Introduction
When we think of terrorism, a barrage of images and scenes
fills our minds - bombings, firearms, veiled faces, and large-scale tragedies
such as the World Trade Center attack and plane hijackings. However, we often
overlook many other aspects of this complex issue. Why is that? To explore this
topic, we must first seek to define what we mean by patriotism and,
subsequently, contemplate the future. Therefore, my initial question to you is,
what exactly is the essence of patriotism, and how does it relate to terrorism?
Unveiling Terrorism's Many Faces
In recent days, our nation has been marred by a series of
bomb blasts, each more alarming than the last. Lives have been lost, and many
individuals have been left injured. This raises a crucial query: Who are the
perpetrators behind these acts, and why are they relentlessly spilling the
blood of innocent people? What drives these recurring attacks on various public
spaces, including markets, trains, buses, places of worship, courthouses, and
most disturbingly, our Parliament? What is the true purpose behind these
assaults? It is vital to determine whether these attacks have surged in
response to Mr. Bush's declaration of the Global War on Terrorism following the
fateful events of September 11, 2001, or if they predate this announcement.
This issue extends beyond our borders and has created a climate of fear
worldwide. Nevertheless, our focus is to discern between various forms of
terrorism and to unequivocally condemn this phenomenon. We must declare that
those behind these attacks are our enemies, posing a direct threat to our
nation. We shall not shield them at any cost. These individuals shed innocent
blood, force people into a state of fear, and seek to justify their ideologies,
marking them as extremists. They do not align with any religion or nation; rather,
they are adversaries of peace and justice.
The Unseen Terror: Displacement and Oppression
However, this portrayal is deemed incomplete by some of my
friends. In regions like Orissa, Rajasthan, Bihar, Maharashtra, Kashmir,
Punjab, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, and several other parts of the world,
farmers, tribal communities, laborers, and ordinary citizens are forcibly
displaced from their lands. They are met with bullets, loss of life, and
destruction of their homes. Street gangs subject them to all forms of
brutality, and these acts are orchestrated on behalf of vested interests, all
while masquerading under the banner of development. It matters not who you are,
your religious or caste background; as long as you pose a challenge to their
version of development, you become a target. As Bush once declared, "those
who are not with us are against us." So, is this not a form of terrorism?
When the US government conducts strikes in Iraq or Afghanistan, causing the
loss of millions of lives for personal gain, is this not terrorism? Notably,
the same American government holds responsibility for the deaths of 600,000
Iraqi children during Clinton's tenure, owing to economic sanctions placed on
the nation. Furthermore, Israel's prolonged occupation of Palestine and its
acts of aggression over 60 years have been nothing short of oppression and
brutality. The same holds true for Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf and the
oppressive rule of Saudi Arabia. Is this not terrorism in disguise? Regardless
of the label, it is worth pondering deeply.
Alternative Perspectives: Challenging the Label
An alternative perspective on this matter asserts that the
term "terrorism" is employed by the ruling establishment to suppress
voices of dissent that challenge its dominance and influence in a particular
political or geographical realm. This has sparked a debate over the usage of
the term and whether it should be eradicated altogether. My question remains
the same: Why? For instance, Bhagat Singh and his companions operated a
revolutionary terrorist organization, or inquilabi terrorists. Their intentions
have been well-documented, yet the debate on their classification persists. So,
we ask again: why? During the Russian Revolution, workers and peasants
abandoned their tools in favor of arms, prompting the capitalist regime to
label them terrorists. Malcolm X, an advocate for black freedom, met a similar
fate as the American government deemed him a terrorist. In our recent
conversation with Ahmed Maslanmani, a prominent figure in the struggle for
Palestinian independence, he emphasized the need for all forms of revolution in
light of the dire circumstances faced by the Palestinian people. Whether
through arms or other means, the call for resistance is compelling. Is this not
a form of terrorism? As author Leon Uris contends, "Terrorism is the war
of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich."
Two Approaches to Understanding Terrorism
Noam Chomsky, in his work "International Terrorism:
Image and Reality," presents two distinct approaches to the study of
terrorism. The first approach is the literal one, in which terrorism is taken
seriously, and its definition is closely examined. In this method, the focus is
on identifying what constitutes terrorism, investigating notable examples, especially
major instances, and exploring the causes and potential remedies. Conversely,
the propagandistic approach adopts an entirely different perspective. It
regards the concept of terrorism as a weapon exploited in the service of a
particular system of power. This method begins with the assumption that
terrorism is the responsibility of a designated enemy. Acts are labeled as
"terrorist" only when they can be plausibly attributed to this
pre-designated source; otherwise, they are dismissed, suppressed, or rebranded
as "retaliation" or "self-defense." Notably, governments,
particularly those in totalitarian states, often employ the propagandistic
approach.
Shaping Perceptions: Propaganda and the "Global War on
Terrorism"
Hence, a recurring question arises: Are we shaping our own
perceptions, whether influenced by American capitalists, our government, or its
military forces, to define what terrorism is? Noam Chomsky, in his book
"Manufacturing Consent" (A Propaganda Model), delves into the
inequalities of wealth and power, shedding light on how these dynamics affect
media interests and choices. This model elucidates the mechanisms by which
money and power can filter out news fit for publication, marginalize dissenting
voices, and enable the government and dominant private interests to disseminate
their messages to the public.
Prompting Critical Self-Reflection
This prompts us to consider whether the relentless narrative
of the "global war on terrorism" is not an extension of the same
propaganda tool. Amid constant attacks from all directions, we must reflect on
whether our thoughts, freedoms, and very existence are under attack. Are we, as
a people, being divided and pitted against one another? Is the unity and
collective voice against imperialism being subtly undermined?
Demands for Justice and Transparency
To navigate this complex issue, we need to scrutinize our
surroundings and pose critical questions. We must ascertain the nature of the
terrorist threat to us, our nation, and its people. Simultaneously, we
unequivocally denounce all attacks that have occurred and continue to occur
against innocent people. We demand that those responsible face the full force
of the law. The public must also be informed about the identities behind these
attacks, dispelling any masks of anonymity.
Conclusion: Embracing Nuance and Justice
In conclusion, our understanding of terrorism must encompass
its diverse manifestations and their impact on society. While unequivocal
condemnation of violence that harms innocent lives is non-negotiable, we must
also strive to address the root causes of these acts. Terrorism is a
multifaceted issue that necessitates nuanced perspectives, acknowledging the
suffering of marginalized communities and scrutinizing the motives behind the
terrorism label. To champion peace and justice, we must engage in open and
honest dialogue, critically examining the roots of terrorism, and working
together to create a fairer, more equitable world for all.
