Causes of Terrorism

Foreign policy

Osama bin Laden’s tapes have corroborated some of the suggested underlying causes. Amongst the
numerous causes suggested, as noted by Osama bin Laden himself, American foreign policy, in
particular its policy on the Israel-Palestine issue, the continued bombings of and sanctions against Iraq,
and the US military presence in Saudi Arabia. Moreover, the US-led anti-terrorism campaign is said to
have provoked more anti-Americanism in much of the Islamic world, as many Muslims see that
campaign asn being targeted at Islam.

Modernization

On the other hand some argue that terrorists harbor a blind hatred of modernity and view the United
States as a symbol of modernization, which is a source of their suffering. This resentment against the
United States is said to have driven young Arab men to commit atrocious crimes against innocent
Americans.

Poverty

Poverty is often cited as a root cause of terrorism. However poverty is a most heavily contested
potential cause. Many doubts have been aired as to whether poverty is truly aroot cause of terrorism. It
is often pointed out that Osama bin Laden is a multimillionaire and that the hijackers on 9.11 were not
members of the dispossessed. They were middle class, and in some cases upper class. They were well
educated, spoke English and came from Egypt and the wealthy Persian Gulf states. They had been
sufficiently exposed to Western lifestyle to remain inconspicuous living in the United States. This is a
puzzle because terrorists are recruited from the poor and deprived as well as from the wealthier and
educated. As for the latter, they can only be explained as feeling a sense of responsibility for the
sufferers.

Globalization

Rather than poverty per se, the widening gap between the haves and have-nots partly due to
globalization might have fueled a greater sense of inequality. Under the advent of globalization some
benefited more than others, while some suffered more, not being able to reap its fruits. The latter have
felt left out of globalization.

On the other hand, ironically, globalization has empowered terrorists with resources, communication
and information. Terrorists now have a global reach.

Education

Although poverty may not be the sole cause for terrorism, grievance based on poverty may have led
some to be recruited into terrorist groups. In conjunction with poverty, lack of access to education has
been suggested as a factor in making young people susceptible to being initiated into terrorist groups, as
opportunities for low cost education have been offered by terrorist leaders through the mosques and
madrassas. Efforts ought to be made to reduce this sense of inequality by providing more opportunities
for education and by providing a decent standard of living through a new Marshall Plan.
Religion, religious extremism or fanaticism

Religion, religious extremism or fanaticism particularly Islamic has often been cited as one of the
underlying causes. This has stemmed from Osama bin Laden’s statements, including his latest
audiotape, that “we pray to God to aid us that His religion might triumph and we pursue the jihad unto
death so as to merit His mercy”. In the aforementioned “Worldview Survey” 61% of Americans polled
responded that Islamic fundamentalism is a critical threat to US vital interests, which was a 23%
increase from the same survey in 1998.

While religious extremism has been identified as an important means for terrorist organizations to
justify their violent actions and to motivate terrorists to conduct violent attacks, Islam has often been
labeled as the religion of terrorists. Particularly, the notion of jihad, “holy war”, has been cited as
leading terrorists to take suicidal actions which insure that the actors go to heaven, making them eager
to die in a blaze of destruction visited upon their enemy. Not limited to Islam, Aum Shinrikyo has been
cited as another example where religious motivations were used to justify not only murder but also
the59 mass destruction ordered by its leader.

On the other hand, too much global focus on Islam as a cause of terrorism has invited resentment.
Azyumardi Azra, Professor of Islamic history and civilization and rector of the State Islamic University
in Jakarta, Indonesia criticized the western media for continuing to reiterate the idea that the Muslim
world is in a state of perpetual chaos and corruption, unable to govern itself except through the use of
force.

Bayrakdar explains that terrorists misuse Islamic concepts. One should distinguish between extremists
and moderates among Muslims and should refrain from naively labeling Islam a terrorist religion. The
Japanese Diplomatic Blue Book 2002 has also made clear that the fight against terrorists is not a fight
against Islam.

Clash of civilizations

Moreover, it seems 9.11 has brought the infamous theory of the clash of civilizations back to public
discourse, absent since 1996 when Huntington wrote the famous piece.The 9.11 incident, however, was
not due to inter-civilization confrontation as argued by many. Yamazaki Masakazu, for example, argues
that this is not a clash of civilizations because there is a variety of Islam in the world. NATO, which is
deemed to be a part of Western civilization, has aided Muslims in Kosovo and has bombed the former
Yugoslavia, which belongs to Christian culture.

Weak governance

Failed or weak governance is another suggested root cause of terrorism. Incompetent and undemocratic
governments do not always cause terrorism. Rather, weak governance can offer a hotbed for terrorists.
When a sense of injustice and inequality, be it poverty,access to politics, resources or other grievances,
cannot be resolved through proper channels of governance, it may spur people to more violent
resolutions out of desperation, including terrorism.

Environment

Some even suggest the environment as a root cause of terrorism. Thomas Homer-Dixon, Director of
the Centre for the Study of Peace and Conflict of the University of Toronto argued in his article to The
Globe and Mail on September 23, 2001 that environmental stresses – especially shortages of cropland
and fresh water – that have crippled farming in the countryside and forced immense numbers of people
into squalid urban slums, where they are easy fodder for fanatics – as a source of violent terrorism.

Although it is hard to identify the underlying causes of violent terrorism, violent actions ought to be a
representation of desperation about some sort of grievances that have not been addressed and could not
be resolved by other peaceful means. What we have witnessed since 9.11 are more organized and
massive terrorists’ attacks on citizens by acts of people sacrificing their own lives. This presupposes
more organized principles than the emotions of hatred, jealousy, isolation and a sense of deprivation.

Looking at these commonly suggested underlying causes, one can extract a common thread of a sense
of injustice and inequality of those who are not on the good side of poverty, governance, globalization,
governance, conflicts etc. They must have reached a level of desperation that compelled them to believe
that resorting to violence was the only way to resolution. Leaders of terrorist groups seem to have
exploited this sense of injustice and inequality among people, especially young people, to recruit and to
motivate them to conduct terrorist attacks. However, the leaders may have their own targets and goals
to achieve. This may sound like the revolutionaries during the French Revolution who took up arms for
their cause, but it is different due to the global scope and multitudes of underlying causes. In the French
Revolution the group aimed at killing their king, but the assassination of American President George
W. Bush would not solve their grievances and the other causes of terrorism in the 21 st Century. We
need to send a clear message to terrorists that killing citizens will not lead to solutions.

Sense of injustice

In order to reduce threats emanating from massive terrorism, we need to intervene into this sense of
injustice and inequality before it translates into violent action. We need to address these causes in
addition to measures of punishment and sanction against terrorists, which should send a message to
terrorists and their leaders that their goals cannot be achieved by such violent conduct.
Causes of Terrorism
The causes of terrorism appear to be varied. There does not appear to be one lone factor that leads
people to engage in acts of terror. Scholars have categorized motivations for terrorism to include
psychological, ideological, and strategic.

Psychological Perspective

Those who engage in terrorism may do so for purely personal reasons, based on their own psychological
state of mind. Their motivation may be nothing more than hate or the desire for power. For example, in
1893 Auguste Vaillant bombed the French Chamber of Deputies. In many respects this terrorist is
interested in getting attention from others for his or her act, rather than some grand ideological or
strategic goal.

Ideological Perspective

Ideology is defined as the beliefs, values, and/or principles by which a group identifies its particular
aims and goals. Ideology may encompass religion or political philosophies and programs. Examples of
terrorist groups motivated by ideology include the Irish Republican Army (IRA), in Sri Lanka the
Liberation

Tigers of Tamal Eelam (LTTE), and the Bader Meinhoff in Germany. The IRA is motivated by a
political program to oust the United Kingdom from Ireland and unite Ireland under one flag. Similarly
the LTTE seek to establish a separate state for their people, the Tamals in Sri Lanka. Finally, the Bader
Meinhoff was a terrorist group made up of middle-class adults who opposed capitalism and sought to
destroy capitalist infrastructure in Germany.

Strategic Perspective

Terrorism is sometimes seen as a logical extension of the failure of politics. When people seek redress
of their grievances through government, but fail to win government’s attention to their plight, they may
resort to violence. From this viewpoint, terrorism is the result of a logical analysis of the goals and
objectives of a group, and their estimate of the likelihood of gaining victory. If victory seems unlikely
using more traditional means of opposition, then one might calculate that terrorism is a better option.
For example, in South Africa the African National Congress only turned to the use of terrorism after
political avenues were explored and failed. Of course, not just individuals may feel let down by the
political process. States may use terrorists in the pursuit of their own strategic interests. States may
sponsor terrorist groups, especially when the objectives of the state and the terrorist group are similar.
For example, Libya used terrorists to explode a bomb aboard Pan Am 103 flying from London toNew
York in 1988, allegedly in response to U.S. and British bombing of Libya.
Typical Terrorist Objectives Include:

1. Attract public attention to the group’s grievances

2. Encourage empathy for their unfair/unjust situation and sympathy for the cause
3. Demonstrate the inability of the state to provide security
4. Demonstrate the illegitimacy of the state’s institutions
5. Polarize the public to simplify the debates and arguments
6. Coerce the public into pressuring the state into compromise solutions
7. Force the state into repressive reactions that discredit the government
8. Force the state into repressive reactions that serve to recruit new members and supporters
9. Demonstrate the economic consequences of continued violence
10. Highlight the potential political consequences of continued conflict
11. Attract international attention and encourage intervention
12. Provoke widespread civil uprising to change the government, or form a separate state

Motivations for Political Violence

Karl von Clausewitz described “war as politics by other means.” One might describe terrorism in the
same way, or as “war by other means.” There are two types of terrorism: rational and irrational.
Rational terrorism has a political goal and a purpose. Irrational terror might be described as mindless
violence that serves some dark psychological imbalance and is as difficult to understand as the motives
of serial killers. As such this is the realm of psychologists and psychiatrists, not political scientists,
politicians, statesmen, and security specialists. This briefing deals only with “rational terrorism.”

Rational terrorism is an outgrowth of public dissatisfaction and political dissent and a form of revolt
against the established order, or regime. Few, if any, dissident movements willingly adopt terror as a
conscious tactic, namely because such tactics provoke public revulsion and condemnation. Dissident
movements will usually begin as reform movements that fail to achieve their demands and proceed
through stages of escalating fear, frustration, anger and hardening attitudes:

 Identifying inequities

 Frustrated Attempts at Reform

 Organized Dissent

 Civil Disobedience

 Reactionary Counter Attack

 Political Violence

Violent political conflict can be categorized in terms of the motivation and aspirations of the
combatants.

1. Political – In some cases the dissidents have what may best described as political motivations. It’s
said that war is diplomacy by other means; violent political conflict could be described as politics by
other means. The motivation may be to affect a political reform, or overthrow a regime perceived as
illegitimate or lacking public trust and support. Terrorism may be used as to demonstrate the weakness
and vulnerability of the regime, to reveal its inability to provide security, to provoke government
repression to help recruit followers, and ultimately to force leaders from power. This motivation has
been most common in Latin America, and would be typical where there is an oppressed majority
population that is denied political influence.
2. Cultural – This motivation is most common in situations where an ethnic or religious group fears
extermination, or loss of their common identity, language or culture. It may also be combined with
political motives, where the rulers discriminate against the ethnic group in terms of jobs, economic
opportunity or access to the political process. In the case of oppressed minorities, opposed by a strong,
entrenched regime, terrorism may be seen as the only available option. This is especially true where
demands for political reform are ignored, where there are few, if any, external allies, and where the
regime resorts to collective punishment for what are seen as reasonable and justified demands.

3. Psychological – A surprising number of pro-government analysts favor this explanation, which

asserts that some terrorists are unbalanced, violent individuals suffering some form of psychosis. Others
may be egomaniacs driven to achieve recognition through violence, and who attract a following of other
dysfunctional individuals. This characterization may be accurate in cases where terrorist appear to have
no logical goal, or motivation, or a purpose that makes little sense to normal people. This can include
cases where the goal is the psychological benefit achieved by vengeance (Timothy McVeigh and the
Oklahoma City bombing). Psychologically motivated terrorism is simply a criminal act, like serial
killing, and doesn’t qualify for analysis as political violence.

Cultural motivations can be further classified into three broad, but non-exclusive categories.

Separatism – (let’s separate) In situation where the ruling group is seen to be unfair and unjust in its
government administration, dissident groups fight to form a separate state. Example would include the
aspirations of Tamils in Sri Lanka, or Basques in Spain to establish a separate state for their people.

Cohesion – (aka Irredentism – let’s get back together) The objective is to re-unite an ethno-political
group that has been divided and separated by an arbitrary state border. An example is the conflict in
Northern Ireland where Irish Republicans (typically Catholics) aspire to unify the 6 northern counties
with the Republic of Ireland.

Nationalism – (let’s organize ourselves) The aspiration of a national group (people related by ethnicity,
religion, language or culture) to create a formal state for their nation. An example is the aspiration to
establish Kurdistan as a homeland for the Kurdish people. This entails elements of both separatism and
irredentism of Kurds living in Turkey, Iraq and Iran.

In today’s world there are any number of intractable conflicts, some active, others dormant but
unresolved. Some of the most enduring are the divisions in Ireland, Korea and Cyprus, each one
dividing people by artificial borders. Many are described in Flashpoints Country Briefings. Most of
these can be classified as traditional forms of political violence, including terrorism.

Many analysts and scholars draw distinctions between traditional terrorism and the new international
terrorism, represented by al-Qaeda and the militant Islamist movement. But is this really new, or just a
different manifestation of political unrest, with a violent twist and more deadly potential?

Up until 2001, the number of terrorist incidents had been declining, but the attacks were becoming more
deadly, culminating with 9/11. Since invading Afghanistan and Iraq that trend has clearly been reversed.
Day in and day out, the news reports attacks against occupying coalition forces (as insurgency) and
escalating attacks against civilian targets to deter collaborators.