Check the pictures I uploaded for another blog here, and then let's review our academic debates and theories on the making of terrorism.
Most of those who try to explain the root of terrorism seek to find an answer on the interpretation of religious texts. They assume that a terrorist commits a terror because his faith urges him/her to do so.
The scholars hold this theory because they can not rely on economic explanations. The fact that the suicide-bombers and those who hijacked airplanes to attack the World Trade Center came from wealthy families rejected an assumption that economic problem frustrated the terrorists so that they were available to sacrifice their supposed unworthy lives.
This group of scholars also refer to another proof that there has never been a poor African committing a suicide bombing. If it has nothing to do with economic problem, then it may be their religion. Why? Because most of terrorists are relatively practicing believers (Muslims).
This group of scholars comprises non-Muslims and Muslims as well. The non-Muslims accused Islam as a violent religion, and demand Muslims "rewrite" their Qur'an. The Muslim group who hold such an approach usually try to "correct" the alleged "wrong" interpretation of the Qur'an. In Indonesia, the moderate and liberal Muslims relentlessly promote an alternative interpretation of the Qur'an to show that Islam is a peaceful religion.
I reject such an approach for missing the main root of problem. In my previous piece published by the Jakarta Post, I insisted there that "Moderatism is not a panacea for terrorism because the supposed fundamentalist misinterpretation is merely manipulated to achieve a political objective (such as Pan Islamic or independence). As Robert Pape puts it in his book, before Israel's invasion of Lebanon there was no suicide terrorist campaign against Israel; before the Sri Lankan military moved into the Tamil's homeland, the Tamil Tigers did not use suicide attacks."
I believe terrorism has nothing to do with a religious interpretation. Yes, it indeed uses religious teaching; however, religion itself is a neutral tool. It is neither violent nor peaceful in its nature. I oftentimes said that religion in a political conflict is like a gun: it is the man behind the gun that kills, not the gun.
What drive people to sacrifice their lives is injustice they see or experienced. As long as we find widely spread injustice in Muslim lands from Chechnya to Kashmir or Mindanao, what the US calls "terrorism" will always live. Because it is not a terror in fact; but rather a fight to defend their lives and land.
The pictures I asked you to check provides a simple theory to predict the born of more jihadis (the ones the US and Israel call them "terrorists" instead) in Lebanon and Palestine. You can simply imagine what the survivors would do after they lost their family.
When their weak states of Lebanon and Palestine can't do anything, those people will voluntarily join Hamas and Hezbollah to defend their land on behalf of their passed away family members. When it is the fact, the US and Israel will never defeat them until they kill all Lebanese and Palestinian (a genocide ... that America and Israel seemingly would call it a "measured" response).
Posting Komentar