|
Experts and analysts on terrorism have
observed over the past fifteen years that
international terrorist networks are now
more likely to be primarily motivated by
religious ideologies, seeking to cause
large scale causalities within civilian
populations. This is a move away from the
more ‘traditional’ terrorists of the
past who were mainly motivated by
political ideals and carried out
small-scale attacks to make a political
statement. The rise of this ‘new’ type
of terrorism is worrying governments
around the world, particularly the
governments of the United States and
Britain.
As
its proponents purposely seek to obtain
weapons of mass destruction, be they
nuclear, chemical or biological, with the
intention of using them to inflict
large-scale casualties on civilian
populations of countries or societies,
they perceive to be a threat to their
stupendous beliefs. Governments are
increasingly aware of just how little they
can do to protect their citizens from
attacks
Here in the Middle East, the consequences
of an attack by a terrorist organization,
using weapons of mass destruction could be
more damaging to countries and societies
than the more developed western states. A
successful attack on any one of a number
of Middle Eastern States could destroy
that country entirely, simply because some
populations are so small. For Instance,
the six Gulf countries that make up the
GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), have a
combined population of fewer than twenty
million people. Large scale loss of live
would almost certainly lead to the
destruction of their civil society and the
devastation of their economies, leaving
them open for assimilation by other
nations or people to the point where they
disappear as unique cultural entities
In the more populous nations of the
region, the result of such attack may be
mitigated to some extent by the size of
population. But most of the large Middle
East countries, such as Egypt, Syria,
Algeria and Iraq are poorer that their
Gulf neighbours with less developed
heath-care and civil defence
infrastructures. The loss of life would be
on a massive scale. And would certainly
cripple their economies, degrade social
structures and leave their regimes ripe
for overthrow or manipulation by other
more powerful nations.
Chemical, biological and nuclear weapons
are not new; they have been around over
fifty years. The Germans were the first to
use such a mass destruction weapon when it
used mustard gas on 22nd April
1915 to attack the British trenches during
the First World War. Since their
introduction to the battlefield, nearly
every European government sought to
develop weapons that would produce mass
battlefield casualties. Unfortunately
their development coincided with a change
in military thinking on how to contact
wars. In the past it had been considered
enough to inflict harm on enemy soldiers
and not the civilian population. Although
there were cases where cities and towns
were burnt and pillage and populations put
to the sword, it was not, as was it was to
become later, a deliberate act of war. But
as societies in the 20th
Century became increasingly more urban and
industialised, military planners
considered that destroying the economic
framework of a country by ruining its
industrial base and terrifying its
population would read to a swifter victory
on the battlefield.
Once Pandora’s box had been opened and
the development of weapons of mass
destruction began, it took under thirty
years for mans ingenuity to devise weapons
capable of wiping life of the face of the
entire planet. Our first flirtation with
these weapons at the close of the Second
World War at Nagasaki and Hiroshima,
demonstrated just how successful we have
been in devising of killing our fellow
man. Since that time, we have successfully
developed other types of weapons with just
as much lethality, in the form of
biological and chemical agents that are
capable of destroying large numbers of
people in a short space of time.
And now at the beginning of a new century,
we are once again facing the awful
possibility that some person, organisation
or state sees the use of nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons as a legitimate way
to advance their cause, regardless of the
cost in human live and suffering.
1995 saw the first ever major WMD attack -
it was the use of nerve gas by a terrorist
group when the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo
killed 12 and injured thousands of Tokyo
subway passengers. This willingness by
religious groups, cults and fanatics to
use such weapons has been on the increase.
Terrorist groups who wish to access to or
use Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) pose
significant risks to population centers
around the world.
Let us imagine that a group wished to
overthrow the government of Iraq. It
could, by introducing a biological agent
such as anthrax into military bases around
the county and the capital Baghdad,
paralyse the entire government and
decimate its armed forces rendering ripe
for sudden change of government or
vulnerable to an outside military force.
Another possibility could be that Israel
under an extreme right wing Prime Minister
finally decides to wage out war on the
Palestinians. He could attack the West
Bank and Gaza with Israel’s arsenal of
nuclear ammunition. This consists of over
300 hundred miniaturised thermonuclear
shells, designed to release deadly gamma
radiation while minimising blast effects
and long-term radiation – in essence to
kill people while leaving property intact.
Both of these scenarios are entirely
particularly possible if their proponents
see their victims as deserving of the
fate.
So it can clearly be seen that it is the
duty of all of us to ensure that such
horrific events do not takes place. We
cannot, and must not justify or condone
even one act of terrorism against anyone
as to do so only bring nearer the
possibility that WMD will be used in
future attacks by terrorists. Terrorism is
a unique form of crime and is often in
fact a form of psychological warfare
–“ propaganda by deed”- and seeks to
gain world attention for its cause and
support from its sympathisers.
Increasingly given the structure of
societies around the globe and sheer
volume of information spanning them, it
has become increasingly harder for acts of
terrorism to have more than a minor impact
on the global consciousness. A few dead
here, a bomb there, are unfortunately all
to commonplace nowadays to gain much
international media attention. It is only
when actions such as the attack on America
that really seize and hold peoples
attention. Terrorists have come to realise
that they must carryout ever more
spectacular acts to ensure world
attention, and what can be more
spectacular than a thermonuclear
detonation, the release of a deadly gas or
the spread of a lethal biological agent in
one of the capitals of the world. It could
be London, Washington, Paris, or Berlin.
But it could equally be Riyadh, Amman,
Teheran or Abu Dhabi. No capital or people
are immune from this form of attack.
So far, the use of weapons of mass
destruction by terrorist has been confined
to the pages of science fiction
literature, but given the technology
available to terrorists today, what is
today’s science fiction can easily
become tomorrow’s fact.
One of the truths about terrorism is that
it is the weapon of the weak; if people
feel that they have become marginalised or
their beliefs or cause ignored, then they
may desperately reach for a way to call
attention to their plight or their
grievance. This leads to another truth
about terrorism that terrorists want
people watching not necessarily a lot of
dead people. It is this that has until now
made the risk of attacks’ using weapons
of mass destruction a low one. But as has
been noted by analysts and commentators on
terrorism as the underlying motives change
from secular ones to religious ones, there
seems to be a willingness to ignore the
sanctity of human life if the victims does
not share the same beliefs as the
terrorist. Therefore it is now more likely
that we will see sometime in the near
future a terrorist attack on a major
population centre that will result in the
loss of hundreds if not thousands of
lives.
Given that attacks using weapons of mass
destruction are more likely, it is up to
governments to prepare for such a
horrifying eventuality by putting in place
measures to prevent them and set up
mechanisms to respond quickly to such an
act with the aim of minimising casualties.
Let’s not fool ourselves here in the
Middle East by thinking, ”it will never
happen here. It is a problem for Western
Governments” and not do anything to
protect ourselves. The Middle East has as
many problems and conflicts as anywhere
else and no one can predict the
consequences of some of them particularly
as the protagonist become more and more
desperate as their despair escalates.
We must realise that we too can become the
victims of such murderous acts. We must
continue to condemn terrorism in all its
forms and we must urge our governments to
take steps to protect us. We too need to
create effective emergency management
programs that builds public support by
incorporating citizens in the planning and
implementing of such programmes.
Regional governments should work closely
together and share information on
organisations and individuals who may be
prepared to carry out act of terrorism in
the region. Campaigns should be instigated
to raise the awareness of the dangers of
such attacks, and teach and inform people
on the type of danger they might expect
and the actions to take if such an event
takes place.
Equipment can be bought that would give
respiratory protection from nuclear,
chemical and biological agents. A
protective mask, while not being able to
stop radiation exposure, will prevent
radioactive dust and particles from an
aerosol being inhaled; it will also stop
most other chemical and biological
particles too. Another measure to minimise
causalities is to give all citizens some
civil defense training that would enable
them to respond quickly to an attack.
These are all positive steps that
governments throughout the Middle East can
take to try and ensure the safety of their
citizens.
According
to the United Nations there are currently
280 armed conflicts of varying intensity
going on in the world right now. These
often involve mercenaries, death squads
and terrorist groups. We simply cannot
assume that any of them will stay away
from using chemical, biological or nuclear
weapons if given the chance to acquire
them. With this in mind, let us realise
that the problems of terrorism and the use
of weapons of mass destruction aren’t
just a ‘Western problem,’ they are of
concern to us all. Particularly as the
Middle East is the home of some of the
most intractable of these conflicts so let
us all be forthright and condemns any act
of terrorism great or small, and from what
ever quarter. For by condoning just one,
may in the long run see us suffer
consequences that until now were
unimaginable.
|
