 |
|
Terrorism: The cancer
spreads unhindered FROM Manhattan to Manila, the world is being painted red with human blood. Narco-terrorism, bio-terrorism, state terrorism, cross-border terrorism etc. are variations of the all-encompassing generic term, "terrorism." Terrorism has several facets that have evolved over a period of time. In the modern times we saw its first startling manifestation in the wake of the French Revolution. Another facet was revealed in the Southern United States when the Ku Klux Klan was set up after the Confederacy was defeated during the American Civil War. While the French revolutionaries mostly terrorised and wiped out its decadent nobility, the Ku Klux Klan specialised in giving a terrible time to former slaves. We need to remember that both Fascism and Communism — even the Russian revolutionary movement before the First World War — had several traits of organised terrorism. The 20th century saw
systematised terrorism in its most virulent form. The Nazi-sponsored
Holocaust that resulted in the killing of millions of Jews shall
remain unparalleled in the history of mankind. Perhaps the Pol Pot
regime came close to it in Cambodia a few decades later. And, who can
forget the horrors of Stalin’s regime? This century also witnessed
great technological advances, but it also saw the unleashing of two
World Wars and one Cold War — technically the third World War. The
second one resulted in the establishing of the State of Israel in West
Asia — much to the chagrin of the Arabs who already were chafing
under debilitating exploitation. This resulted in waves of militant
campaigns in West Asia. The Palestine Liberation Organisation and its
more radical versions have conducted acts of terrorism both within
Israel and against countries sympathetic to the Jewish State. However,
even as the Palestinians saw the futility of conducting terrorist
strikes to achieve political goals, Iran and Libya began to finance
radical outfits that espoused Islamic fundamentalism. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the late 1960s, India saw the rise of Communist lawlessness. Naxalites spread terror in West Bengal, Bihar, Andhra, Pradesh and several other states. Though on the wane, leftist extremists to do have pockets of influence, viz, the People’s War Group in Andhra Pradesh, the Maoist Communist Centre in Bihar and Jharkhand etc. Western countries, too, in the 1970s, saw the rise of radical left-wing groups, such as the Red Army Faction in West Germany, better known as the Baader-Meishoff Gang, the Japanese Red Army terrorist group and the Red Brigades in Italy. In Latin America, the so-called urban guerrilla movements, such as the Shining Path and the Peruvian Maoist terrorist group, shifted terrorist activities from the countryside into the sprawling cities. In Northern Ireland, the Irish Republican Army, supported by some sympathetic foreign governments, began terrorist attacks in Ireland and elsewhere, targeting both military and civilians sites. Today, Sri Lanka, once a shining example of peaceful coexistence and tranquility, is wrecked by Tamil extremist organisations like the LTTE, which have developed a formidable network spanning South-East Asia, Europe and North America. Major-General O.P. Sabharwal in his book, The Killer Instinct, says, "Our main enemy in the twenty-first century will be terrorism. Terrorist organisations or countries using them as a front, could explode a stray nuclear warhead or carry out biological or chemical attacks which in turn could cause a chain reaction and bring the world to the brink of destruction."
Why do people resort to this form of political protest despite the fact that violent means have seldom resulted in peaceful endings? Even if a temporary lull is achieved, it only ends up being a precursor to bigger upheavals in future, since the underlying cause of organised violence is seldom removed or even understood. Before we go into its causes, let us be clear about one thing, viz, terrorism is also a form of war. Though state terrorism is a reality as depicted by Stalin’s regime in the Soviet Union or even earlier by Hitler’s Nazi Germany, today it is the weaker opponents who resort to terrorism. The surprise element, the ability to spread rumours, and to carry out lethal strikes against chosen targets help in spreading panic in the targeted country, leading to the weakening of its politico-administrative superstructure. Cash-strapped and militarily insubstantial opponents resort to this form of warfare as it costs only a fraction of what a conventional armed conflict would in terms of men and material. History is cited as the chief breeder of terrorism. A community that has a glorious past is unable to reconcile to its present state of decline and decay. Frustration manifests itself in the form of sporadic violence. Slowly, but inexorably, it degenerates into a way of life. Muslim extremists never tire of reminding their constituency of the magnificent past when Islamic warriors ruled the roost in Asia, Africa and significant parts of Europe. Poverty is often touted as the main cause for the birth of terrorism. However, this can only be partly true. Naxalites did strike roots in some parts of the country because of extreme poverty and economic exploitation. But the majority of rural poor have rejected the creed of violence as a means of redress for their grievances. This is not to say that in future too their forbearance could be taken for granted. However, poverty alone cannot be the deciding factor in the rise of terrorism. The IRA, the Khalistanis and the protagonists of Tamil Elam do not fit into this stereotype. Perhaps it has more to do with power play. As long as Sri Lankan Tamils thought they were getting a fair deal in the power-sharing business they lived peacefully. Trouble arose only when they felt that they were being deprived of their legitimate dues. The IRA insurgency too had more of political than sectarian reasons. Yet in all three cases, language, ethnicity, religion or sect did become the cloak that hid the profane ambitions of the respective protagonists. Some point out that a pluralistic society is more prone to terrorist activities than a homogenous one. If it were so, then Nepal should not have been at the receiving end of violent protests. In his well-researched tome Scarred Minds, Prof Daya Somasundaram of Sri Lanka says that for people to be pushed into war, to sacrifice their material, physical, psychological, social and spiritual well-being for a cause determined by others, basic psychological processes have to be activated and manipulated towards this end. This is not to deny the realities of injustices and inequalities, the violence of social oppression and political repression or economic deprivation. But how are these problems deemed unsolvable without war. Instead of addressing these fundamental problems realistically and practically, people’s attention is distracted from the root causes to finding scapegoats and war (be it a proxy war or plain and simple terrorism) is made to appear as the only inevitable and final solution. The professor further adds that popular frustrations and discontent are harnessed towards this end by appealing to primitive loyalties and patriotic duty and by arousing deep passions. If one visits different
parts of India one would find the locals airing their grievances against
New Delhi. They look upon their state leaders as mere lackeys of the
"rulers in Delhi". Be it the North-East or the J&K, they
all feel let down by the Centre. There is an urgent need to remove these
perceptions — real or imaginary — and make all citizens feel equal
in our pluralistic polity. Thus, psychologically the various communities
should be enabled to be in tune with common national aspirations
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
