Thinking about terrorism

Suddenly America’s world has changed. And, as rescuers search the rubble for survivors and leaders scramble to heal the national trauma, restore order in the national economy and plan retaliation (how and against whom?), the rest of us must take time out from shock and grieving to do some serious pondering.

Terrorist attacks have long been known as effective techniques by which dissident groups can disrupt established governments. Organized anarchists rattled the United States government in the 1920s. Algerian nationalists in the early 1960s used random parcel bombs left on buses and markets to force France to negotiate independence. Young American radicals opposing the Vietnam War and authority in general spread chaos later in the 1960s. More recently, a few of the opponents of globalization have messed up meetings of the International Monetary Fund.

Now makeshift amateurism has given away to big time expertise and organization. It wasn’t that what they did was so sophisticated – sneaking knives on board and crashing the planes – but it was undeniably well thought out and executed, suggesting a level of coordination that turns the focus on only a few groups.

One of those, of course is Al-Qaeda under Osama bin Laden. According to Jane’s military reports, Al-Qaeda “is a conglomerate of groups spread throughout the world operating as a network. It has a global reach, with a presence in Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Turkey, Jordan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Syria, Xinjiang in China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Myanmar, Indonesia, Mindanao in the Philippines, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, Tunisia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya, Dagestan, Kashmir, Sudan, Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania, Azerbaijan, Eritrea, Uganda, Ethiopia, and in the West Bank and Gaza.”

But the reach doesn’t stop there. When President Bush says any nation seen to

be harboring the terrorists will also be targets of reprisal, it is fair to wonder if that includes places where the terrorists might keep the funding for their networks, say, Switzerland.

And even when the United States finally confirms which terrorist group is responsible the question of why it occurred, why terrorists in dozens of countries, according to one expert, want to harm Americans, remains. Knowing what grievances give rise to fanaticism is important because the aim of any retaliation is not only to punish but to deter. Along with the punishment, helping haven nations of terrorists become strong democratically and economically may be the strongest deterrence of all.

Many other questions in the next few weeks must be answered at home before the United States looks abroad. Still, knowing that a nearly unlimited supply of zealots has now witnessed what is possible, long-term deterrence seems more desirable than ever.