Nightmare in Nairobi: What Can West Learn From Israel?
|
|
Civilians escape an area at the Westgate Shopping Center in
Nairobi that gunmen stormed, Sept. 21, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Siegfried
Modola)
|
The brutal terrorist attack in Nairobi’s Westgate Mall [Sept. 21] may
have put terrorism in Africa back in the headlines, but the truth is
that it never really left the headlines over the past few years. The
difference is that it was usually limited to local, African headlines.
Only an incident of this magnitude, with multiple casualties in an
ostensibly “Western” mall in an African state that was relatively
“organized” could capture front pages and open news broadcasts around
the world, at least for a short time.
Soon the Kenyans will finally take control of the situation (which has
already lasted many long days), and this no-man’s-land of global
terrorism in Africa will retreat to its natural setting, in the back
pages of the Western media, where it receives little, if any, attention.
We try to ignore what is happening there, in Africa, as if the whole
region doesn’t affect us. We try to “sweep it under the rug” and hide it
in the same place that we sweep everything we don’t want to see. But it
is there. It’s alive and kicking, shooting and killing and blowing
things up.
It is important to look at the incident in Kenya from a more global
perspective. The ground is shaking in Africa. There are tremors
throughout the continent, and they are not limited to Africa either.
Take Tunisia, for instance. Its own revolution was ostensibly quiet,
and an ostensibly moderate Islamist party is now in power there.
Nevertheless, we are starting to see the beginnings of radical Salafist
Islamic terrorism. The Arabic word salaf means “past,” as in
“past tense.” It refers to the idea of restoring Islam to its sources,
or rather to its earliest beginnings, when it was “pure” and
unconstrained by any outside influences. Salafists regard themselves as
the original Muslims, purer than all others. This sometimes connects to
extreme acts of terror unlike anything ever seen before.
They are starting to see this up close in Tunisia, and it is happening
under an Islamic government. Western intelligence sources have
identified a stream of young Salafists from Tunisia flowing into the
bloody maelstrom that is Syria, where they join groups that identify with al-Qaeda and participate in the fighting against Assad’s “secular” regime.
Moving onward, Bahrain, which is not in Africa, maintains close ties
with the continent. A senior Shiite leader was recently arrested there
because of his ties to Hezbollah. Groups connected to al-Qaeda are also
continuing their extensive activities in Sudan. In Iraq, some 100
civilians were killed over
the past few days in al-Qaeda sponsored attacks against Shiites (in
Baghdad), while the total number of casualties in that country since
September tops 800. In Yemen, a branch of al-Qaeda known as the “al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula” [AQAP] continues to operate against the military and civilians alike. A church was attacked in Pakistan [Sept. 22], and now, al-Shabab al-Mujahedeen, a branch of al-Qaeda in the Horn of Africa, launched the brutal attack in Kenya, apparently in response to the Kenyan army’s actions against the radical Islamic group in Somalia.
The question is, what came first? What is the cause, and what is the
effect? There are voices in Europe calling for decreased Western
involvement in Africa’s internal affairs. According to this hypothesis,
Western involvement in Libya and French involvement in Mali only
served to strengthen the radical elements throughout the continent. So,
for example, involvement in Libya disturbed a delicate balance of power
in the region, and resulted in the strengthening of the Boko Haram Islamic terrorist movement (its name means “Western education is forbidden.”)
The expansion of Western involvement results in increasing frustration
among the local population, which, in turn, leads to more intense
protests and the strengthening of militant movements in the region. This
theory holds that the Americans trained and armed the mujahedeen in
Afghanistan only to be attacked by them in Iraq — establishing it as a
pattern which will repeat itself everywhere. You can know how it
started, but you can never tell where or even if it will end. Every
tactical victory becomes a strategic defeat. Every short-term
achievement is replaced by a long-term setback.
This reminds me of a statement by a senior Shin Bet official
in Israel, shortly after the second intifada began in the territories in
2000. At the time, a wave of suicide bombers left Israel’s cities awash
in blood and flames, in body parts, and in pillars of smoke. Back then,
it seemed as if nothing could be done to counter the phenomenon of
dozens and even hundreds of young people who were ready to take their
own lives, as long as they took as many “heretics” as possible up to
heaven with them.
Islamic extremists believe that these suicide bombers obtain the rank of shahid (“martyr”) and go directly to heaven, where they receive the grace of 72 virgins. That same senior official in the Shin Bet, who
held a briefing back then for Israeli journalists, compared the efforts
to stop the terrorism that swept across Israel at the time to an
attempt “to empty the sea with a teaspoon.”
Well, several years have passed since then, and the sea has been dried
out, with a teaspoon or without. Israel launched Operation Defensive
Shield, and seized and purged the terrorist nests, while the
Shin Bet bolstered
its intelligence in the region. Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority
got stronger, and its security forces were revamped and restored with
Western aid. Today, Israel is almost free of terrorism, as it has never
been before. I therefore think that the Western approach that it is
better not to get involved at all, and that it is preferable to give up
in advance is fundamentally wrong. Essentially, it is nothing more than a
sort of pretext for typical Western helplessness.
“Were it not for French President François Hollande’s bold intervention
(in Operation Serval), there is a good chance that Mali would now be a
terrorist state under the aegis of al-Qaeda,” I was told this week by a
senior member of Israel’s National Security Council.
Meanwhile, Boaz Ganor, an Israeli expert on terrorism from the
Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya and head of its Terrorism and
Homeland Security Studies program, says, “The fact that some of the
Kenya terror attack perpetrators are Europeans or Americans who
converted to Islam proves that there is no local reaction to Western
involvement in Africa. The West tends to bury its head in the sand like
an ostrich when confronting such phenomena. You have to call it what it
is, and deal with it using the most appropriate tools. Had the French
not intervened in Mali, the situation today in that country would be
totally different. Islamic terrorism has been flourishing in Africa for
the past five or six years. Africa has become a primary target for
global jihad,
and there are clear reasons for this. It is necessary to deal with this
phenomenon, and not accept it as predetermined by fate.”
There are many diverse reasons for the growth of Islamic terrorism in
Africa. The continent is home to large and influential Islamic
communities, national security forces there are weak, ill equipped, and
poorly trained, the intelligence infrastructure is flimsy and
insufficient, and the population is impoverished and therefore
susceptible to outside influences, particularly by well-funded outfits
that know how to indoctrinate their targets. All of these factors make
Africa the new paradise of
Islamic extremism.
Western intelligence sources have identified the al-Qaeda branch in the
Maghreb nations of North Africa as the group that funnels activists and
the vast amount of weapons, which accumulated after the Libyan crisis,
to sensitive conflict zones in Africa and other places.
“There is extensive activity in prisons, too,” says Ganor. “Many of the
prisons have been breached, and many of the imprisoned terrorists have
escaped and disappeared. This even took place in Egyptian prisons,
during the revolution that toppled Mubarak. Experienced terrorists fled
the prisons and found sanctuary in the Sinai, in Gaza and in Africa.
So what can be done about it? “The first thing,” says a senior Israeli
defense official, “is not to give up. It’s important to invest in
intelligence, because impeding terrorism begins, continues, and ends
with precise and accurate intelligence. Make sure that the moderate
forces in troubled regions realize that we are with them, and that we
have no intention of abandoning them, as has already happened on several
occasions.”
In Israel, it is said that there is no reason to accept terrorism as
being predetermined by fate. It is true that Israel’s triumph over
terrorism was achieved in a limited and clearly delineated area, such as
the West Bank and the insulated Gaza Strip, while the current situation
involves entire countries and continents. But there are advantages,
too. In Israel, the job was left exclusively to the IDF [Israeli Defense
Forces] and the
Shin Bet, while the entire enlightened world
should bear the burden of dealing with global jihad and defending the
advocates of freedom and peace. Why? Because there’s no one else to do
it.
Ben Caspit is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor
's Israel
Pulse. He is also a senior columnist and political analyst for Israeli
newspapers, and has a daily radio show and regular TV shows on politics
and Israel. On Twitter: @BenCaspit
Labels: Islamism, Middle East, North Africa, Terrorism
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home