issuesbeyondborders

Terrorism has become quite ubiquitous that one can’t help but notice that it has also become dubious. Terror has undergone a few paradigm shifts through the decades. What hasn’t changed is the fact that it still is, as it has always been, a showcase of grand spectacle. With terrorism, the medium is necessarily the message. It isn’t terrorism if media hasn’t hyped it yet. Media coverage is precisely what terrorism needs. There are various things that terrorists want but media mileage is exactly what they need because they live (and die) for image and recall. Terrorism is a complete marketing package unto itself.

To this day, there is no internationally agreed definition of the word terrorism. This is mostly because there hasn’t been a motive trend that emerges apparent from the terror groups that history has produced. There have been patterns in behavior and attitude, but making a terrorist stereotype is an exercise in futility since terrorists come in all forms and style. Most importantly, they have existed for various motives. The Irish Republican Army (IRA) and all its subsequent remnants may have existed for a reason other than that of the Deccan Mujahideen that just recently blasted the famous landmarks of Mumbai. No one can truly ascertain what the real motives of terrorists are. They may have a common purpose, to sow terror for the sake of coercion while having total disregard for the safety of civilians, but objective does not necessarily mean motive.

The region of motive is what makes terrorism a dubious thing. Motive is what renders it even more controversial as it makes the definition completely relative. When the US and the UK invaded Iraq, what the Iraqi civilians suffered in the hands of the invading Western forces was certainly terroristic, no matter how one looks at it. The terror elements of panic, fear, coercion, and disregard for the welfare and safety of civilians were all present in the Iraq war. Can we, therefore, surmise that the joint US-UK surges and their Black Ops were terror groups in Iraq? Fallujah, Sadr City, Basra, and Baghdad were certainly fields of terror. The incendiary weapon called white phosphorous used in the conflagrations to flatten some parts of the country was certainly a terroristic ammunition, quite newfangled and not belonging to the usual war arsenal. By this definition, the US and UK forces were terrorists garbed in official soldier’s uniform. Much of the world did not see this angle of state-sponsored terrorism because the term ‘terrorist’ is a pejorative one.

The haziest division that cracks open the word terrorist lies in the enigma of motive. Are those that sow terror simply become terrorists or freedom fighters? When the B-29 bomber plane Enola Gay dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, it surely was terrorism on a grand scale. While the US can claim that it was a fight for freedom and end to World War II, it was nothing short of a massive terror attack on those who perished as well as those who continued to suffer in life. Likewise, the elements of panic, fear, coercion, and complete disregard for civilians’ lives were all present. Terrorism is also defined as psychological warfare, and the bombings of Japan were certainly such.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia–People’s Army (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia–Ejército del Pueblo) also known as FARC or FARC-EP, an erstwhile Marxist-Leninist revolutionary guerilla organization has conveniently, and quite expectedly, turned into a terror group mostly to employ terroristic jaunts to facilitate the highly lucrative cocaine trade in South America. The Taliban, said to be a very active cell of the al-Qaeda, uses terrorism to manage the multi-billion dollar heroin trade in Afghanistan. The Somali radical Islamists use terror to take over the failed state of Somalia and neatly manage the very lucrative pirate business in the Gulf of Aden. The Basque terror group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA), the Palestinian Sunni paramilitary known as Hamas, the Hezbollah of Lebanon, and the Sri Lankan Liberation Tigers Tamil Eelam (LTTE) are said to be sowing terror for ideological, racist, territorial, and political motives. Radical Islamists always employ terroristic tactics for their political agenda under the pleasant disguise of adhering to the tenets of Islam.

No one knows exactly why terrorists do the thing they do. However, one thing is certain. Terrorists want to be known sensationally for what they do.

The world needs stereotypes to comprehend otherwise incomprehensible events. That is why it is the world itself that makes terror a booming business. Terror is a totally planned and syndicated effort that neatly markets its offerings of panic and fear. The world is all too willing to always be its target market. Media, likewise, is all too willing to advertise it via its coverage.

What media captures as terroristic acts, however, largely depends on the stereotype of terrorism. No one can expect media to label state-sponsored terrorism as terroristic act. On the contrary, media will even further hype this as fight for freedom. The thousands of deaths incurred during Mugabe’s ‘fight for freedom’ have never been labeled as terror attacks by media and the rest of the world that hailed Mugabe as a ‘freedom fighter.’

In reality, terrorists are nothing but common thieves, plunderers, drug traders, landgrabbers, invaders, or some other criminal elements. Some may have even been psychotic enough as to blow themselves up. These criminals only become elevated to the stature of terrorist because of media saturation and audience obsession. Osama bin Laden must still be laughing all the way to the bank.

The Deccan Mujahideen does not even seem to have any motive save for becoming celebrities before they die. Did they even exist for a cause prior to the Mumbai attacks?

This can only mean one thing. The business of terror must, indeed, be booming.

Image 1
Image 2
Image 3
Image 4