In response to the bombings in London, John Major, a former British prime minister, told the Guardian newspaper that those who incite hatred should be deported from England.
“As far as those who literally spit hate at our country I would be prepared to deport those where it is clear that what they are doing is causing civil unrest and may cost other people, as a result of that, their lives.”
The “uncomfortable reality” was that many terrorists were born in or lived in the UK but had been taught to hate its culture.
The argument might have supporters and it is easily done if the culprits are not British, but what happens when those involved in terrorist activities are actually from the same country they attack? Should they still be deported? The other question is: If those people are highly dangerous and cannot be trusted in their own country, is it safe to move them to other countries?
Those people live in these societies, most of them were born here, have family and friends here and yet they choose to attack their own society. Blair said that the terrorists hate “our way of life” but I do not think that it is so simple. This could be right in cases where the culprits came from other countries; the attackers in 9/11 for example. But those who were involved in the London bombings, those who bombed the resort of Sharm El-Sheikh and those who are involved in bombings in Saudi Arabia — they are Egyptians, Saudis and British nationals.
George Bush also said those bombers hate the “Western way of life” and that is their main motive; this reasoning of course has its supporters.
Simplistic as this reasoning is, it is one argument, so we will concede this argument. So those responsible for 9/11 hated the American way of life, and those who did 7/7 in London hated the British way of life. Where does this leave bombers in Egypt and Saudi Arabia? Surely there is a difference between the Egyptian/Saudi way of life and the American/British way of life? This means that the argument about “way of life” just does not stand up to scrutiny and it raises more questions than it answers.
If each country deported those who oppose its way of life, would the problem vanish with the deportees or would we be deporting the explosive mentality to other places? How safe would the world be with this mentality in action, especially when there are many who want to adopt this mentality and use it as a weapon to fight whatever is categorized as “the enemy,” be it culture, government or occupation?
In an effort to see things in a different light, John Pilger wrote in Antiwar. Com: “The cause of the current terrorism is neither religion nor hatred for “our way of life”: It is political, requiring a political solution. It is injustice and double standards, which plant the deepest grievances.”
Politics is the answer; for whatever reasons those incidents happen, they all have a political agenda. It has nothing to do with religion. Country ties do not matter; religious ties are not heeded when planning to kill. It is evident that human losses are no deterrent. In London, Sharm El-Sheikh and even in Iraq, bombs explode but usually the victims are those who are not involved in the game. What these bombers are doing now is systematically creating a wave of hate against them within the ordinary people. The people who are killed in those bombings are ordinary people who are caught in the game between the terrorists and their “enemies”.
What is the best way to deal with distorted ways of thinking? Do the problems end with the pushing away of the source or do they end by dissecting the problems into parts and studying each on its own, reflecting on the sources of certain thoughts?
There is so much work to be done, internally and within each society. What makes fanatics take over the minds of young people and transform them into human explosives?
We need to understand first all the whys and then we can come up with theories and solutions. Has death become a trade, a job or a hobby?
• At the same time as the echoes of the explosions in London and Sharm died away, the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat reported that an Iranian conservative leader has placed an advertisement in an Iranian newspaper asking for volunteers for suicide bombings. The item mentioned that a few months ago, a movement called Zaitoun (Olives!) for men and women opened its doors for those who want to participate in suicidal or what they call “martyrdom” operations against the enemies of Islam.
The paper carried an interview with one of the volunteers who regretted his decision later and fled the country. The young man said that the first batch of “wannabe martyrs” numbered 80; their ages ranged from 14-30. It is interesting that the application asked for two photos and a birth certificate as required documents for registration. Very organized! So the culture of “kill your enemy and die in the process” is spreading, but the scary part is that it is no longer “kill your enemies” type of thought; it has become kill anyone.
The recruiters whether in Iran or any other country around the world, usually target a certain age group that is rebellious by nature, those whose dreams are not fulfilled or those whose minds are vulnerable. So the innocent is killed by the ignorant and the plotters stay safe in their houses counting the dead.
I finished reading the Asharq Al-Awsat story with just one question buzzing in my mind: “Are we ever going to be safe again?”
