|
Dr. Walid Phares
Europe Must Realize Jihadism
Is an Ideology Not Only a Theology
August 20, 2008
Jihadi terrorism is one of the largest threats
Europe and the international community are facing in
this era. Hence studying Jihadi terrorism beyond the
formation and the dismantling of cells is highly
relevant to Europeans because of the impact of its
actions on security, politics, and economy.
Jihadism is putting significant pressure on European foreign policy
regarding where and when Europe can intervene in an international crisis
such as those in Afghanistan, Lebanon and Darfur. It is also putting
pressure on the European economy through the choices made in foreign
policies. But the inability to explain these pressures is a major reason
behind the strategic failure in containing and reversing the threat
which continues to expand and grow across the continent.
As some members of the European Parliament have declared, the issue is
about "identification" of that threat. We need to "ID" it so that we can
address it properly. Western democracies have had a failure in
perception of the threat; for the countries that have been fighting this
movement are still debating it seven years after 9/11 and several years
after Madrid and London attacks. World War II took five years to win,
and, in this confrontation, the identification of the menace is still
not completed properly after seven years. Hence, we will offer a few
suggestions of strategic guidelines to address this issue.
First: The Identification Problem
1. Self Identification: The Jihadists talk about themselves, their
agenda and their views. Let's not ignore this literature, but let's
analyze it and learn from it. These movements certainly use theology in
their discourse, but they have developed an ideology. They do define
themselves as Jihadis, Islamists, Takfiris, and others, but the most
accurate term to identify them is "Jihadists."
2. European Debate: Today's debate in Europe about the origin and nature
of the Jihadist movement is still struggling with the so-called "root
causes" of this terror phenomenon. In my discussions across the
continent, including my sessions with many of the 27 counter-terrorism
teams at the European Union level, one can summarize the Euro-debate on
this matter as follow. Four points and counter-points are made:
a. Many in the EU claim that Jihadism is a response to European (and
Western) foreign policy. The counter-arguments are that Jihadism as an
ideology and as a movement has preceded all relevant European policies
in modern times. The Salafists rose in the 1920s long before the UN and
the Arab-Israeli conflict. Foreign policy impacts these movements but
does not create them.
b. Others have stated that economic disenfranchisement is at the root of
these movements. But there are many counter arguments: First, the Jihadi
agenda does not talk about economic justice. Second, there are multiple
layers of social classes among Jihadists from the lower social class,
the middle class and the upper class as well. In addition, the Jihadi
ideology creates takfeer which is a display of hatred between segments
of societies. The Jihadists in Sudan, for example, have clearly
displayed racism in Darfur.
c. New theories are claiming that the root causes are
socio-psychological stresses such as racism. But the counter-argument is
that racism is a phenomenon linked to immigration and exists for all
immigrants not just the Arab Muslim communities.
d. From the other side of the debate, some intellectuals are charging
that the roots of terrorism are found in Islamic religious texts. But
the counter-argument is that texts alone cannot mobilize and organize
movements. There need to be ideological forces that create the movement
while using references to theological texts.
Thus in the final analysis Jihadism is an ideology not a theology.
Second: The Strategies of the Jihadists
If Europe and the West are facing an ideology, and thus a movement, one
has to learn about their war room, their policies and strategies. We
need to understand these so that governments and societies are able to
confront them.
The Jihadists have had great debates about their strategies. Al Qaeda,
the "hot headed," wants to target the United States and Europe with
terror so that they can rise in the Arab and Muslim world. But you have
the other "long-term" Jihadists who are creating the pools of
indoctrination. With their large, funded mechanism they produce the
young minds from among which al Qaeda recruits. I am not only concerned
about those who have already became Jihadists between ages 15 and 25,
but more so about those who are between ages 8 and 13. What we need
today is strategic law enforcement in addition to the local one.
Why were we (governments and NGOs) not aware of this ideological
warfare?
The answer is simply because the Jihadists are good in the war of ideas;
good at deceiving their foes by raising other issues, using our system
against us. Hence between 1945 and 1990, as the West was engaged in the
cold war, they infiltrated the Arab Muslim. They have produced four
generations with the support of oil production revenues. In a second war
of ideas they put additional efforts inside the West and Europe. They
have seized the microphone inside the Muslim communities and had an
impact on a segment of these societies marginalizing the democracy
seekers.
Since 2001, in a third war of ideas, the Jihadis have put pressure on
our democracies in Europe to affect foreign policies that could help
democracies in the Middle East and oppose the radicals. The various
violences in Europe are aimed at changing foreign policies so that
Europe (and the West), instead of helping the weak as in Darfur and
Lebanon, and instead of supporting women and minorities, would abandon
them.
Three: Strategic Advice
Some strategic advice to address the challenge:
1. A European priority should be to define the ideology. Advance work
has been done over the past years. The largest party at the European
Parliament has produced a document clearly identifying the Jihadi
terrorists as being at the root of the crisis. More has to be done at
the level of other groups and the European Union.
2. Another priority should be to educate the European public about the
ideology, movement and strategies of the Jihadists. The advantages of
such massive public information are numerous. One, it will give
direction to national communities to get to the root of the problem. It
would reduce racism as it would separate radical ideology from religious
communities. It would also help Muslim communities make that separation
between the radical militants and the mainstream in their societies.
3. Last, but not least, a European priority should be to support
pro-democracy forces inside the Muslim communities so that these
communities are better protected against racism and back-clashes on the
one hand, and are freed from control by the Jihadists on the other hand.
This is a summary of an analysis Dr. Phares discussed during this
past June-July with European officials as a Visiting Fellow with the
European Foundation for Democracy in Brussels. Among the main groups and
for which he presented these ideas were: The EPP Group at the European
Parliament in its Conference in Paris; the secretariat for international
relations of the European Socialist Group in Brussels; the Center for
International Affairs in Rome with the participation of the Chief of
Staff of the Italian Armed Forces; members of the Budenstag on National
Security and Foreign Affairs in Berlin, counter terrorism officials at
the European Union including from the UK, Germany, Spain, Czech
Republic, Rumania, Belgium, Slovakia, Poland, Estonia, as well as top
officials at the interior ministries offices on radicalization in
Germany, France and the UK. I will expand in another posting on the
circulation of ideas and the various challenges facing Europe and the
West in general per these discussions. The summary was initially
presented at the Paris Conference and shared with the various officials
with whom he met. |
”
and "
