This article is in reference to “Correspondent Inference Theory” by Bruce Schneier.
I have previously written about terrorism and the true goals & motivations of terrorists (see my article, “What the Terrorists Want“). This latest article on the subject from Bruce takes the discussion a very important and valuable step further. I recommend you read that article.
In my past writings on the subject of terrorism, I’ve always stressed how terrorist attacks are not about the target of the particular attack, but are instead about inducing terror, typically in a large population. The point being that we need to not focus on the tactics used and we need to refuse to be terrorized.
Bruce’s new article talks about the reasons why the psychological impact of terrorist activities (especially attacks on innocents) lead us to infer and then associate the tactical target with the motivation and reason for the attack. We think, “Terrorists attack in order to kill as many of us as they can or disrupt as many of our lives as they can.” This isn’t necessarily incorrect, as the tactical plan a terrorist chooses to employ really is about just such goals, but those goals are also not the true motivator. The point of a terrorist attack isn’t to disrupt our lives or even as simple as inducing terror in the population; almost all terrorists actually have other, larger goals in mind.
We defeat terrorism by refusing to be terrorized, but we do not defeat the terrorists in that way. This is because they will still have their primary goals, and they will not have gotten any closer to them whether or not we refuse to be terrorized. Here are six of Bin Laden and al Qaeda’s goals (from former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer’s book “Imperial Hubris“):
- End U.S. support of Israel
- Force American troops out of the Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia
- End the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan and (subsequently) Iraq
- End U.S. support of other countries’ anti-Muslim policies
- End U.S. pressure on Arab oil companies to keep prices low
- End U.S. support for “illegitimate” (i.e. moderate) Arab governments, like Pakistan
Terrorism is about terrorizing people. That terror is meant to be a political lever to induce changes desired by the terrorist(s). But terrorism just doesn’t work. In his article “Why Terrorism Does Not Work, published in International Security, Max Abrams analized terrorist attacks and concluded that they are successful at achieving the goals of the terrorists only 7% of the time. Abrams seems to have been rather generous in his measurement of success and failure, giving the benefit of the doubt to the terrorists, so in reality, the number might be closer to 3%.
To defeat terrorism is a very hard problem. It would be much easier if the terrorists realized that terrorism doesn’t work. The vast majority of the time, it does not bring them closer to their true goals. The best thing each of us can do is refuse to be terrorized and to not overreact.