By Daniel Shaw    

       The idea that terrorism is a major threat to the United States is a relatively new one. Until the attacks on September 11th 2001, terrorism was seen as merely a nuisance to the US. The US had experienced terrorist attacks from right and left wing extremist groups as well as lone individuals acting out their own extremist agenda, but the far more common attacks were committed by Islamic terrorists. Discussions on Islamic terrorism as it pertains to US national defense often does not go deep enough into history to discover that the motivations behind this threat are not oppression, poverty, or failed state driven. In most cases the earliest attacks that are focused on are attacks such as the October of 2000 attack on the USS Cole, or possibly as far back as the 1983 bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut Lebanon. Sadly we have forgotten that America’s first foreign military action was against a foe whose motivation was based solely on their interpretation of the Koran. “It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave” (American Peace Commissioners Letter to John Jay 1786).

       If we as a nation are going to deter, detect and defend against terrorist attacks than we must discover the cause of the ideology as a whole as well as the motivations behind the terrorists themselves. In the case of Islamic terrorism, we find that the ideology is religion driven as some followers of the Islamic faith subscribe to the ideology of Islamism or what some call militant Islam. These militants believe that they have not only the right to cause harm to nonbelievers, but it is their duty to do so, just as the Jihadist were quoted in the aforementioned letter to John Jay. So how does this help us combat terrorism today?

       First, it enables us to understand who we are up against and the tactics that they are allowed to use according to Sharia. For example, we know that, historically, Islamic Jihadist will not hesitate to use suicide attacks to conduct violent acts against civilian targets. A crude example of how our knowledge of terrorist motivations can promote security can be found in the Department of Defense’s anti terrorism and force protection training that the US military must undergo annually. In this training, service members are instructed to choose window seats during air travel because aisle seats make the traveler more accessible to harm. Sadly this is still taught, however if we were to take into consideration that hijackers are no longer simply attempting to evade apprehension, we would conclude that direct action must be taken to not allow today’s hijacker to control or even move freely in the aircraft, thus changing the service members seating arrangement to an aisle seat so he or she can take action.

       The previous example is of stopping a threat at the time of action. Of course it would be optimal to stop such an act before lives become threatened. This can be done with human and signals intelligence, but we have to know where to look. By learning what sect of Islam or what Imams are breeding terrorists in their Mosques, we are able to monitor and track potential terrorists from an early point and uncover plots before they reach the action phase. With this information we can also begin to compile demographic information on those who subscribe to Islamism and take action accordingly. For example, we know that Osama Bin Laden was very wealthy and that many of the 9/11 suicide hijackers were well educated and wealthy. This does not mean that poverty and illiteracy do not contribute to the recruitment of terrorists. In Iraq and Afghanistan we find very often that those detonating improvised explosive devices are low income males who do it simply for money or because their families were threatened by the insurgency. For these reasons, we have shifted from major combat operations to support and stability operations. Building roads, schools, and economic strength will not end Islamic terrorism, but it will likely have a positive effect in the future by providing a choice for the next generation.

       On a larger more deadly scale, we can look back at the cold war when Soviet Union countries acted as state sponsors for guerillas in Central and South American countries. During that era there was great fear of nuclear war, but keeping it at bay was the policy of mutually assured destruction. Today we face Iran as a rising threat as they have been state sponsors of Hamas and Hezbollah for decades. Iran relates directly to the cold war in the area of nuclear capability. As the country strives for nuclear technology the US, Israel, and many other UN nations appose Iran’s nuclear research. The reason for this opposition is the belief that Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will likely use a nuclear weapon on an Israeli or US target. It is debatable that the idea of mutually assured destruction would be a factor at all with Iran, given their ties with Islamic terrorists and Ahmadinejad’s Islamic extremist rhetoric. The Islamic militant catch phrase “we love death more than you love life” comes to mind. Ahmadinejad would not fear MAD and perhaps even welcome the idea of mass martyrdom.

       Setting aside the idea of MAD being negated by martyrdom, an absolute threat that MAD would not be applicable to would be Hamas or Hezbollah having nuclear capability to carry out their violent agenda. Given the history between the aforementioned organizations and Iran, it would be very likely that Iran would arm them with nuclear weapons, if Iran were to obtain the technology. By understanding the causes and motivation behind Islamic terrorism, we are able to see the connection between countries like Iran and terrorist organizations as well as the implications those relationships could have on the international community, thus clarifying the reasoning behind UN sanctions and an international call to action in order to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear ability and preventing a catastrophe.

       Whether we are talking about Iran’s nuclear research and their history of state sponsored terrorism, or a single terrorist cell we must know the motivations and history behind our enemy in order to deter them from committing violence, detect them if they intend to do violence, and defend our citizens from their acts of violence.