Timely Lecture on the History of Terrorism

I just got back from a scheduled lecture on the war on terror by Sir Adam Roberts, one of the world's leading authorities on the history of terrorism. He also happened to be walking in London yesterday about 1 block from the main train station that was hit. He spent about 90 minutes placing this struggle within the context of the entire history of modern terrorism---from anarcho-syndicalists to Russian anti-tsarists, to the Red Brigade, Algerian anti-French resistance, Che Guevera, the IRA, the PLO, Hamas, Islamic Brotherhood, the Malay communists, and Shining Path, etc.

His exposition on the patterns, techniques and appeal of such groups was breathtaking. He supported the effort to get Bin Laden in Afghanistan, but he thinks that Iraq is a tragic mistake and that Bush is only making it much, much worse by his absolute refusal to learn from history---or to even acknowledge that the US is part of history, rather than an exception to it. For instance, the claim that you can "defeat" terrorism once and for all---is, as history shows, an absurdity which only weakens one's position and gives leverage to the terrorists (since any terrorist act, no matter how small its consequences, exposes you as unable to make good on your claims).

But his darkest warnings concerned our extra-legal incarceration and "interrogation" policies. He cited several historical examples (with special emphasis on the British experience with the IRA) to demonstrate that such efforts inevitably make the resistance stronger and even more vicious.

He concluded with a brilliant set-piece on the danger of throwing around the word "evil" to describe terrorists. It's a natural reaction, of course, but one that needs to be resisted by all strategic thinkers who truly want to sap the life out of terrorist movements. Mythologizing them in such absolute, ahistorical terms only helps them recruit. The fact is that there are many different types of people with different investments in terrorism and the smart and historically-informed approach is to take away as many factors as possible which turn people towards terrorism as a solution. You can never get all of them to give it up; there will always be a percentage of terrorists who are simply murderers and sadists, or criminals using politics as an excuse, or relgious or nationalist fanatics who will never give up the "crusade" against what they see as "evil."

The point is to isolate such sociopaths, and Sir Adam thinks that can only be done by international cooperation, maintainence of human rights and the rule of law, careful police investigation and prosecution of specific acts, and in extreme cases (like Afghanistan) strategic multinational military intervention with clear and limited goals and ample post-war planning and aid.

One last point: having interviewed and read the memoirs of thousands of terrorists, Sir Adam concluded that the single greatest fear which haunts all such murderers is that of public indifference: when the people affected by the terrorist act refuse to panic, refuse to be bullied, refuse to act out in blind, paranoid rage, but merely pick up the pieces, go back to their lives and seek just punishment for the specific people who did the act, terrorism itself is defeated.