It may look like bad advise coming from a country besieged by enemies all around, but what is written by Benjamin Netanyahu in 1995, makes great sense to me , when it comes to the present day situation in India.
"ISRAEL AND A PALESTINIAN STATE ZEROSUM GAME?
"ISRAEL AND A PALESTINIAN STATE ZEROSUM GAME?
blackmail which they are supposed to defuse: All that Timothy McVeigh's colleagues need to know is that the United States government would consider releasing him in exchange for the lives of innocent hostages in order to get the terrorists to make just such a demand. Only the most unrelenting refusal ever to surrender to such blackmail can prevent most such situations from arising.
Train special forces to fight terrorism
Greater emphasis must be placed on the training of special units equipped for antiterror operations. În anti-terror training, laW enforcers learn to fight a completely different kind of gun battle, in which the goal is to hold their fire rather than to unleash it. Operations against terrorists often involve the rescue of hostages or the possibility that innocent bystanders might be hurt. This necessarily means that the soldiers or policemen charged with fighting terrorism must learn to subdue the natural temptation to concentrate overwhelming fire on the enemy. Counter-terrorist operations usually require the barest minimum application of force necessary to overcome the terrorists, Who often use hostages as a human shield.
While those branches of Western security services specializing in counter-intelligence and surveillance generally enjoy a high level of professionalism and training, this is often not the case with the forces that have to do the actual fighting against terrorists, it may be impossible to guarantee that there will be no more scenes such as the one in Waco, Texas, in which scores of cultists and four lawmen were killed. But the likelihood of avoiding such catastrophes is considerably increased if the forces involved are proficient in anti-terror techniques. Such units at the national or federal level are usually adequately trained for these missions, but in a
ISRAEL AND A PALESTINIAN STATE ZEROSUM GAME?
.Western countries in the late 1980s, it has returned in ferocious and fearful new forms. In the United states, the bombings of the World Trade Center in Manhattan and the Federal Building in Oklahoma City demonstrated to Americans that terrorism could now strike on Main Street internationally, terrorist attacks from Beirut to Buenos Aires Were recalling the familiar scenes of carnage from the 1980s on the television screens and front pages of the free World in the 1990s in Paris, bombs exploded in a crowded subway after nearly a decade's respite from such outrages. And in Japan
a horrifying new form of chemical terrorism struck fear in the hearts of millions of commuters in one of the World's most advanced societies
However, the modus operandi of this new wave of terrorism is usually different from that of the earlier terrorism that afflicted the World for two decades beginning in the 1960s. The new terrorism boasts few, if any hostage takings and practically no hijackings it specializes in the bombing of its targets. The reason for this change is that punishment meted out in the 1980s to hostage takers and airline hijackers and to their sponsors made the more overt kind of terrorisma costly affair. The new terrorism seeks to evade this punishment by hiding more deeply in the shadows than did its predecessors, Terrorism thrives in the dark and withers when stripped of its deniability. Yet it is a fact that today's domestic and international terrorists may be identified fairly easily, and it is therefore possible to deter and prevent them from pursuing the policies of terror
X 一 5 × o - a.
FIGHTING TERROR - AND WINNING
Binyamin Netangahu
Today's terrorism can be driven back, even though the current breed of interlocking domestic and international terrorists is certainly not to be taken lightly. They know the West Well and have developed strategies designed to take advantage of all its weaknesses. An effective battle against terrorism must of necessity require a shift in the domestic and international policies that enable terrorism to grow and the intensification of those efforts that can uproot it. Domestically in the United States this requires a reassessment of the legal instruments necessary for combating homegrown terrorism, alongside the means to monitor added powers given to the government to pursue these ends. Internationally, this means identifying the great change that has taken place in the forces driving worldwide terrorism since the 1980s, and shaping a powerful international alliance against thern
What this new terrorism portends for Israel America and the world and what can be done about it has not yet been sufficiently understood. The growth of terrorism has been accompanied by a steady escalation in the means of violence arms used to assassinate individuals from small arms used to mow down groups, to car bombs now capable of bringing down entire buildings, to lethal chemicals that (as in lapan) can threaten entire cities. The very real possibility that terrorist states and organizations may soon acquire horrific weapons of mass destruction and use them to escalate terrorism beyond our wildest nightmares has not been addressed properly by Western governments it must be recognized that barring firm and resolute action by the United States and the West terrorismin the 1990s will expand dramatically both domes. tically and internationally. Today's tragedies can either be the harbingers of much greater calamities yet to come or the turning point in which free societies once again mobilize their resources, their ingenuity, and their will to wipe out this evil from our midst. Fighting terrorism is not a policy option, it is a necessity for the survival of our democratic society and our freedoms. But in order to fight terrorism effectively, we must first understand its nature and its goals. Terrorism is the deliberate and systematic assault on civilians to inspire fear for political ends Although one may quibble with this definition, for example by broadening political ends to include ideological or religious motives, it nonetheless captures the essence of terrorism- the purposeful attack on the innocent, those who are kors decoxial, outside the field of legitimate conflict. In fact, the more removed the target of the attack from any connection to the grievance enunciated by the terrorists, the greater the terror. What possible connection is there between the kindergarten children savaged in an office building in Oklahoma to the purported grievances of the Patriots of Arizona? What do the incidental shoppers in the World Trade Center in Manhattan have to do with the Islamic Jihad? Yet for terrorism to have any impact, it is precisely the lack of connection, the lack of any possible involvement or complicity of the chosen wictims in the cause the terrorists seek to attack that produces the desired fear. For terrorisms underlying message is that every member of society is guilty, that anyone can be a victim, and that therefore, no one is safe. Although their professed purpose is invariably couched in the language of freedom and the battle for human rights there is a built-in contradiction between such professed aims and the method chosen to implement them. In fact, the methods reveal the totalitarian strain that runs through all terrorist groups. Those who deliberately bomb babies are not interested in freedom, and those who trample on human rights are not interested in defending such rights. It is not only that the ends of the terrorists do not succeedin justifying the means
they choose; their choice of means indicates what their true ends are. Far from being fighters for freedom, terrorists are the forerunners of tyranny. It is instructive to note, for example, that the French Resistance during World War II did not resort to the systematic killing of German women and children, although they were well within reach in occupied France The unequivocal and unrelenting moral cordemnation of terrorism must therefore constitute the first line of defense against its most insidious effect. Terrorists who blow up buildings in Oklahoma or buses in Jerusalem must never be accorded the status of misguided or desperate men using desperate means. Worst still is calling the murderer a martyr or shaheed The citizens of free societies must be told again and again that terrorists are savage beasts of prey, and should be treated as such. Terrorism should be given no intellectual quarter. To do otherwise is to elevate both to a higher status, thereby undermining the ability of governments to fight back. On the domestic level, the fact that terrorists are politically motivated criminals is irrelevant, except in providing clues for their apprehension. If the first obstacle to the spread of domestic terrorism in most democracies is in the realm of political culture, the second is in the realm of operations. The advanced democracies usually have at their disposal a vast array of surveillance and other intelligence-gathering capabilities that give them the ability to track down terrorists put them on trial, and punish them. The United States is especially capable of monitoring the activities of terrorists, it has technical capabilities that exceed anything available to any other country, especially formidable eavesdropping and photographic capabilities. The movements and activities of potential terrorists can thus be observed, and they may be apprehended before they strike-at least when the law enforcement agencies are permitted to act. The Western democracies are capable of elimimating the domestic terror in their midst only if they decide to make use of the operational tools presently at their disposal. But such optimism
in the 1990s will expand dramatically both domes. tically and internationally. Today's tragedies can either be the harbingers of much greater calamities yet to come or the turning point in which free societies once again mobilize their resources, their ingenuity, and their will to wipe out this evil from our midst. Fighting terrorism is not a policy option, it is a necessity for the survival of our democratic society and our freedoms. But in order to fight terrorism effectively, we must first understand its nature and its goals. Terrorism is the deliberate and systematic assault on civilians to inspire fear for political ends Although one may quibble with this definition, for example by broadening political ends to include ideological or religious motives, it nonetheless captures the essence of terrorism- the purposeful attack on the innocent, those who are kors decoxial, outside the field of legitimate conflict. In fact, the more removed the target of the attack from any connection to the grievance enunciated by the terrorists, the greater the terror. What possible connection is there between the kindergarten children savaged in an office building in Oklahoma to the purported grievances of the Patriots of Arizona? What do the incidental shoppers in the World Trade Center in Manhattan have to do with the Islamic Jihad? Yet for terrorism to have any impact, it is precisely the lack of connection, the lack of any possible involvement or complicity of the chosen wictims in the cause the terrorists seek to attack that produces the desired fear. For terrorisms underlying message is that every member of society is guilty, that anyone can be a victim, and that therefore, no one is safe. Although their professed purpose is invariably couched in the language of freedom and the battle for human rights there is a built-in contradiction between such professed aims and the method chosen to implement them. In fact, the methods reveal the totalitarian strain that runs through all terrorist groups. Those who deliberately bomb babies are not interested in freedom, and those who trample on human rights are not interested in defending such rights. It is not only that the ends of the terrorists do not succeedin justifying the means
they choose; their choice of means indicates what their true ends are. Far from being fighters for freedom, terrorists are the forerunners of tyranny. It is instructive to note, for example, that the French Resistance during World War II did not resort to the systematic killing of German women and children, although they were well within reach in occupied France The unequivocal and unrelenting moral condemnation of terrorism must therefore constitute the first line of defense against its most insidious effect. Terrorists who blow up buildings in Oklahoma or buses in Jerusalem must never be accorded the status of misguided or desperate men using desperate means. Worst still is calling the murderer a martyr or shaheed The citizens of free societies must be told again and again that terrorists are savage beasts of prey, and should be treated as such. Terrorism should be given no intellectual quarter. To do otherwise is to elevate both to a higher status, thereby undermining the ability of governments to fight back. On the domestic level, the fact that terrorists are politically motivated criminals is irrelevant, except in providing clues for their apprehension. If the first obstacle to the spread of domestic terrorism in most democracies is in the realm of political culture, the second is in the realm of operations. The advanced democracies usually have at their disposal a vast array of surveillance and other intelligence-gathering capabilities that give them the ability to track down terrorists put them on trial, and punish them. The United States is especially capable of monitoring the activities of terrorists, it has technical capabilities that exceed anything available to any other country, especially formidable eavesdropping and photographic capabilities. The movements and activities of potential terrorists can thus be observed, and they may be apprehended before they strike-at least when the law enforcement agencies are permitted to act. The Western democracies are capable of eliminating the domestic terror in their midst only if they decide to make use of the operational tools presently at their disposal. But such optimism
Israel has had some spectacular successes in this area, including the rescue of 103 hostages at Entebbe. But it has also had its share of spectacular failures, the worst of which was the loss of twenty-six schoolchildren being held hostage in a school building in Maalot. Having specially trained troops that accumulate and refine anti-terror techniques reduces the probability of failure, it does not, of course, mean that terrorists may be fought and hostages rescued without risk. What is crucial to recognize is that the risk to society of not challenging the terrorists forcefully - that is, of negotiating With them and accepting their demands- is far greater than the risk involved in the use of special forces. For in negotiating, the government issues an open invitation for more terror, an invitation which puts at risk the safety of every citizen in society.
Educate the public. The terrorist uses violence to erode the resistance of the public and leaders alike to his political demands. But the resistance of a society to terrorist blackmail may likewise be strengthened by counter-terrorist education, which clearly puts forth what the terrorists are trying to achieve, elucidates the immorality of their methods, and explains the necessity of resisting them. Such education is usually unnecessary in the case of sporadic and isolated terrorist attacks, which are almost universally met with an appropriate and natural revulsion. But in the case of a prolonged and sustained campaign lasting months or years, the natural disgust of the public with the terrorists' message begins to break down and is often replaced by a Willingness to accommodate terrorist demands. By preparing terrorism-education programs for various age groups and including them in the school curriculum, the government can inoculate the population.
other idea of civil freedom, which should be brought to a speedy end Tighten immigration laws. It is now well known that terrorists from the Middle East andelsewhere hawe made the United States, Germany, Italy, and other countries into terrorist havens because of laxity in immigration regulation. This era of immigration free-for-all should be brought to an end. An important aspect of taking control of the immigration situation is stricter background checks of potential immigrants, coupled with the real possibility of deportation. The possibility of expulsion must be a threat howering over all terrorist and pro-terrorist activity in the democracies. The new Clinton Administration initiative, for example, defines spokesmen and fund-raisers for terrorist organizations as liable to deportation, makes immigration files available to federal investigators, and establishes a special judicial process for deportations in which classified evidence may be brought without giving the terrorist organizations access to the materials Require periodic legislative review to safeguard civil liberties. The concern of civil libertarians over possible infringements of the rights of innocent citizens is well placed, and all additional powers granted the security services should require annual renewal by the legislature, this in addition to judicial oversight of actions as they are taken in the field. Thus hearings may be held to consider the record of possible abuses which have resulted from changes in police authority. If the abuses prove to be too frecuent or the results inconclusive in terms of the citizens, the particular provisions in question can be jettisoned automatically. The legal provisions suggested above constitute a roster of measures available to a democracy subjected to a sustained threat of terror. A lesser threat usually could require fewer measures. In some countries these measures would necessarily mean
shifting the legal balance between civil liberties and security. There is nothing easy in making this choice. But it is nevertheless crucial that the citizens of the West understand that such options are legitimately available to them, and that, judiciously applied, they may serve to put terrorism back on the defensive.
would be misplaced with regard to international terrorism, a much hardier and more implacable nemesis. What road should the United States and other democracies pursue if they are to overcome not only the domestic terror of Oklahoma City but the potentially much more insidious international terror which produced the World Trade Center bombing, and which may wery well produce other such tragedies before it has been defeated? To answer this question, We must first understand the nature and genesis of international terrorism and the process by which it has assumed its present form.
international terrorism is the use of terrorist violence against a given nation by another state which uses the terrorists to fight a proxy war as an alternative to conventional war. Sometimes the terror is imported at the initiative of a foreign movement which nevertheless enjoys the support of a sovereign state, at the very least in the form of a benign passivity which encourages the growth of such groups on its own soil. The reason that international terrorism is so persistent and so difficult to uproot is that the support of a modern state can provide the international terrorist with everything that the domestic terrorist usually lacks in the way of cultural and logistical assistance. An alien, non-democratic society may be able to provide the depth of support for terrorist ideas to spawn a genuine terrorist army; it can offer professional training and equipment for covert operations as well as diplomatic cover and other crucial logistical aid; it can make available virtually unlimited funds and most important of all, it can ensure a safe haven to which the terrorists may escape and from which they can then emergeanew. Thus, with the support of a terrorist state, the terrorist is no longer alonely and hunted fugitive from society. He becomes part of a different social milieu, which encourages him, nurtures him, protects him, and sees to it that he succeeds. The absurdly lopsided contest between the Western security services and the terrorist is, under these circumstances, no longer lopsided. It now pits the formidable resources of the West against the nearly comparable resources of a foreign state or network of states - and in this contest it is by no
36 ISKAELANDA PALESTINAN STATEzEROSUM GAME
means immediately clear who will emerge the victor.
The second wave of international terrorism, that of the 1990s, is the direct result of all these developments. And the growth of militant Islamic terrorism, with independent states in the Middle East serving as its launching ground, and bases of Islamic militants in the West offering alternate bridgeheads, has already been felt in the West in more ways than one. Just as Soviet-Arab terrorism produced its imitators, so too, the growth of this kind of chaos is bound to hawe an effect on its would-be imitators. It may not be pure coincidence that the method used to bomb the federal building in Oklahoma City was a mimicry of the favorite type of Islamic fundamentalist carbombing. If this kind of domestic international terrorism is not cut out at the root, it is bound to grow, with disastrous consecuences.
Undoubtedly the two greatest obstacles to dealing with this problem are, first, recognizing the nature of the threat and, second, understanding that it can be defeated. My first intention when writing about terrorism has been, accordingly, to alert the citizens and decision-makers of the West as to the nature of the new terrorist challenge which the democracies now face. In this time of historic flux, Western leaders have a responsibility to resist the tendency for passivity, the temptation to rest on the laurels of the victory over Communism as though nothing else truly could jeopardize their societies. The leaders of the democracies must solicit the understanding and support of the public and its elected representatives for vigorous policies against terrorism. Oösta pricipi- oppose bad things when they are small- was the motto of Israel Zangwill, one of the first leaders of the modern Iewish national movement at the beginning of this century Alas, many of his colleagues did not heed this warning, and the Jewish people paid a horrendous price in the decades that followed. The same advice must be directed today to presidents and prime ministers, congressmen and parliamentarians, with one proviso: When it comes to terrorism, the bad things are no longer small. They have already reached disturbing proportions, although it must be said that they have not yet grown to dimensions
Actively pursue terrorists Legal powers are of course meaningless if they are not accompanied by a commensurate mustering of will to act on the part of the executive branch and the security services. Rooting out terrorist groups must become a top priority for elected officials of all parties - andone that cannot be allowed to slide from political relevance after a few cases have been cracked. in an age in which the power of the Weapons which individuals may obtain grows incredibly from one year to the next, and in which information about how to obtain and use such weapons can be instantly transmitted by electronic mail from any part of the World, an active internal Security policy and aggressive counter-terrorism actions are becoming a crucial part of the mandate of every government, and officials must learn to rise to this challenge
Potential sources of terror must be studied and understood, groups preaching violence must be penetrated and catalogued, and groups actually preparing for it must be uprooted
Do not release jailed terrorists. Among the most important policies which must be adopted in the face of terrorism is the refusal to release convicted terrorists from prisons. This is a mistake that Israel, once the leader in anti-terror techniques, has made over and over again. Release of convicted terrorists before they have served their full sentences seems like an easy and tempting way of defusing blackmail situations in which innocent people may lose their lives. But its utility is momentary at best. Prisomer releases only embolden terrorists by giving them the feeling that even if
that prevent them from being contained and defeated with relatively little cost Several months before his tragic assassination Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin repeated several times that terrorism in Israel, Judea, Samaria and Gaza had orice again become a strategic problem Naively dismissing the PLO's professed ultimate aims as propaganda for internal consumption, the Labor government attempted for the first time to grant many of the PLO's demands-in the hope of being able to forge an alliance with it. At Oslo, Israel ineffect accepted the first stage of the PLO's Phased Plan a gradual withdrawal to the pre-1967 border and the creation of the conditions for an independent PLO state on its borders (except for Jerusalem and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria which were left for later negotiation) The Likud Government was determined not to accepta Palestinian state Within Israels borders We wanted to pursue peace and dialogue with the Palestinians without deluding ourselves and without excusing the dangerous rhetoric and support activities that help spawn terror Instead of accepting terror, we propose a global campaign against terror. We will abide by the following rules, and we ask that other democratic societies heed the following rules in order to combat terrorism: | Impose sanctions on suppliers of nuclear technology to terrorist states. The United States must lead the Western world in preventing the proliferation of nuclear technology, fissionable materials and nuclear scientists to Iran and any other regime with a history of practicing terrorism. While such action under UN supervision has been taken against Iraq in the wake of the Gulf War little or no action was taken until recently against the Iranian nuclear program. Israeliefforts to warn of the danger of the Iranian nuclear program and the Clinton Administrations moves to prevent Russia from supplying Iran with gas centrifuges should serve as two examples of what needs to be done on a far broader scale. All nuclear technologies and know-how should be denied to such states for they will invariably deploy them in the
service of their aggressive purposes it should be noted that all nuclear proliferation is bad, but some of it is worse. Nuclear weapons in the hands of say, the Dutch government are simply not the same as nuclear weapons in the hands of Oadhdafior the Ayatollahs in Teheran Action must be directed first against the suppliers and not the buyers, and it must beled by the United States. The supplying countries must be told bluntly that they must choose between trade with terrorist states and trade with the United States. A special American effort must be made to harness to this regime of anti-nuclear sanctions all the Western countries as well as Russia, China, lapan, and North Korea. The European countries in particular often hide behind liberal trade laws that enable European companies to engage in such trade without strict government supervision. The United States should insist that those laws be changed, i.e., that free trade, like free speech, has its limits, and these limits do not include the supply of laser triggers, gas centrifuges, and enriched uranium
The United States Congress has successfully pressed for enforcement of other standards of international behavior by denying preferred trade status and other economic favors to states limiting free emigration, sponsoring terrorism, or trafficking in drugs The Soviet Union was largely moved to permit Soviet Jews to begin emigrating during the 1970s when the Congress passed the Jackson-Vanik Amendment linking Soviet trade with the United States to freedom of emigration. Similar legislation could create an official list of states supplying nuclear technologies to other countries which could likewise be subjected to trade sanctions Countries which hawe international trading regulations so liberal that they can trade in nuclear death will find themselves having to change their laws or feel the pain where it matters to them most -in their pocketbooks. Suchalist should in
No comments:
Post a Comment