WRITING ON THE WALL: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF RECENT TRENDS AND PATTERNS IN JIHADI TERRORISM

By Patrick BAHZAD

 

 
IRA graffiti in Northern Ireland

 

With the frequency in "lone gunmen" attacks – or attempted and foiled attacks – increasing ever more since the start of this year, it may be time to highlight certain patterns that have become apparent and represent potentially crucial challenges for societies in Western Europe. The paradigm shift regarding both qualitative and quantitative aspects of Islamic terrorism is now clearer than ever before to law enforcement and officials, but the implications of this shift still needs to be emphasized, as there are possibly tough choices ahead of us.

Back in the 1990s, when Western Europe and France in particular were first targeted by groups whose members would later be sucked into the maelstrom of global Jihad, it was fairly easier for law enforcement to identify potential threats. Admittedly, the number of individuals on watch lists was much smaller, leaving counter-terrorism with more resources to monitor activities. But Islamic radicals were still operating genuine cells, and their leaders or logistics experts were often foreigners having been allowed into the country as political refugees. They did not blend into civil society and stuck to their own. Once infiltrated, which happened usually quite quickly, it was only a matter of time before these groups were taken apart by law enforcement, generally before even staging an attack.

Changing patterns and profiles

Those days are gone. Jihad and Islamic terrorism in the West has become an entrepreneurial activity for a underclass holding a grudge. Basically, people are now being groomed or grooming themselves into ticking time-bombs, waiting for a reason to go into self-destruct mode. The crux is, there is no single pattern that fits this new type of terrorism. Too many variables have blurred the line for a simple grid to allow us singling out dangerous individuals from the general population.

Some people cry "racial discrimination" and "ethnic profiling" when they hear targeted surveillance and increased monitoring of certain groups, facilities or web sites. The truth though is that about 30 % of the individuals on the continent's terror watch lists have a fully European (Caucasian) and often domestic background. Another 30 % is made up of European nationals having an immigration background that has nothing to do with the Middle-East or North-Africa. These are mostly second generation immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa, but also from the Caribbean or South America, who have been won over by radical Islam through years of indoctrination in desolate suburbs that are now strongholds of Salafi beliefs, or during a prison stay in which they chose to join the most powerful "brotherhood" in European jails, the Islamic radicals. Only 40 % approximately of security risks – depending on the country – have a Middle-Eastern, North African or Asian background.  

Given this breakdown of potential candidates for "Jihad" or "Hijra", it seems difficult to argue that a more targeted approach to surveillance would be tantamount to "racial profiling". Individuals of interest may have a Caucasian, African or Arabic/Asian background. That is about ¾ of the world population as far as skin colour is concerned. They may be men or women, which is 100 % of the world population. They will also probably be aged 18 to 35, even though terrorists higher up the food chain are older, and there have been isolated cases of so-called "lone wolf" attacks by individuals way over 50.  Again that is about ¾ at least of the world population.

The truth is – sadly for law enforcement – there is no simple profile for singling out dangerous individuals. This is a development that has not made it into the general public's awareness, but anybody sitting on a train and worrying about that suspicious looking Middle-Eastern guy might as well have a good look at the pretty blonde two rows behind him or the neat looking Italian guy in his suit and tie … This simple fact is not a message intended at spreading fear and paranoia. Quite the opposite, when the terrorist could be anybody, it might as well be nobody and there's no reason to single out members of an ethnic or religious group, based on some vague assumptions.

Better awareness

What may be called for, if we are to face more and more of these attacks in the months and years to come, is a better awareness among average citizens, not checking for people's faces and appearance, but paying attention to behaviour and actions. Do we have to brace ourselves for an Israeli type of normality ? It may be too early to tell, but the writing is on the wall, there's no doubt about that. Under no circumstances however should we let our way of life be dictated by those who are out to disrupt and destroy it. There's a price to pay for freedom and democracy, and that price is not just exerted on those willing to serve and defend those values.

Freedom and democracy also means we can't let the terrorists drive a wedge in between "us", as the Western and Christian centre of gravity of our societies, and more recently arrived fellow compatriots of Muslim faith. That is exactly what groups such as Al Qaeda in particular want to achieve. Convince the Muslim population in the West they will never be fully accepted, they will remain second-class citizens indefinitely, they will always have to struggle against bias and prejudice, and should thus embrace the only culture and religion that is truly theirs: Islam, in a Salafi/Wahhabi version that is totally alien to large numbers of Muslim Europeans.

As for the "Islamic State", despite all its claims calling for the establishment of a worldwide Caliphate, it seems content for now to unleash waves of "lone gunmen" who have been recruited mostly through Internet crowdsourcing. The messages arguing for continuous attacks against any type of target in the West are being repeated over and over on ISIS social media, but the fact of the matter is, ISIS has much less traction getting its ideological and religious message across than the Salafi charities and fundamentalist Islamic NGOs, whose work is based on the assumption of a gradual and long term shift within Western society.

Refusing the Terrorists' terms

Objectively, there is a division of labour between the various Jihadi franchises and radical Islamic groups, but the left hand does not necessarily know what the right hand does ... What this could mean in the long run, is difficult to assess. Possibly, Al Qaeda – reinventing itself for yet another time – will survive the "Caliphate" and carry on the fight. Possibly, both groups will merge at some point into a new hybrid of Jihadi revivalism. Possibly also, the "Islamic State" will absorb whatever is left of Al Qaeda at a certain point, thus bolstering its credentials with fundamentalist and well respected clerics endorsing its message.

Be that as it may, fracturing Western societies and alienating the largest possible part of its Muslim minorities will still feature high on their global agenda of conquest, whether through the means of conversion and proselytism or through sheer force and coercion. This aspect of the fight against radical Islam must not be forgotten: even though recent attacks may have been directed at military recruitment centres, trains, newspapers or Jewish supermarkets, the underlying process at work is that of "revolutionary warfare" 2.0, mixing an Islamic revivalist insurgency, 1970s style left-wing terrorism and massive online recruitment propaganda.

The aim is not just to hit the State, strike fear into the minds of ordinary citizens but – in the long run – instigate a climate of violence and counter-violence, with law enforcement engaging in an ever increasing cycle of measures that will be presented by the terrorists as unfair reprisals against ordinary Muslims in the West. At the heart of any revolutionary war is the struggle for the people, not the territory, and in this case it is a struggle for the hearts and minds of Muslims in Europe and North America.

What groups such as ISIS and Al Qaeda are aiming for, is to present Muslim communities with a reversal of the dilemma that was expressed so eloquently by George W. Bush: "you're either with us or with the terrorists". Well, that is exactly where these people want us to go, because they know perfectly well that once they will have divided those Muslim communities from within, and driven a wedge between them and the rest of the population, they will have a field day quelling internal dissent, standing up to the State, making more and more demands and escalating the political fight into a military one, if their demands aren't met.

Bracing ourselves for a long term struggle

Realistically, they have no chance of succeeding, but the nuisance they could become and the level of violence that could be induced is immense. At this point in time, things may look more like a religious version of the left-wing terrorism of the 1970s. Small groups of extremist and their ideologues calling onto their followers to attack States that have been discriminating their people. Yesterday, it was "fascist" States oppressing the workers. Today it is the "Crusaders and Jews" waging a war against the true followers of Muhammad.

No doubt, there is a fraction of our youth that will be receptive to this message. And their background, as is already apparent, will not be rooted in a fundamentalist Islamic up-bringing only. Sometimes, it will be young people from liberal, middle-class families, who will fall for this message, as the enablers and recruiters in the Middle-East are perfectly aware of the romantic appeal there is in the West for rebellion and revolution against injustice and oppression.

There are enough of these disoriented, misguided and lost young people who might buy into a grand cause, worth fighting and killing for, all in the name of a greater good. Again, this should raise our awareness as to the scale of the issue and help us avoid any indiscriminate focus on whole communities. It is specific individuals, whatever their background is, that need to be monitored, based on the more and more complex profiles and patterns that law enforcement manage to establish in order to read these people. If we miss out on this paradigm shift and on the requirements this represents for society as a whole, we may find ourselves in a position where the still marginal – but worrying – attacks of today will give way to a totally different dimension of conflict.

Al Qaeda theorists have often used the concept of the "long war". They saw their struggle not as a short-term, high-intensity conflict at the end of which they might emerge as the winning side, but as a slow process of highs and lows which would inevitably lead to victory. It was left unsaid whether that victory would materialize in 10, 50 or 100 years. The timeline was secondary, it was the outcome that mattered. Although ISIS has not been very vocal about its long term strategy lately, probably because they already have a State to run and have more than enough on their plate, earlier strategic papers of the organisation also clearly show the commitment and willingness to a long term goal, the worldwide Caliphate.

Northern Ireland "Troubles" as a possible model for future conflict

This concept of the "long war" is no Al Qaeda prerogative. In fact, it wasn't even invented by the Jihadis, but was forged by military strategists of the Provisional IRA in the mid-1970s, as an alternative for their inability to reach a decisive victory against a superior military. The idea was to wage a war of attrition against the British State, causing as many deaths as possible in order to create a demand for concessions among the British people, organise bombing campaigns targeting economic and financial infrastructures in the United-Kingdom, foster a climate of insurgency in areas with strong support for the IRA, thus making these places ungovernable and turning them into "liberated" areas, gain large support for the cause through national and international propaganda, and bolster the image of the IRA fighters by punishing criminals, collaborators and informers.

This strategy was later replaced by the concept of "the armalite and the ballot-box" in which the military wing of the Irish Republican movement (i.e. the Provisional IRA) and its political wing (the "Sinn Fein" party) would work basically as two sides of the same coin, keeping on the military pressure and maintaining a certain degree of violence, while at the same time offering to negotiate a political settlement. One could argue however that both strategies were actually complementary, or that the latter could only have been implemented as a logical follow-up to the former's failure.

The analogy between the IRA's tactics and the agenda of the Jihadis doesn't stop with their commitment to fighting a "long war". There is enough analytical evidence now to suggest that what radical Islam has morphed into, at least in the West, is a multi-dimensional nexus combining elements of the 1970s leftwing and ideologically based terror groups with the kind of ethnic/nationalist narrative best embodied by the Provisional IRA or, to a lesser degree, the Basque separatists from ETA.

Now of course, there is no certainty that these similarities will be reflected in events on the ground. History doesn't repeat itself, but similar causes have a tendency to produce similar effects, and this should be a warning to all of us. What the "Troubles" meant for Northern Ireland is no secret: 30 years of civil war, plenty of anti-terrorism laws, the emergence of a police and surveillance State, a structural under-development and high poverty level … and casualties in excess of 50 000 for a population roughly equal to that of Maine.

Obviously, we're not there yet and there is still plenty to do to avert such a catastrophic scenario. Decision making is important however – "governing is anticipating", as they say in French. And hitting the panic button - going into overdrive - could be as irresponsible as carrying on as if nothing had happened. Either way, if we get it wrong, we'll be one step closer to the prospect of a terrorism campaign and a level of violence such as it was embodied by the Provisional IRA … on a continental European scale.

Limits and significance of the worst case scenario 

Of course, there are a number of limits to the analogy with the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland. On the surface, these differences seem striking. Their relevance though is largely influenced by our perception of current events and threats. When talking about Islamic terrorism in the West, or about the expansion of radical Islamic views (such as Salafism or Wahhabism), the general consensus is that this is a phenomenon "imported" into the West by foreign agents, i.e. the terrorists and their ideologues.

But again, the figures mentioned above regarding the evolving profiles of suspected Islamic radicals prove this perception wrong. Today, the West (and in particular Western Europe) is exporting homemade Jihadis ! They flock to the Middle-East to build the "Islamic State" that has been promised by the self-declared new Caliphe or they turn into domestic terrorists, more commonly designated as "lone gunmen" seemingly acting with no outside help, and strike their own State, kill their own compatriots.

The perception of the Islamic threat as being alien to our countries is dangerous. Certainly, the enablers, recruiters and ideologues are based thousand of miles away, but the dispensable footsoldiers in this clandestine war are Westerners. Born and raised in the West. Long term legal residents. Sons - and daughters - to ordinary, working-class or middle-class families. That is the most basic element in the equation we have to solve.

All too often, we still see Islamic terorism as a mirror effect of Western intervention in regions where we shouldn't be. But this relation between foreign adventures of Western powers and the "blowback" effect this may have through terrorist attacks is mostly a feature of the late 1990s and early 2000s. It may still be valid to a certain degree, but it is not indicative of what the future holds for us. Remaining prisoner of that vision is like fighting yesterday's war all over again, instead of preparing for tomorrow's.

 

Comments

[turcopolier]

Bryn P

I don't know about funding by SA of mosques in the US. In re surveillance I know you have CC cameras everywhere. We don't have that yet but it is coming I am sure, but I don't think Special Branch and the Security Service are as aggressive and pervasive in penetration of possible subversive groups as are the FBI and some local police forces like the NYPD. pl

[Babak Makkinejad]

Reminds me of this fellow in a wedding reception - a Euro-American - who mentioned how his daughter bailed out of a graduate program because the male students were not Euro-Americans.

It was funny because he said to me: "..no offense..."

[Patrick Bahzad]

Agree with PL,

Especially with reference to NYPD, which has done an outstanding job in terms of intel gathering, prevention of potential threats and analysis of shapes and patterns in radical Islamism, worldwide. These guys know what they're doing.

I suppose the FBI's activities are focused on the larger picture in some respects, even though we've all heard about those famous "spy planes" circling over Dearborn. Why this caused such a stirr is a mystery to me.

[Patrick Bahzad]

Interesting story ... although, what is a Euro-American ?

[Babak Makkinejad]

Euro-American is an American from European stock.

[Patrick Bahzad]

is that PC slang ? "Euro-American" as in "African-American" ?
And if so, what was the guy implying regarding the graduate programme ? Just wondering because I don't even get his point

[rjj]

It started out as snark at hyphenated Americans. Subtype Albo-Americans whose ancestors spoke Albonics, the patois of Perfidious Albion.

[Babak Makkinejad]

The daughter was attending a graduate program populated by men from the Middle East, India, Korea, China.

She could not possibly bring herself to marry such men as those; they were from inferior races/cultures.

Therefore she left that graduate program and moved elsewhere to meet eligible "White" young men.

I prefer to use the word "Euro-American" in lieu of "White"; with its racist and racialist connotations.

My sense of it has been that "White" in US was applied initially largely to Anglo-Saxons and others immigrants from Northern Europe (including France) but not to the Southern Europeans.

When Enrico Fermi went to see the US Secretary of the Navy, the sergeant walked into the Secretary's office and stated: "There is a dago here to see you."

Likewise for Jews and Spaniards.

I met people whose parents asked them not to give them "darkie" children by marrying an Armenian.

[Even though I am not Armenian, I have known many in my life, and I was personally offended by such remarks; who the Hell were these people? Some two-bit peasant who now lays claim to some sort of racial superiority to one of the most ancient and cultivated people in the world?]

Later, it seems to me, the "White" appellation was enlarged in the United States to include Jews and Italians and Spaniards and others - I suppose it was based on some sort of the enlargement of what constituted a "White" religion in the minds of Euro-Americans.

I met Jews in US who had a much darker complexion and kinkier hair than very many Iranians - yet they were considered "White" in the United States (perhaps not so in UK).

More than anything else, it is amusing.

I am Beige - in the parlance of the United States racial discourse.

[Patrick Bahzad]

Beige ? You kidding ??

I wonder what I would resent more, the homosexual or the racial implication ...

According to that chromatic code, Anglo-Americans should be termed "Pink" ;-)

[Patrick Bahzad]

oh thx for the semantics lesson ! Wasn't aware of that :-)

[David Habakkuk]

Babak Makkinejad,

I don't know. What I think likely is that persistent discreet efforts were made to attempt to make Americans realise that the Ulster situation was actually quite complex.

You might be interested in a piece by Peter Oborne, which touches on this, and also on British policy towards Iran.

(See http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week/diary/8895981/diary-608/ .)

It is also of interest, in relation to the complexities of British identity. The historian Sir Lewis Namier, to whom he refers, and who had an immense influence on the writing of history here, was born Lukwik Niemiowski in what was then Congress Poland, from a family of secular-minded Jewish gentry.

He was a fervent Zionist, and a close friend and associate of Chaim Weizmann. But when Namier converted to Anglicanism to marry his second wife, Weizmann severed relations.

[David Habakkuk]

Patrick Bahzad,

In relation to Britain, a great deal of the explanation is that very many people actually swallowed that 'end of history' crap.

Put another way, people here, as in the U.S. drew all the wrong conclusions from the retreat and collapse of the Soviet Union.

[annamaria]

The Jihady propaganda does not have a chance to compete next to Mr. Michael Ledeen and his pro-war activities and heavy influence on the US policies in the Middle East. This man has been quite important for making decisions that led to the unimaginable looting of the US treasury on the phony wars in the Middle East and for endangering the U.S. interests and demolishing the U.S. reputation. Take a note that Mr. Ledeen is a committed Zionist. His is also an expert in fascism both as a scholar and a collaborator with Italian neo-Nazis.
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/ledeen_michael

[Babak Makkinejad]

In reference to all those young people tanning themselves on campus - one sometime heard the question: "Have you noticed the increased incidence of red lobster around?".

[David Habakkuk]

different clue,

Uri Avnery is Helmut Osterman, a 'yekke' – the derogatory Israeli term for German Jews.

A tension between tribal and more general loyalties runs through many of us. Part of the tragedy of German Jews lay quite precisely in the fact that the assimilationist urge was so strong. When the 'goyim' in Germany retreated into a savage tribalism, it was immensely difficult for Jews who had identified with that country, its language, and its culture, to cope.

In the case of Osterman/Avnery, the response was a kind of romantic Zionism. As is very evident in his recent writings – see for example the essay he published last month entitled 'Sheldon's Stooges: Netanyahu and the King of Vegas' – the retreat of Israelis, and also so many American Jews, into tribalism provokes in him something between despair and a kind of gallows humour. An excerpt:

'Far from creating a New Jew as Zionism promised, the Old Jew dominates Israel. The Old Jew believes that the entire world is anti-Semitic, and any new evidence fills him with satisfaction. You see? The Goyim haven't changed at all.'

And then, have a look at the exchanges between Ari Shavit, at heart a ghetto Jew, and Avraham Burg, another 'yekke', back in 2007.

(See http://peacepalestine.blogspot.co.uk/2007/06/complete-abraham-burg-
interview-leaving.html .)

Or indeed, the exchanges between Shavit and Amos Elon, another 'yekke', back in 2004.

(See http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/12/27/an-interview-with-amos-elon/ .)

For Jews who do not think that the appropriate response to Hitler is to retreat back into the ghetto, Israel has been becoming a dead end. And this is not simply a matter of ethnic origin – it is not difficult to find Polish Jewish refugees in Britain and the descendants of such refugees who find the directions that Zionism has taken utterly abhorrent.

A tragedy is that the ghetto mentality of Israelis appears to have had a suffocating effect on Jewish life in the United States.

[Bryn P]

With regard to Northern Ireland it is my undersanding that towards the end the IRA were thoroughly infiltrated by the security forces. The Troubles had gone on long enough for this to have happened and no doubt it would have been far easier to do so given the similarities of race and culture between the combatants. This is not to claim that the war was won. It was unwinnable by either side. Certainly from the UK authorities' point of view their options were greatly limited by potential condemnation by the US. The war had reached a stalemate and the final agreement was as good as it was going to get.

As has been mentioned earlier financial support from the Irish in the States went a long way to prolong the struggle. It always surprises me that these supporters were not just Irish-Catholics, but in many instances Irish-Protestants. One would have expected the latter to be on the other side.

[Amir]

I know of lots of mosques in Belgium, that were funded by SA. It sounds simplistic but a cheap way to find who is influencing and probably financing the "place of worship", is to request a copy of the publications that they provide. No need for invasive police tactics here.
The situation in Belgium was very worrisome prior the decision of the state to fund the mosques themselves and recognize Islam as a religion. The latter curtailed some but not all the SA influence: http://www.cie.ugent.be/RUG/kanmaz3.htm