Islamic terrorism and self-determination
The roots of Northern Irish, Basque, Chechen, Algerian, Iraqi or Palestinian terrorism on claims for self-determination are obvious ones which the experience in Northern Ireland offers much hope can be resolved with political negotiations that provide real self-governance and self-determination to the peoples terrorist groups in these regions claim to represent.
The claims of other Islamist groups like Al-Queda are more problematic and pose a much more difficult challenge for those seeking political solutions to the death and destruction that they impose.
Today, I happened upon this article by Azzam Tamimi in the January 7, 2005 Guardian - while reading up on yesterday's bombings in Algeria - that may indicate that democratic self-governance might help abate, or at least cut off the political oxygen, for Al Queda type terrorism, as well, which exploits the anger that many Arabs feel without the ability to choose their own political destinies and which blame Western democracies for their plight (despite much of the despotism being homegrown).
The right to rule ourselves
One of the serious lessons from the Belfast Agreement negotiations is that the right to self-rule is often a serious motivation for political support for terrorism in many areas of the world. Clearly the experiences of Western democracies with on-going terrorist movements - right-wing fundamentalist Christian pro-life and anti-government violence (i.e. the Oklahoma City bombings, the murder of abortion doctors and bombings of abortion clinics) and left-wing terrorism (i.e. environmentalist tree-spiking in the 1990's and left-wing terrorism from groups like the Weathermen, the Simbanese Liberation Army, and the like in the 1960's) - demonstrates that opportunties for political engagement, representation and participation do not end all risks of terrorism.
But our experience in both liberal democracies and in countries where terrorism is strong do indicate a less pronounced risk, long-term, in countries where self-governance is present. Short term, terrorists do seem to take advantage of post-authoritarian governing arrangements, as Alberto Abadie argues in his work on poverty, political freedom and terrorism.
Poverty, Political Freedom and the Roots of Terrorism
But political freedom, long term, argues Abadie, is the strongest predictor of less terrorism. And the less violent political reality in liberal democracies relative to more illiberal parts of the world seems to bear out his analysis.
All of of this, I knew, which is why I have always had much confidence that a peace agreement could significantly reduce terrorism in Palestine and Israel, given a shared commitment to a peace and security agreement (terrorists do need to be tracked down and imprisoned or killed; it can't happen on it's own).
But Tammimi's piece gives me reason to believe that the self-governance/self-determination claims of Arabs and Muslims living in more authoritarian, less democratic, more illiberal countries might be a much more important factor in reducing and combatting terrorism from the likes of groups like Al Queda, whose terrorism springs from less obvious self-determination claims. The raison de entre, of groups like Al Queda, presumably, is to impose Islamic theocratic arrangements on the world, after all, rather than liberate the Arab and Muslim world.
But the really confused reason and language of Tamimi's piece, ironically, gives me reason to think that, perhaps, the irrational claims of Islamist terrorist groups, or at least the political oxygen that gives them material and political support for their effort, might be more related to claims on democratic self-governance by Arabs and Muslims than I have recognized in the past.
It's an interesting read, even if it makes very little reasoned sense. In fact, it is its irrationality which offers the most for those seeking insight into how to neutralize and combat the kind of terrorism that groups like Al Queda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and many similar groups have to offer.
