It appears that it is easier to catch the culprits after a terrorist attack than to really understand the ‘root cause’ of the trouble and then annihilate it. At least that would appear to be the case after the July 7 suicide bomb attacks in London.

The police say they have established the identity of the suicide bombers—all British citizens of Pakistani origin. But they are finding it difficult to unmask the ‘mastermind’ behind the attacks. Many in Britain were wondering why young people from ‘respectable’ middle class families should be lured by extremists. Accounts in the British media have also stressed that the families of the perpetrators were ‘shocked’ and ‘shattered’ when they were told that their wards were responsible for the reprehensible attacks in London that Black Thursday morning.

It is natural to be ‘shocked’ and ‘shattered’ when a member of your family or someone very close to you is accused of being responsible for a crime as despicable as terrorism. The disclosure about the identity of the London suicide bombers has also shocked the British Muslims, both because it earns a bad name for the community unjustifiably and the likelihood of a backlash. Many British Muslim community leaders expressed disbelief that their youth could take to the path of terrorism when their acts did nothing but maligned the name of their religion.

British Muslim community leaders made a point that there is a sense of alienation or deprivation among many Muslim youth in the UK because of lack of education and job opportunities which generate anger and frustration. This in turn leads to hate towards others and from hate it is only a short step to embracing extremism or terrorism. Many Muslims in the world suffer from what is called the ‘victim culture’. They think Muslims wherever in minority are singled out for denial of ‘rights’ and it also contributes to the generation of hate.

However, many Muslim leaders in different countries do not accept that the explanation for the fast rise of extremism or terrorism among the youth is entirely attributable to ‘hate’. These leaders lay a greater stress of what they perceive as ‘injustice’ to the Muslim communities wherever they live, and not just Palestine.

In some former East European countries the Muslims were killed in large numbers by despots and their armed adventurers but the killers remain at large. Russia uses its might to control armed separatists in its southern territories. The Pakistanis speak of ‘suppression’ of Kashmiris—as though they are the most liberal regime on earth. Then, there are ‘historical wrongs’ of the past. The solution, for some, therefore, is taking to arms—not dialogue.

It will be hard to deny that the Muslims have been wronged in the past. But then there are many other communities in the world which feel they were equally maltreated at the hands of Muslims in the past. It does not appear that Muslim countries have a better record in treating their minorities than most other countries. In a country like Saudi Arabia which does not allow cremation, a non-Muslim stands to be punished for keeping even a photograph of his deity inside the house. In theocratic states, religious minorities are constitutionally relegated to the position of second class citizens. Such things would certainly not endear the hosts to some guest communities but does that give rise to terrorism among them?

This business of unfolding the long list of ‘grievances’ in explaining the ‘root cause’ of terrorism is patently wrong, as is the myth that poverty and backwardness breed terrorists. In fact, one of the worries in the world is that terrorists are awash with money. Defending the acts of terrorism on grounds of ‘grievances’ amounts to justifying them and encouraging them to grow.

It will be naïve to think that when terrorism has grown into a global phenomenon—and also a rich proposition—it will disappear the moment the so-called ‘grievances’ of one community have been removed. It will be a dim-witted Indian who will believe, for instance, that the ‘final solution’ of the Kashmir problem would herald eternal peace in the region.

The proponents of the ‘victim culture’ or ‘grievances’ theory overlook, deliberately or otherwise, the simple fact that addressing those problems becomes difficult as long as terrorism thrives as that would amount to bowing before the merchants of death and destruction. Conceding victory to terrorists cannot be a comfortable thought under any circumstances.

The supporters of terrorism in Kashmir and Palestine, for instance, often remind us that whatever little ‘concessions’ they have got is all due to their terror tactics. They say words to the effect: Who will listen to us if we do not use the gun?

The ordinary Muslims have every right to feel indignant whenever the word ‘Islamist’ or ‘Muslim’ is added to extremists or terrorists because it creates the false impression about an entire community. Muslim community in some countries must also ask their leaders why they refuse to take notice of religious places that are openly used for recruiting jehadis and why many clerics feel obliged to include inflammatory references to the ‘infidels’ in their sermons. They denounce all other cultures and spread an erroneous feeling that only an aggressive Islam can stave off ‘danger’ from other cultures.

It is generally not taken into account that terrorist outfits not only aim to eliminate their ‘enemies’ but also want to see the whole world come under the flag of one religion. This is the only way they see to meet their ‘grievances’. And they believe that a one-religion world would become a better place to live. If tolerance and co-existence are to be banished the six billion people of the world can only expect more troublesome days.

It has been four years since the US launched a ‘war’ on terror but terrorism has only increased since then because this war is not being fought with sincerity. The most important ally of the US in this war allows terrorists to be trained and bred on its grounds. Almost all the major terrorist attacks in the world have some Pakistani angle to it.

But the US does not feel the need to press Islamabad hard for closing down its entire terror apparatus. It may be noted that one of the three British suicide bombers, who had previously shown no interest in pursuing religion, had reportedly turned ‘deeply religious’ after a stay in one of the Pakistani seminaries. The youth was obviously heavily indoctrinated and motivated at this seminary to hate the very country where he was born and brought up--enough to blow himself up and kill many innocents.


Courtesy : Syndicate Features

Printer-Friendly Version