Sinha Ratnatunga, Gulf News --
January 28, 2002)

Swissinfoa Swiss news agency, reproducing extracts of the annual report of
the Swiss Federal Police for 2002 stated categorically that militant groups
from the Balkans and Sri Lanka were particularly active in Switzerland last
year. It added that ethnic Albanians and Tamil Tiger rebels used the country
as a safe haven and logistics centre to direct guerrilla campaigns.
"Members of inter-national criminal and extremist organisations use
Switzerland as a safe haven and dissemination point of propaganda," the
report said.
"In addition, money is raised to support the violent activities of extremist
groups and organisations in other countries. This applies particularly to
the conflict areas in the Balkans and in Sri Lanka."
Quoting Jürg Bühler of the Federal Police Office Swissinfo said that
extremists try to use the Swiss financial centre with its high-quality
services to launder money, and that other countries in Europe, notably
Britain, face similar problems. (See Daily Mirror July 13, 2002 for full
report.)
Here is the incontrovertible evidence from the horse's mouth. The Police,
the intelligence gathering centres, the politicians, and the law-enforcement
authorities were fully aware of what was happening under their noses and yet
they failed in their moral and legal obligations to other nations reeling
under the violence of political criminals.