Part I: Background to Terrorism

Part I: Background to Terrorism, draws upon the expertise of Dr. Jonathan R. White, author of Terrorism: An Introduction, Third Edition (2002). White's text is part of The Wadsworth Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice Series. The part begins with several official definitions of terrorism and then goes on to discuss terrorism as a world threat with particular attention paid to the origins of Middle Eastern Terrorism. The last section of Part I looks at the threat of technological and biological terrorism faced by the United States-

A. Defining Terrorism

Even governmental bodies have several definitions of terrorism.

State Department: Title 22 of the United States Code section 2656f(d) contains the following definitions: The term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. The term "international terrorism" means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country. The term "terrorist group" means any group practicing, or that has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism.

SOURCE: 1999 Patterns of Terrorism.

FBI: The FBI defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization.

SOURCE: http://www.fbi.gov/publish/terror/ terrusa.html.

Vice President's Task Force: Terrorism is the unlawful use or threat of vio- lence against persons or property to further political or social objectives. It is usually intended to intimidate or coerce a government, individuals or groups, or to modify their behavior or politics.

SOURCE: Vice President's Task Force, 1986.

United Nations: A TERRORIST is any person who, acting independently of the specific recognition of a country, or as a single person, or as part of a group not recognized as an official part or division of a nation, acts to destroy or to injure civilians or destroy or damage property belonging to civilians or to governments in order to effect some political goal.

TERRORISM is the act of destroying or injuring civilian lives or the act of destroying or damaging civilian or government property without the expressly chartered permission of a specific government, thus, by individuals or groups acting independently or governments on their own accord and belief, in the attempt to effect some political goal.

SOURCE: http://www.inlink.com/~civitas/mun/ res9596/terror.html.

Defense Department: Terrorism is the unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives.

SOURCE: http://www.periscope.usni.com/demo/ terms/t0000282.html.

Defense Intelligence Agency: Terrorism is premeditated, political violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine state agents, usually to influence an audience.

SOURCE: http://www.periscope.usni.com/demo/ terms/t0000282.html.

B. The Domestic Response to Terrorist Attacks on America:
An Operational and Legal Assessment

This essay is originally written for this Web site by Alejandro del Carmen, University of Texas, Arlington

The morning of Tuesday September 11, 2001 was not expected to be any different from other summer mornings. Most Americans went about their business--rushing to work, dropping their children off at school, and planning their day as cell phones rang and crowded elevators suggested that the monotonous morning routine was at hand. However, at approximately 8:45 a.m., the world stood still with images of a civilian airplane crashing into the north tower of the World Trade Center. The assumption by those failing to admit foul play, was that this incident constituted nothing more than an accident by a pilot that may have lost consciousness or perhaps it was due to a mechanical failure. This, however, was a short-lived position. At approximately 9:03 a.m., a second civilian airplane crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center, leaving no doubt that this constituted a terrorist attack on America. This was later confirmed by reports that another airplane had crashed into the Pentagon while another hijacked plane had crashed south of Pittsburgh.

Those of us who watched live television on the morning of September 11, 2001 almost instantly recognized that we were living an historical moment that would be remembered and discussed for generations to come. Although many issues have been raised regarding the September 11th terrorist attacks, little has been discussed regarding the method of response and legality of operations being followed by government officials. Thus, the attempt here will be to examine both the law enforcement response and coordination efforts while discussing the legal framework of operation that supports the jurisdiction of federal law enforcement agencies and the executive branch in their efforts to fight terrorism.

The Law Enforcement Response

The law enforcement response to the September 11 terrorist attacks was immediate and followed what could be described as a "mechanical" and procedural model of operation. On September 11, at approximately 9:17 a.m., in accordance with procedures already established for purposes of responding to terrorist incidents, the Federal Aviation Administration¹ (FAA) acting under the direction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation ²(FBI), closed all New York City airports. Soon after, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey ³ proceeded to shut down all New York area bridges and tunnels. This was followed by the FAA’s instructions to ground all flight operations in the United States until further notice. This marked the first time in U.S. history when all air traffic had been completely halted.

Looking back at the sequence of events of September 11, many experts have argued that the swiftness and coordination of federal agencies such as the FBI and FAA, in conjunction with the New York Police Department ⁴ (NYPD) , was essential in preventing further terrorist attacks on September 11th. In fact, intelligence reports and evidence gathered by sources close to the investigation have revealed that additional terrorist attacks involving the use of commercial airliners had been planned for later on that day. Thus, the coordination of federal, state, and local authorities which resulted in the grounding of all U.S. airline carriers, not only prevented other terrorist attacks from taking place but also made it possible for federal agencies to re-assess the situation and direct resources where needed.

The coordination of federal agencies with local authorities in times of crisis have long been the topics of conversation in congressional hearings, budget appropriations committees, and the White House. These have assisted in the appropriation of federal funding for the planning, implementation, and rehearsal of crisis management operations. There is very little doubt that rehearsals helped federal authorities in coordinating their response to the September 11 tragedy.

The role of federal agencies in responding to terrorist acts is clearly outlined in government crisis management plans. The FBI serves as the lead federal agency in resolving a "crisis" while enjoying the assistance of at least one of sixteen state-based terrorism task forces that are currently in place throughout the country. Regarding the September 11 terrorist attacks, the FBI and New York Police Department Joint Terrorism Task Force ⁵(FBI-NYPD JTTF) took over the immediate responsibility of controlling and re-assessing the crisis continuously. They were assisted, as outlined in crisis management plans, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ⁶ (FEMA) in the coordination of "consequence management" (e.g., evacuation and search and rescue efforts) of the New York and Washington D.C. terrorist acts. However, it is important to note that due to the possibility that a situation could emerge (i.e., the September 11 terrorist attacks) dictating the need for an agency that could address "crisis" and "consequence management" needs simultaneously, the FBI has been authorized to perform both "crisis" and "consequence management" until the attorney general transfers the "consequence management" role to FEMA. Regarding the September 11 attacks, FEMA has played an instrumental role in coordinating and deploying 9-11 task forces to New York from various states including Massachusetts, Ohio, Missouri, Indiana, and California. Another four task forces were deployed to the Washington area. The principal task of these task forces was to participate in search and rescue missions; sadly, these turned into recovery missions once it was determined that only a few individuals survived the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

In the event that a foreign country requests assistance to respond to a terrorist act committed against United States interests abroad, the U.S. State Department ⁷ assumes primary responsibility for the coordination and distribution of federal resources to honor this request. Moreover, in the event of a terrorist attack on America, the U. S. Department of Defense’s ⁸ (DOD) primary responsibility is to provide specialized technical resources and logistical support to other federal agencies. Further, the DOD is said to remain flexible in its role to provide other forms of assistance as prescribed by the President of the United States. In cases involving nuclear threats, the U.S. Department of Energy provides technical and scientific assistance to locate hidden nuclear material while diagnosing possible nuclear devices. Although the September 11 attacks did not involve a nuclear threat, the U.S. Department of Energy has undertaken an active role in the support of the operations carried out by other federal agencies. Some of these include the Public Health Service ⁹ (PHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ¹⁰ (CDC). The primary responsibility of the PHS and CDC is to provide scientific personnel and equipment to assist in the investigation, control, and treatment of possible biological and chemical materials associated with terrorist attacks.

Following the recent terrorist attacks in New York and Washington D.C., the PHS and CDC continue to exhibit an active role in testing and treating individuals whose test results have suggested the presence of Anthrax—a virulent bacteria, usually a hazard of farm workers, which has been used as a chemical weapon. In addition to these and other federal agencies, the resources and technical assistance provided by state and local authorities is regarded as critical in the overall response to terrorist attacks. In an attempt to improve current and future efforts of local, state, and federal agencies in planning and responding to terrorist acts, the President of the United States has recently announced the creation of The Office of Homeland Security ¹¹. Although no one seems to know the main role this office will likely exert in its apparent oversight of other federal agencies, it is critical to examine both the legality and jurisdiction of federal agencies including The Office of Homeland Security, as they investigate and assess the current crisis affecting the United States.

Perhaps the role of the Office of Homeland Security and other federal agencies will be further defined as the United States moves to a greater phase of vulnerability. No one seems to ignore any longer the potential that exists for further terrorist attacks on American soil; perhaps the most traumatic psychological impact of these recent attacks is the question of when and how these attacks will come next. Some argue that they will be in the areas of cyberspace. That is, computers at major corporations, including government-based equipment, are likely to be the subjects of cyber-terrorist attacks initiated from overseas. It is further speculated that the banking industries along with the military are of particular vulnerability to acts of cyber-terrorism. According to Dartmouth’s Institute for Security Technology Studies, significant increases in computer attacks on governmental and corporate web sites and computer systems occurred around September 11; the true threat to computer security and financial, infrastructure, telecommunications, and corporate systems will only be known as time passes.

The effect of the current public panic regarding our current vulnerability to terrorism has recently taken the form of hatred towards middle-eastern groups that somehow resemble, in our minds, the culprit of the September 11 tragedy. Sadly, the situation is likely to escalate as the population begins to profile fellow members of the community by demanding that they "take another flight" or "select another bus." The overall attitude is one of hatred and suspicion that may result in a collective public outcry that demands the oppression and perhaps even the isolation of Americans of middle-eastern descent.

Jurisdiction of Federal Agencies

The federal agencies currently involved in the investigation of the September 11 terrorist acts are acting under the legal authority established by a series of executive and legislative acts that have been introduced in the past 18 years. Since President Reagan authorized the FBI to serve as the leading agency in responding to acts of terrorism against the United States, the U.S. Congress and the executive branch have helped enhance the jurisdiction of federal agencies in their counter-terrorism efforts. According to the former FBI Director Louis J. Freeh, in a statement before the Senate Judiciary Committee (1988), the FBI counter terrorism capabilities were greatly enhanced in 1984 and 1986 when "Congress passed laws permitting the Bureau to exercise federal jurisdiction overseas when a U.S. National is murdered, assaulted, or taken hostage by terrorists, or when certain U.S. interests are attacked." It is important to note that ever since Congress passed these laws, the FBI has conducted several hundred investigations overseas with the most recent involving the USS Cole. In addition, the power of the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies was greatly enhanced by Congressional initiatives such as the Antiterrorism and Intelligence Authorization Acts and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. Regarding the latter, section 302 of this Act authorizes the Secretaries of State and Treasury along with the Attorney General to designate as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) certain groups that meet specific criteria pertaining to their affiliation or financial support of terrorism. This designation, as has been evident in recent weeks, facilitates the United States Government with substantial power to freeze, through U.S. financial institutions, the assets belonging to FTOs.

With the recent approval of antiterrorism legislation, there is strong likelihood that the capability and jurisdiction of federal law enforcement agencies will expand significantly. For instance, among the new powers granted to them, federal agencies will be capable of detaining non-U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism for up to seven days without charging them with a specific offense. Federal law enforcement agencies will also enjoy relaxed wire tapping laws and greater subpoena powers for e-mail records of terrorist suspects.

The current assignments of most law enforcement agencies to different investigative tasks are being coordinated and delegated by Attorney General Ashcroft. As Attorney General of the United States, he has been given the authority to delegate and assign different roles to each of the federal agencies working on the September 11 terrorist case. Further, he oversees the prosecutorial aspect of these cases as well. That is, he has the authority to assign criminal cases to any of the hundreds of federal prosecutors that currently work for the Department of Justice.

Regarding the jurisdiction of the Homeland Security Office (HSO), it is expected that Tom Ridge, the recently appointed director of the HSO, will develop partnerships with federal, state, and local jurisdictions in an effort to detect, prepare, and respond to terrorist threats or attacks within the United States. As former governor of Pennsylvania, Governor Ridge brings to his new post a reputation of being tough, fair, and decisive. Further, as a former U.S. Marine, it is expected that Governor Ridge will carry out his duties successfully. These include the detection, prevention, preparation, protection, and response to terrorist threats against the United States.

Clearly then, the HSO will hold federal jurisdiction in its attempt to address current and future terrorism threats. In addition, recent congressional reports have suggested that HSO Director Ridge will benefit from more power than anticipated as bipartisan legislation expanding the authority of the HSO has been recently introduced and is currently being considered. In addition to the HSO, other offices of the executive branch of government in general, and the President of the United States specifically, have also enjoyed in the recent past, legislation that expands their authority in circumstances that threaten national security. For instance, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) has, under the provisions of the legislative-based Federal Public Health Statutory Authority, the power to assist States when facing communicable diseases or other health epidemics. Further, the so-called Posse Comitatus Act presents a long-standing national policy of defining the law enforcement role of civilian authorities; however, it leaves room to assign the military to this function in cases and under specific circumstances as authorized by the U.S. Constitution or Act of Congress.

Aside from Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the President of the United States has special powers granted by the legislative branch, through the enactment of special Congressional Acts, when facing unusual circumstances threatening the stability of the United States. Some of these Acts include the Insurrection Act (empowers the president to use the military), the Stafford Act (allows the use of federal resources to support state and local governments at times of domestic disaster), the National Emergencies Act (reflects on Congress’ judgment regarding the presence of presidential procedural requirements in some circumstances), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (provides direction to the president regarding the protection of public health and the environment). Clearly then, as we move to fight what has been called by some as "America’s new war," we must ask how much extraordinary power the framers of the Constitution would have allowed for the federal government to obtain in light of the current terrorist attacks on American soil.

References

Anti-Defamation League. (1999). "The Joint Terrorism Task Force: A Concept that Works." Law Enforcement Agency Resource Network. Washington, DC.

Bodrero, D. Douglas (1999). "Confronting Terrorism on the State and Local Level."
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. March 1999, Volume 68, Number 3.

National Domestic Preparedness Office. (2001). NDPO Fact Sheet. Thomas G. Kinnally. Washington, DC.

Stevens, Paul Schott. (2001). "U.S. Armed Forces and Homeland Defense: The Legal Framework." Center for Strategic and International Studies. Washington, DC.

The White House Press Release. (2001). "President Establishes Office of Homeland Security." Washington, DC. October 13, 2001.

U.S. Department of Justice. (1999). Mrs. Barbara Y. Martinez, Deputy Director-National Domestic Preparedness Office. "Preparedness for Terrorism Response: Before the U.S. House of Representatives." Congressional Statement: Federal Bureau of Investigation. Washington, D.C. June 9, 1999.

U.S. Department of Justice. (1998). Louis J. Freeh, Director-FBI. "U.S. Government’s Response to International Terrorism." Before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Congressional Statement: Federal Bureau of Investigation. September 3, 1998.

¹  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversees civil aviation in the United States. Further, it regulates the maintenance, operation, and certification of aircrafts flying in the continental United States. Its role since September 11 has been to oversee the safety-related flaws that have been cited as partly responsible for the recent terrorist incidents.

²   The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is the principal investigative agency of the United States Department of Justice. Its origins date back to 1908 when Attorney General Charles Bonaparte created a force of several special agents. Since September 11, the FBI, as the lead law enforcement agency, has committed its principal resources including approximately 4,000 field agents and 300 support staff members to the on-going terrorist investigation.

³  The New York/New Jersey Port Authority oversees the transportation infrastructure of a common area to both states—New York and New Jersey. Its main role during the September 11 attacks has been of cooperation with the FBI regarding the opening and closing of tunnels, bridges, and airports in the New York/New Jersey areas.

⁴   The New York Police Department (NYPD) is one of the oldest police departments in the United States. It dates back to 1658 when Dutch settlers established the Burgher guard—a paid group of eight patrolmen who were on the lookout, during evenings, for raids or fires. Today, the NYPD has a force of 38,000 officers who currently assist the FBI in its efforts to apprehend individuals associated with the September 11 terrorist attacks.

⁵   FBI and New York Police Department Joint Terrorism Task Force (FBI-NYPD JTTF) work together to prevent panic and share technological and intelligence-related information in order to more effectively investigate and apprehend individuals suspected of terrorism. Today, the FBI-NYPD Joint Terrorism Task Force is working closely with other federal agencies in an attempt to follow every possible lead that will uncover more information regarding the September 11 attacks on New York City.

⁶   The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is an independent governmental agency that responds directly to the President of the United States. FEMA is currently made up of 2,500 individuals who work on a full time capacity. They are assisted by over 5,000 stand-by disaster reservists who may be called as needed. The mission of FEMA has been to provide leadership and support in order to reduce the loss of life and property. Further, it aims at protecting the United States from all types of hazardous materials. Today, FEMA works closely with the FBI in the search and rescue and recovery missions at what has been called "ground zero"---the general area that used to house the World Trade Center Towers.

⁷   The United States Department of State is the lead United States governmental agency in charge of foreign affairs. The Department aims at the advance of U.S. objectives and interests overseas. Further, it protects the lives of American citizens overseas. Since September 11, the State Department has been active in promoting a strong coalition that supports the retaliation of the U.S. military. Internally, they have provided other federal agencies including the FBI with information regarding the foreign support received by terrorists in order to carry out their criminal act against the United States on September 11, 2001.

⁸   Department of Defense (DOD) is in charge of military affairs. It is headed by the Defense Secretary—a cabinet-level post created by Congress in 1947. Today, the Department of Defense oversees all branches of the United States military and advices the President of the United States on military affairs. Since September 11, the DOD has planned and executed a military campaign against Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban regime. In addition, DOD criminal investigators have coordinated their efforts with the FBI in the investigation on the attacks against the Pentagon on September 11.

⁹   Public Health Service (PHS) is the United States principal agency, which oversees over 300 programs aimed at protecting the health of all Americans. Today, the PHS has collaborated with the Centers for Disease Control and other federal agencies in the investigation of envelopes with Anthrax recently mailed to media and government officials.

¹⁰   Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is the lead federal agency charged with protecting the health and safety of people in and outside the United States. It also aims at preventing and controlling diseases while employing scientific research techniques designed to identify diseases throughout the world. Since the September 11 attacks, the CDC has deployed teams to Florida, New York, and Nevada in an attempt to respond to the Anthrax scare that is currently affecting the United States.

¹¹   The Office of Homeland Security was recently created by President Bush, with the aim of developing and coordinating a national strategy to offer security to the United States from terrorist attacks. The office is already beginning to coordinate the efforts by the executive branch to detect, protect and respond to any threats of terrorism in the United States. Although the September 11 attacks on the United States prompted the President to create this new office, it is expected that the role of the Office of Homeland Security will continue to increase and make a significant impact in the coordinating efforts of the federal government as it attempts to address the terrorism threat in the United States.

C. Origins of Middle Eastern Terrorism

The origins of modern terrorism have been reviewed in terms of its spread from Western European ideology to Russia, then back to the West by the incorporation of Russian revolutionary thought in the nationalist struggle in Ireland. Before discussing modern terrorism, it is necessary to look at the historical development of conflict in the Middle East. Several Middle Eastern groups took the concepts of modern terrorism and transformed them into a mode of conflict. This chapter introduces the development of religious and historical conflicts in the Middle East and the historical role of terrorism in the area. After you read this chapter, you should be able to do the following:

1. Outline a religious, political, and historical introduction to the Middle East.
2. Provide a brief synopsis of the major problems in the Middle East.
3. Identify the three primary sources of terrorism in the Middle East.
4. Describe the Zionist movement in Palestine from the beginning of World War I to the Arab Revolt.
5. Describe the role of terrorism in the birth of modern Israel.
6. State the problems caused by intra-Arab power rivalries.
7. Explain the origins of Shiaism and its impact on revolutionary Iran.

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE REGION

The term Middle East refers to a section of the world that encompasses North Africa, Southwest Asia directly south of Turkey including the Arabian peninsula, Iran, and Afghanistan. (See map in Figure 7.1.) Some commentators also include Pakistan in their geographical definition of Middle East because it is dominated by Islamic culture. The term was coined by American naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan toward the end of the nineteenth century. Albert Hourani (1997) presents one of the most definitive histories of the area. According to Hourani, the area is dominated by two major concerns: the religion of Islam and the history of the Arab people.

The Prophet Mohammed, the founder of Islam, received a series of revelations from Gabriel, an angel known in Hebrew and Christian traditions, about 610 C.E. Mystified by his encounters with the angel and unable to write, Mohammed returned to his family after each event and related the angel's accounts of God's desires for humanity in a series of poems and verses. Dutiful family members recorded these revelations, and they were incorporated into a holy book called the Q'ran, or the Verses. Mohammed, elated by his angelic encounters with the Almighty, spread a message of universalism, love, and monotheism.

Although Mohammed's message was essentially based on love, discipline, and submission to God's will, merchants in his hometown of Mecca were incensed by his religious pronouncements. Mohammed spoke of a final judgment against evil. Such eschatology threatened the religious trade of Mecca, a trade center where various cultures crossed paths and many deities flourished in an atmosphere of polytheism. In short, there was a profit to be made in statues, charms, and relics, and Mohammed's talk of one universal power uniting humankind was bad for business. The merchants took the only logical step they could see. They tried to kill Mohammed.

Fleeing from Mecca, the Prophet's utterances did not stop. He gained a large following and in a few years returned to Mecca not only with a message of love, but also with a sword. Mohammed declared a holy war, a jihad, on all nonbelievers. Mecca became a holy city, and the Arab realm of Islam spread. At the time of his death about 632, Islam was a dominating and growing force in the Middle East.

Mohammed's followers spread Islam and Arabic culture through the Middle East in the years after his death. Two dynasties of leaders, the Umayyads (661Ð750) and the Abbasids (750Ð1258), ruled the area in the years following Mohammed. Hourani points out that these leaders, or caliphs, theologically divided the world into the Realm of Islam and the Realm of War. The purpose of Islam was to subject the world to God's will. Indeed, Islam means submission to the will of God, and a Muslim is one who submits.

About 1000 C.E. the Turks began to take the domains of the Abbasids. Struggles continued for the next 100 years until a Mongol advance from east Asia brought the Abbasid dynasty to an end. The Mongols were eventually stopped by an Egyptian army of slaves, and their descendants gave rise to a new group of Turks known as Ottomans. The Ottomans were aggressive, conquering most of the Middle East and large parts of Europe. The Ottomans fought the Iranians on one border and central Europeans on the other border for many years.

Map of the Middle East

European relations with Islamic empires were not characterized by harmony. The West began its first violent encounters with the European attempts to conquer the Middle East known as the Crusades (1095 to about 1250). These affairs were bloody and instigated centuries of hatred and distrust between Muslims and Christians. European struggles with the Ottoman Empire reinforced years of military tensions between the two civilizations. Modern tensions in the area can be traced to the decline of Ottoman influence and the collapse of Iranian power in the eighteenth century. When these Islamic powers receded, Western Christian powers were quick to fill the void.

Yonah Alexander (1976) points out that issues of power shifts were complicated by a late nineteenth century concept called Zionism. Zionists began moving to Palestine in the 1890s for the purpose of establishing a Jewish homeland. This created some tension, as Syria and Egypt were vying for control of the area. The problem exploded in 1914, when World War I internationalized the political problems of the Middle East. Modern Middle Eastern terrorism can be traced to World War I's (1914Ð1918) political watershed.

A SYNOPSIS OF SOME MAJOR PROBLEMS

To understand terrorism in the Middle East, it is necessary to appreciate certain recent aspects of the region's history. To best understand the Middle East, keep the following assumptions in mind:
1. The current structure of Middle Eastern geography and political rule is a direct result of nineteenth century European imperial influence in the region and the outcomes of World War I.
2. Many of the Arab countries in the Middle East place more emphasis on the power of the family than on contemporary notions of government. However, Israel rules itself as a parliamentary democracy.
3. The modern state of Israel is not the nation mentioned in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles or the Islamic Q'ran. It is a secular power dominated by people of European descent.
4. Arabs, and Palestinians in particular, do not hold a monopoly on terrorism.
5. The religious differences in the region have developed over centuries, and fanaticism in any one of them can spawn violence. There are fanatical Jews, Christians, and Muslims in the Middle East who practice terrorism in the name of religion.
6. Although the Middle East has been volatile since 1948, the year Israel was recognized as a nation-state, modern terrorism grew after 1967. It increased after 1973 and became a standard method of military operations in the following two decades.
7. In 1993, however, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) renounced terrorism. Ironically, this has created tremendous tension. On the Arab side, some groups have denounced the PLO's actions while others have embraced it. The same reaction has occurred in Israel, where one set of political parties endorses peace plans and another prepares for war. Middle Eastern peace is a very fragile process, and terrorism is a wild card. It can upset delicate negotiations at any time, even after a peace treaty has been signed and implemented (for an example, see Hoffman, 1995).
8. All of these issues are complicated by a shortage of water and vast differences in social structure. The area contains some of the world's richest and some of the world's poorest people. Most of them are far from water sources.

One can best begin to understand the Middle East by focusing on the world of the late 1800s. During that time period, three critical events took place that helped to shape the modern Middle East.

First, the Ottoman Empire, the Turk-based government that ruled much of the Middle East, was falling apart in the nineteenth century. This meant the Ottoman Turks encountered domestic challenges across their empire as various nationalistic, tribal, and familial groups revolted, and they faced foreign threats, too. The Iranian empire had collapsed earlier, but Great Britain, France, Germany, and Russia intervened in the area with military force. Each European country was willing to promise potential rebels many things, if they revolted against the Turks. Realistically, few of those promises could be kept.

The second critical event came from a political movement called Zionism. From 1896 to 1906, European Jews, separated from their ancient homeland for nearly 2,000 years, wanted to create their own nation. Some of them favored Palestine, whereas others wanted to move to Argentina. In 1906, those who backed Palestine won the argument, and European Jews increasingly moved to the area. They did not ask the Palestinian Arabs, the people who lived in Palestine, for permission.

Finally, European armies engulfed the Middle East from 1914 to 1918, as they fought World War I. They continued to make contradictory promises as they sought to gain spheres of influence in the region. When the war ended, the victorious nations felt they had won the area from the Turks. They divided the Middle East, not with respect to future political problems but to share the spoils of victory. This created long-term political problems.

D. Technological and Biological Terrorism

U.S. VULNERABILITY TO TECHNOLOGICAL TERRORISM

The United States is the most technologically advanced superpower in the world. Technology has opened new doors to the future, which many Americans have taken for granted. Other national competitors have taken advantage of the United States's nonchalant attitude toward technology at times, but the United States stands as one of the masters of new industrial and technological techniques. Along with Japan and Western Europe, the United States is a technologically oriented society.

The irony of U.S. success with technology is that the country has become vulnerable to attacks on technology and by technology. One does not have to agree with Brian Clark's political position to understand that the United States is dependent on technology. While the military has taken precautions to shield defense and weapons systems from interference, civilian industry has fallen behind. Given U.S. dependence on technology, this has created a window of opportunity for terrorists.

There is no clear way to react to the problem of technological vulnerability. Some analysts, like Halstead and Ballard (1997), have called for rigid new safeguards and massive new security efforts. Others believe a calm assessment of potential threats is more in order (Heim, 1984). Analysts do not agree about the extent of the threat, and most of them focus on weapons of mass destruction. A study by B. J. Berkowitz et al. (1972) was one of the first to examine the implications of mass destruction weapons in the hands of terrorists. Its conclusion was that civil chaos would result. According to the study, several attempts were made by radical groups to employ some level of CBW attack from 1967 to 1970. Although this information is dated, the Aum Shinrikyo attack in Tokyo demonstrates the reality of the threat.

The Berkowitz study points to several areas of vulnerability. Metropolitan water supplies are subject to contamination. Although poisons would dissipate in a large volume of water, general public reaction would be one of panic. In addition, criminal organizations have attempted to produce chemical weapons for extortion and assassination. Berkowitz and his colleagues also point out attempts to steal or produce CBWs in Europe and the United States.

Robert Mullen (1978) also examines modern society's vulnerability to technological weapons. The capacity for mass destruction is a recent historical development. In the past, killing many people required many people to do the killing. Technology has changed this. Mass destruction terrorism can be inferred from CBWs and nuclear weapons.

Mullen states that terrorism based on massively destructive weapons involves skills that few terrorist groups possess.Technical weapons require technical skills and support networks.Many groups lack these capacities, but Mullen says the past may not be indicative of the future.The capability for mass destruction exists.

Robert Kupperman and Darrell Trent (1979) deal with some of the issues posed by technological threats. Kupperman (1985b) examines the issue again, with a specific focus on organizational responses to technological threats, and he describes the potential threat that technological terrorism poses for the United States. Both Kupperman and Trent strike a middle ground, however, between complacently ignoring the problem and overreacting to it.

In Kupperman and Trent's analysis, responsible policies should be developed to meet the potential threat. The response should be one of policy analysis and application. Industrial and technological safeguards will work only if they are accompanied by proper emergency procedures. Kupperman and Trent suggest models for restructuring U.S. federal bureaus and emergency planning networks.

Unlike many analysts, Kupperman and Trent believe the analytical literature on terrorism to be fairly complete. They do not see the need to add to the theoretical body of knowledge. Instead, they argue that Walter Laqueur has appropriately described the historical and social background of terrorism and that Brian Jenkins has adequately analyzed current and future trends. The only gap in the literature is in the area of technology.

The authors were trying to get policy moving in the direction of counterterrorism; technology provided their motivation for writing. Kupperman and Trent believe the problem of technological terrorism has generally been ignored and the U.S. government is woefully underprepared to deal with a technological threat. Accordingly, they describe several horrifying potential scenarios for terrorism (without giving terrorists clues on weapons construction or utilization). They hope the devastating nature of the scenarios will grab policymakers' attention.

Kupperman and Trent believe that social deterrents are insufficient to rule out the use of mass destruction weapons. Increased possession of nuclear and chemical weapons has been accompanied by their use or threatened use. Nation-states have legitimized the use of mass destruction weapons, hence paving the way for terrorists to adopt them. The analysts conclude that it is time to start realizing the truly destructive nature of such weapons.

The most common type of terrorist weapon is a bomb. It has been historically popular, it is easy to deliver, and it poses a difficult puzzle for police to solve. Kupperman and Trent say that when groups mature, they move toward more sophisticated weaponry, but in their initial stages, groups find that bombs are cheap and effective tools. Kupperman and Trent state that the danger is an enhancement of bombs through CBWs or nuclear capacities. Recent experience demonstrates that even sophisticated conventional bombs can destroy civilian aircraft.

Kupperman and Trent argue either type of weapon can be used for psychological impact, and they predict the public would react with panic if either nuclear or CBW agents were introduced by terrorists. They believe that because nuclear bombs are difficult to make or steal, terrorists would achieve the same psychological impact by spreading radioactive materials. If accompanied by an effective means to spread the toxins, chemical and biological weapons have a similar potential.

Attacks on technological targets are another way to achieve mass destruction without the need for technological weapons. In addition, Kupperman and Trent point to the ability of terrorists to paralyze the economy by attacking targets necessary for production and service. Electrical power grids are important from this standpoint, and the most likely targets are transmission lines and transformers. Gas and petroleum lines are even more vulnerable, and conventional and nuclear power plants present tempting targets. They also consider the vulnerability of computer networks.

In Kupperman and Trent's analysis, counterterrorism must begin with a reorganization of the federal bureaucracy. Without discussing the specifics for each agency, their recommendations can be summarized in two steps. First, the analysts want a few key federal agencies to have definite responsibility for emergency situations. The role of individual agencies should be spelled out in policy guidelines, and bureaucratic managers should be held responsible for their agencies' abilities to deal with potential terrorism.

In their second series of recommendations, Kupperman and Trent want the government to develop realistic management plans to coordinate the response of its various units. There is a need to develop a small, knowledgeable crisis staff to direct operations in the event of a technological attack. According to the researchers, it is not necessary to become preoccupied with the counterterrorist functions of each agency because mass destruction terrorism is a lowprobability occurrence. However, preparing for an event with key managers can serve as both a deterrent and a practical method to restore normalcy in the event of an attack.

Some security specialists have focused on the idea of prevention. Indeed, it comprises the philosophy of such organizations as the American Society for Industrial Security. Prevention of technological terrorism is a corollary to safeguarding technological materials. Robert Kindilien (1985) makes this argument with reference to the nuclear power industry. Enhanced security will reduce the risk of losing dangerous material and waste. American industry is currently vulnerable to such losses. Kindilien says it is necessary to assess risks and attack them with an aggressive security system.

Another point about the vulnerability of the United States has been raised by many analysts. If a mass destruction threat developed, the initial public reaction would probably be one of panic. A fear of chemical weapons and radioactivity pervades popular culture. If the American public believed a major city was in jeopardy, there is reason to believe fear would sweep the nation. In a climate of fear, cherished liberties can be destroyed.

Russell Ayers (1975) and John Barton (1980) have raised this issue. In this sense, the corollary to technological terrorism is another threat. In reacting to potential mass destruction, security and police powers would be increased. In many societies, this has been closely correlated with a decline in civil liberties. The ideal function of the American justice system is to protect individual rights, but historically, in times of panic, the government and the police have forgotten this. There is good reason to believe that technological terrorism would create panic, and civil rights often fall by the wayside in such situations.

Another potential target of technology and terrorism is the energy industry. Oil and gas are the United States's chief means of energy. An article placed in an addendum to the Kupperman and Trent analysis raises the problem of securing the energy industry. The analysis claims the transportation and storage of fossil fuels is not as safe as people tend to assume.

SECURITY PROBLEMS IN THE ENERGY INDUSTRY

The United States relies on energy to support its technology, and the interruption of energy supplies could be construed as a national security threat. If a nation or terrorist group could shut off U.S. energy, it could close down major portions of the economy. Secure energy production, transportation, and storage are all critical to the United States.

Kupperman and Trent state that electrical systems are quite vulnerable. Attacks on key power transformers could stop the flow of electricity to large segments of the country for quite some time. Damage to key generating facilities would also have long-term effects. Currently, the threat is localized. Power stations and transformers have been subject to industrial sabotage, but this has had only local, short-term effects.

Maynard Stephens (1979, pp. 220Ð223) assesses the vulnerability of U.S. oil and natural gas systems. Stephens argues the interruption of oil and gas delivery would have the most devastating economic impact of any attack on energy. The reason is that oil and gas form the United States's greatest source of energy. Seventy-five percent of U.S. energy needs are filled by oil and gas. Although electrical power grids have backup supplies, no method of continuing service is available if oil and gas lines are destroyed.

According to Stephens, the efficiency of the systems is the major problem. Industry and government planners designed U.S. pipelines for maximum flow and distribution of the product. As a result, oil and gas are channeled over hundreds of miles in a highly efficient and concentrated set of pipelines. But this very efficiency has weakened the security of the system: An attack on a major line would magnify the scope of the attack.

Stephens's main worry is the lack of federal and state concern about protecting the gas and petroleum industries. He claims the government has taken almost no protective measures. Stephens says because domestic terrorism in the United States has not often been manifested, threats to the oil and gas industries appear to be abstract.

Things have changed since Stephens's article appeared. Not only has the United States been subject to domestic terrorism, but also some of it has been supported by foreign governments. Kupperman and Trent appear to have been correct. In the early stages-the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City, for example-the primary weapon has been the bomb. More sophisticated attacks can be expected in the future. The oil and gas distribution systems are perfect targets. Transportation centers and parts are next in line.

To illustrate the point, consider a situation like the 1991 Persian Gulf War. American heavy equipment for the war was shipped through ports along the Atlantic seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico. Assume you are a Middle Eastern leader and the United States is preparing a Desert StormÐstyle operation against your country. You do not have conventional military forces cable of stopping the United States, but you have several terrorist training camps in your country and links to international terrorist structures inside the United States. What could you do?

If you had the technological sophistication, it would be relatively easy to strike the United States. If you could cause sufficient explosions in the ports at Houston, Charleston, Norfolk, and New York, you would limit American capacity to move heavy equipment to the Middle East. If this was combined with attacks on the electrical power grid and gas pipelines, your efforts would be more effective. Finally, a few well-placed bombs like that in Oklahoma City would cause general panic.

This hypothetical scenario is not designed to make you paranoid, and if it did happen, it probably would not end with a devastating defeat of the United States. In addition, any nation that would attempt such an undertaking would require extensive planning and coordination, something far beyond the leadership capacity of a street thug like Saddam Hussein. If it did happen, however, it would isolate military forces in the region and hamper their supply lines. In the opening stages of Desert Storm, it could have resulted in thousands of American casualties. Therefore, policies and emergency plans must begin to anticipate U.S. technological vulnerability. If terrorism is approached as a legal problem, a national defense role for federal, state, and local police agencies must be recognized.

THE THREAT OF NUCLEAR TERRORISM

The most frequently discussed aspect of future terrorism is nuclear attack, and it seems to have a psychological impact far more frightening than other scenarios. This may be due to the widespread fear of nuclear weapons, or to the fact that a greater body of knowledge on the topic is available to the general public. Regardless, it is frequently impossible to discuss the future of terrorism without examining the potential impact of nuclear weapons or radioactive material (Sanz, 1992).

One of many analysts who have addressed the question of nuclear terrorism, B. David (1985) makes four critical points about the issue. First, nuclear terrorism and chemical and biologicalweapon terrorism are usually discussed together. Second, true nuclear terrorism requires either a difficult production process or the theft of radioactive materials or weapons; CBW agents are easier to produce and obtain.Third, a key to responding to nuclear terrorism is to discern the motivation of a group that might be willing to use weapons of mass destruction. Finally, there are still social sanctions against employing such weapons.

Martha Crenshaw (1977) raises other points. First, Crenshaw is concerned about the proliferation of nuclear materials on an international level. She believes the abundance of nuclear materials increases the likelihood of nuclear terrorism.

More than two decades after Crenshaw's analysis, the nuclear issue still dominates segments of the international agenda. President Clinton signed a United NationsÐsponsored antinuclear treaty in 1996, but some nations, such as India, refused to support the ban. The collapse of the Soviet Union also made active nuclear weapons available to terrorist groups.

Crenshaw also expresses concern about the spread of the nuclear power industry. The number of nuclear power plants increases the potential for attacks on power-generating stations and the theft of waste material. Terrorists who lack the ability to build or buy nuclear weapons can simply obtain nuclear waste from a generating station and detonate it. This would produce a groundlevel "nuclear" blast, complete with fallout.

Brian Jenkins (1975, 1980, 1986, 1987) has approached the question of nuclear terrorism cautiously and provides several answers. He gave his first answer in 1975, admitting that his conjectures were purely speculative. His answer has been slightly revised through the years, but his initial response has been partially validated by nearly three decades of developments in terrorism. Basically, Jenkins says we do not know whether terrorists will use nuclear weapons but we have no reason to assume that they will automatically evolve in that direction.

Jenkins says nuclear terrorism is possible, but he is reluctant to see it as a major threat. He believes terrorists are rational creatures, and nuclear terrorism is irrational. Nuclear weapons would not work in low-level operations, and once the weapons were deactivated, there would be no incentive for governments to continue to honor any negotiated promises. Social restraints tend to make nuclear devices impractical.

However, the possibility of nuclear terrorism cannot be dismissed. Jenkins points out that many Americans believe nuclear terrorism is more likely than a nuclear war. Trends in nuclear-related terrorism have reinforced public beliefs. Jenkins equates attacks on nuclear facilities with nuclear terrorism, and his data indicate that attacks on the nuclear industry and on weapons facilities are declining. Yet attacks continue, accompanied by the general trend toward an increased level of violence. If nuclear terrorism is not inevitable, it is certainly not impossible.

Nuclear terrorism could take a variety of forms. Jenkins says terrorists could attack nuclear facilities and use the entire area as a weapon. They could also simply steal material or ask a ransom for it. Terrorists could fabricate a nuclear hoax, and the ensuing panic might be as dangerous as a threatened explosion. In the simplest case, terrorists could spread radioactive material; in the most complex case, they might detonate a device. More recently, British sources (Ryan, 1996) indicate that the Russian Mafia has attempted to sell live nuclear weapons and supporting technology on the black market. The term nuclear terrorism is used frequently, but for a variety of potential activities.

Several people have commented on Jenkins's position. Paul Leventhal and Yonah Alexander (1986, pp. 33Ð53) recorded a speech by Jenkins on nuclear terrorism and some experts' reactions to it. One member of the audience, David Mabry of the U.S. Department of State, agreed with Jenkins about the rationalism of terrorists. Mabry said terrorists do not kill for the sake of killing; they have a political motivation for their actions.

Mabry disagrees with Jenkins's assessment of the probability of nuclear terrorism. Given the increasing violence of terrorist groups, the lure of nuclear terrorism is becoming too great. State sponsors of terrorist groups have greater access to nuclear weapons, further increasing the possibility of such terrorism. Mabry was convinced that Iran and Libya would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons in a terrorist incident. Finally, because bombing is the most popular terrorist act, nuclear bombing might simply be viewed as its logical extension.

Yural Ne'eman, a physics professor and former Israeli cabinet minister, also disagreed with Jenkins. He was critical of Jenkins's reluctance to distinguish attacks on nuclear facilities from the use of nuclear materials in terrorism. Ne'eman said they are not the same thing and they certainly are not positively correlated. Therefore, declining rates of attacks on nuclear facilities had no connection with the probability of a use of nuclear material in terrorism.

Ne'eman also believed most terrorism was state-sponsored. Far from the individual groups that Jenkins imagined, Ne'eman saw most terrorists as an extension of national governments. Ne'eman agreed with Mabry that Iran and Libya were prime candidates for the use of nuclear weapons. He also added Iraq to the list and completely dismissed Jenkins's notion that terrorists would be somehow constrained by a sense of morality.

Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre (1980) wrote a terrorist thriller titled The Fifth Horseman that featured fictional state-sponsored technological terrorism. The premise of the book is that Moamar Khadaffy has managed to construct a hydrogen bomb. He places the weapon in New York City by clandestinely shipping it to the United States with a semiautonomous terrorist group. An army of bureaucrats, emergency personnel, and police officers search for the device while Khadaffy negotiates with the U.S. president about Libyan demands. The United States is paralyzed in its response for a variety of diplomatic reasons.

The premise of the novel is exciting, and the book is fun to read. In the real world, however, the scenario poses some problems. If a nation was to sponsor nuclear terrorism against the United States, it would run the risk of full American military reprisal. Mass destruction could obviously be construed as an act of war; American military forces have been deployed for terrorist events of far less significance than a nuclear explosion. This refers back to the policy debate between legality and defense.

The United States has undertaken efforts to prepare for technological terrorism. According to Christopher Dobson and Ronald Payne (1982b, pp. 51Ð76), an array of federal agencies has joined forces to combat all acts of domestic terrorism. Donald A. DeVito and Lacy Suiter (1987, pp. 416Ð432), both directors of state emergency planning agencies, suggest that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) be used as the clearinghouse for bureaucratic coordination. They say terrorism demands emergency planning. FEMA has taken a leading role in preparing for effective interaction among local, federal, and state governments. It is supported by a variety of federal regulatory bodies and law enforcement agencies.

BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL TERRORISM

Chemical and biological agents might well be the weapons of choice should terrorists use weapons of mass destruction. FEMA (1998) gives several reasons. First, biological and chemical agents are easier to produce than nuclear weapons or radioactive material. Second, as many as 26 nations appear to have developed chemical weapons, and 12 more nations are seeking to do so. In addition, 10 other nations have biological weapons programs. Finally, chemical and biological agents are easier to transport and utilize than nuclear weapons. Chemical and biological weapons are relatively easy to use, they are available, and they are mobile. Have they become, as some people argue, the poor person's nuclear bomb?

To answer this question, look at the nature of each agent. Ron Purver (1995) offers an outstanding summary of open source information on chemical and biological agents. Purver says biological weapons are based on microorganisms and poisons produced by plants and animals. Most of the weapons terrorists would use have been classified as agents that would produce fever, a plague, or some other type of infectious disease. Some of the agents are extremely lethal, while others would be used to incapacitate people. Purver also says some terrorism analysts fear the development of a genetically engineered disease.

Chemical agents are not as lethal as biological agents, and they are easier to control. The four common types of chemical weapons are: nerve agents, blood agents, choking agents, and blistering agents (see Table 15.1). Nerve agents enter the body through contaminated food or water, air, or contact with skin. They cause uncontrolled body fluids to flow from openings in the body and induce muscle spasms. In high doses, victims can go into convulsions, and death may come from the evacuation of body fluids within a matter of minutes. Sarin is a common type of nerve weapon. Blood agents are absorbed through breathing and are carried through the body by breathing. They cause lethal damage by reacting with enzymes in the body. Hydrogen cyanide, the gas used in Nazi concentration camps, is a blood agent. Choking chemicals, such as chlorine gas, attack the lungs and prevent people from breathing. These agents cause the walls of the lungs to flood with mucus, and the victim literally drowns in the secretions. Blistering agents are liquids or gases that burn the skin. The mustard gas used in World War I is a blistering agent (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, 2000).

There are many advantages for terrorists who would like to use chemical or biological weapons. John Deutch (1996), former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, believes the availability of chemical and biological weapons and the ease with which they can be transported make them the weapon of choice for terrorists who want to useWMDs. Jessica Stern (1998) says terrorists may use chemical and biological agents with crude delivery systems. In addition, Stern points out that the resulting panic caused by the use of such horrendous weapons will increase the aura of the group employing them.

While these weapons are horrific, many analysts feel they are inadequate substitutes for nuclear weapons. The reason is that there are more disadvantages than advantages. Leonard Cole (1996), one of the leading experts in the field of chemical and biological weapons, points out that these weapons are difficult to control.

Biological weapons virtually have no controls, and once they are introduced, the group using the weapon might well become a victim. For example, if a terrorist group was able to start a black plague epidemic in a major city, how could it stop the spread of the disease? In addition, it takes time for a biological agent to work. It must incubate, then spread from person to person. Most biological agents are destroyed by weather and sunlight. The agents that can survive, such as concentrated anthrax, are so lethal that they would threaten to contaminate their users for decades. According to Cole, biological weapons are unreliable.

Table 15.1 Chemical and Biological Agents

SOURCES: Canadian Intelligence Service, and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

Chemical weapons are more readily controlled, but they are not as lethal. The FBI's Larry Mefford (1996) shows that chemical weapons are best used in a confined area. They would be an excellent choice for an attack on a building, but their effectiveness in mass destruction is limited. Despite these disadvantages, one should not assume that these weapons will not be used. Terrorists have access to chemical and biological weapons, they have used them, and will probably use them again.

Stephen Bowers and Kimberly Keys (1998) offer a sobering analysis of the likelihood of continued chemical and biological terrorism. Like many other analysts, Bowers and Keys believe the recent infusion of racism and religion in terrorist activities has changed the structure of modern terrorism. Religious zealots are more interested in destruction than the aura created by media coverage. Chemical and biological agents are attractive to such people.

Bowers and Keys propose a three-step methodology for approaching terrorism and technology. First, they argue that group profiling and behavioral analysis has been a powerful tool for counterterrorism. To paraphrase a popular witticism among psychology professors, nothing predicts future behavior like past behavior. Bowers and Keys recommend that law enforcement and defense agencies aggressively analyze the behavior of terrorist groups in order to predict future behavior. Second, like Doug Bodrero, they recommend constant monitoring of social indicators. Terrorist groups do not develop overnight; they are produced by social forces. Law enforcement personnel must constantly monitor the social climate that produces violence. Finally, Bowers and Keys state a key point. Security personnel must share information. The days of FBI, CIA, and ATF rivalries are long gone. WMD threats make agency rivalries superfluous.

Law enforcement and the military can learn quite a bit about responding to WMDs from the firefighting service. Firefighters have dealt with chemical spills and biological disasters for decades. They have systems to identify and contain contaminated areas. Indeed, they already employ the biological and chemical detection systems used by the armed forces. Law enforcement, security, and military personnel can find a wealth of information on response at the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg, Maryland.

CYBERTERRORISM

On January 22, 2000, President Clinton announced a billion dollar plan to fight cyberterrorism. The first question that came to many analysts of terrorism minds was: Is there a cyberterrorism? The answer is not clear. Former FBI counterterrorism specialist William Dyson (2000) perhaps gives the best answer. Dyson says computer terrorism is not a form of terrorism, but terrorists may use computers during the commission of terrorist acts.

Terrorists may use computers in a number of ways. Yael Shahar (1997) envisions scenarios where viruses are implanted in an enemy's computer. He also predicts "logic bombs" that lie dormant for years until they are instructed to overwhelm a computer system. Shahar also believes bogus chips can be sold to sabotage an enemy's computer network. Trojan horses can have a malevolent code to destroy a system, while back doors allow terrorists to enter "secure" systems. Shahar also believes conventional attacks such as overloading an electrical system serve to threaten computer security.

Michael Whine (1999) agrees with Shahar's conclusions, claiming that computer technology is attractive to terrorists for several reasons. Computers allow groups to remain connected, while allowing covert discussions and anonymity. Computer networks are also much less expensive and work intensive than the secretive infrastructures necessary to maintain terrorist groups. Computers also allow terrorists to reach their audiences with little effort. Whine concludes that computers are a force multiplier for terrorist groups.

Bowers and Keys (1998) believe cyberterrorism appears to be a threat because of the nature of modern society. Cyberterrorists may attack the infrastructure. In other words, they can destroy the underpinnings of the social base.Bowers and Keys believe this happens in terms of information flow. Since modern Western society functions on information, cyberterrorists threaten to interrupt or confuse the flow of information. Imagine, they say, an attack on the banking industry through the flow of fund information. Such an attack could completely devastate a society.

Bowers and Keys believe the ability of cyberterrorists to disrupt the economic system is matched by their ability to destroy confidence in social institutions. Cyberterrorists could make an audience feel as if their world is falling apart. Cyberterrorists can target health institutions as well as government services and businesses. They may even attack defense establishments.

By the same token, Bowers and Keys say cyberterrorism belongs to a broader category called "information warfare."Dyson (2000) agrees with all of these conclusions, and adds that terrorists even use the computer to train other terrorists. There is no doubt that computers are vulnerable to crime, and terrorists do use and will continue to use computers. In addition, Tiffany Danitz and Warren Strobel (1999) indicate that political activists can use the Internet as a command-and-control mechanism. Computer security is a necessity in commerce, government, and personal affairs. Terrorists, enemy military forces, criminals, hackers, and others will use computers to their advantage at the expense of others.

This chapter has presented the most depressing aspect of modern terrorism, the megadeath and destruction that can be wrought by terrorists using technology. Yet, Dyson's point needs to be considered. Computers are tools used by terrorists. WMDs and other forms of technology represent the same thing. Perhaps there is no technological terrorism, but there are terrorists who will use technological weapons. Regardless of the terminology, it is a frightening scenario.

Part II: Religion and Terrorism

Religion is a system of beliefs, symbols, and rituals, based on some sacred or supernatural realm, that guides human behavior, gives meaning to life, and unites believers into a community. Social Scientists study the role religion plays in society, how people become religious and the different forms of religious organizations. Religion has long played a crucial role in the development of social and political attitudes. In this part the site draws, again, from White, Terrorism, and from Joan Ferrante's text, Sociology: The United States in a Global Community, Fourth Edition (2000). Prof. Ferrante writes on religion with an emphasis on Afghanistan.

A. Religion and Middle Eastern Terrorism

Middle Eastern terrorism is centered on the struggle for control of the area claimed by the Israelis and the Palestinians. Closely related to this issue is the spread of fundamentalist Islam beyond the Iranian Revolution. This struggle has appeared in three forms: struggle for control of the Palestinian movement, the directions of revolutionary Islam, and the spread of terrorism from the Afghan war. Since the mid-1990s, all three of these issues have been dominated by fervent religious fundamentalism. The Palestinian movement has been influenced by revolutionary Islam, especially from Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Other revolutionary groups are spreading in Egypt, Sudan, Pakistan, and Algeria. One of the main international threats comes from a group headed by Osama bin Ladin. Jewish fundamentalism has spawned its own anti-Arab terrorism. All of these violent extremist views threaten a very fragile peace process. After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Describe two different views of Islam and terrorism.
2. Describe the metamorphosis of Hizbollah and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
3. Summarize the philosophy and structure of Hamas.
4. Outline the history and structure of Osama bin Ladin's organization.
5. Explain bin Ladin's connections to fundamentalism and the links with terrorist violence in Egypt, Pakistan, and Algeria.
6. List and describe other religious terrorist groups in the Middle East.
7. Describe the problem of Jewish fundamentalism and violence.

TWO VIEWS OF ISLAM AND TERRORISM

The American view of Islam has been influenced by various presentations of Islamic extremism in the electronic media, and it has been influenced by popular misconceptions and stereotypes. Daniel Pipes (1983) wrote an outstanding theological and political analysis of Islam nearly 20 years ago. In an insightful summary of theological positions, Pipes demonstrates that many Western attitudes are incorrect. Islam is a legalistic religion more closely related to traditional Judaism than Pauline Christianity, even though all three religions worship the same God.

Unfortunately, Pipes's work did not receive the recognition and influence it deserved. If more policymakers had acted on Pipes's analysis, Americans may have found that many of their religious precepts match those found in Islam. Although most Muslims express religious concepts by combining theological and moral positions in political institutions, Islam is no more a religion of violent fanatics than Judaism or Christianity. Yet, many Americans have little knowledge of Islam. Today most Americans subscribe to one of two positions about Islam and terrorism.

Reuven Paz (1998) summarizes one particular position, but it can also be found in such journalistic examinations as Robin Wright (1986, 1989), Dilip Hiro (1987), and Amir Taheri (1987). This view states that Islamic fundamentalism is related to political violence in the Middle East. Paz pursues this further by asking the question: Is there an Islamic terrorism? His answer is yes.

Paz argues that Islam sees itself in a global war with the West. This is exacerbated by socioeconomic differences. Islamicists divide the world into the realm of Islam (dar al-Islam) and the realm of heresy (dar al-Harb). Islamic radicals have relegated the West to the realm of heresy. Paz says success against heresy is measured in the popular support of terrorist groups. Since Muslims in general see themselves in a struggle with the West for social and political reasons, Paz concludes that popular support of militant Islam indicates an "Islamic terrorism" exists. He says the West should not debate its existence, it should defend itself against Islamic terrorism.

Others are not so quick to accept such logic. David Kibble (1996) argues that Islamic fundamentalism seems to be a threat at face value. Radical groups of Islamics in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other areas appear to have declared war on the United States and its allies. Indeed, an American secretary of defense stated that Islamic fundamentalism is the greatest threat to American security since Communism. Kibble believes such fears are unfounded.

Kibble says there are pockets of Islamic extremism in the Middle East that sustain terrorism. He argues, however, that these segments are isolated and divided. There is a broad spectrum of religious and political beliefs in Islam that rejects violence. Kibble believes that when fundamentalists take power, it may be the first step toward democracy. He urges caution in labeling Middle Eastern violence as "Islamic terrorism."

Clarence Bouchat (1996) agrees. He says American fears and misunderstandings of Islam make it appear as if fundamentalists were united and threatening to gather the Middle East in a war against the West. This is not the case. Fundamentalists are a divided lot, just as religious fundamentalists in the United States are divided. The history of the West and the Middle East involves centuries of religious wars. Bouchat says more is to be gained by examining the religious similarities between the two regions than by using such terms as "Islamic terrorism."

It is quite clear that violent religious fanatics are playing key roles in Middle Eastern terrorism. This has resulted in a new type of terrorism in the region. In the 1990s, several international structures emerged in the name of religion. No longer relying on rogue states or the interests of competing nations, these groups have emerged as a cause unto themselves. Religion is the basis of their calling, and they attract followers throughout the region.

THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION AND HIZBOLLAH'S METAMORPHOSIS

When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, the Iranians responded by sending their Revolutionary Guards, creating and supporting a new terrorist network. At first glance, the connection seems to be an illogical geographical link, but closer examination reveals the purpose. The Israeli invasion prompted responses throughout the Muslim world, and the Iranians, hard-pressed to deal with their young revolutionaries at home, found a perfect place to export their unruly zeal. Locked in a large war with Iraq, the Iranians found Lebanon a place to fan the fires of revolution.

The name Hizbollah literally means "the Party of God."According to Dilip Hiro (1987, pp. 113Ð181, 240Ð243), Hizbollah grew out of the Iranian Revolution as an extension of the Revolutionary Guards. The Revolutionary Guards were the military wing of the Ayatollah Khomeini's organization. Hizbollah assisted the Revolutionary Guards by attempting to purify the revolution. It attacked all forms of Western thought and sought to consolidate Khomeini's gains.

Hiro says the members of Hizbollah were not only interested in carrying out the goals of the revolution, but also concerned with the social conditions of Islam in general. This helped account for their loose organizational structure. The Party of God was more a meeting of similar minds than a group interested in a rigid, formal structure. Shiaism was the heart of Hizbollah, and Shiites throughout the Middle East were the concern of the group. The Shiites of Lebanon were no exception. Wege (1994) adequately demonstrates Hiro's argument. The term Party of God is taken from Islamic references and is directly related to the martyrdom of Hussein Ibn Ali. Failure to understand Hizbollah as an Islamic concept is a failure to understand the context of evangelical Islam.

According to Hiro, relations between Lebanese and Iranian Shiites had been close since the 1950s. When conflict broke out in Lebanon in 1975, Amal, a Shiite militia, was formed to protect Lebanese Shiites. Amal was trained by the PLO, but it developed and maintained strong Iranian contacts. In 1979, it grew in strength, and its members watched the Iranian Revolution with interest.

According to Anat Kurz (1994), Palestinian and Lebanese radicals found common ground in the 1980s. Nabih Berri was elected general secretary of Amal in 1980. This event caused concern among the more radical members of Amal, including those who supported the Iranian Revolution, because they believed Berri was a constitutionalist and too conservative. In 1982, the radicals left Amal for the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley, where they formed a new group, Islamic Amal, and awaited further developments. When the first Revolutionary Guards of Hizbollah arrived in the Bekaa Valley in 1982, they found willing allies in the Islamic Amal.

For the first few years of its involvement, Hizbollah acted more or less like a terrorist clearinghouse (Reuters, 1996a). Following orders from Iran, Hizbollah met as an independent organization, always willing to deny its Iranian connections. According to Israeli intelligence (Israeli Foreign Ministry, 1996), Hizbollah was directed by three central figures: Sheik Mohammed Hussein Fadlollah, Abus Musawi, and Hassan Nasrallah. Fadlollah, the target of an attempted American-sponsored assassination, was a charismatic spiritual leader. Nasrallah was a practical militarist, leaving the Islamic Amal militia to organize Hizbollah into a regional force. Musawi provided the loose connections to Iran.

From 1982 to 1985, Hizbollah formed a relationship with a shadowy terrorist group known as Islamic Jihad. According to Amir Tehari (1987), Hizbollah leaders met to give policy direction for Islamic Jihad. The council of leaders met in the city of Baalbek in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley and issued nebulous "suggestions" to Islamic Jihad. They also provided financial and logistical support for terrorist operations but kept themselves out of the day-to-day affairs of the terrorist group. By keeping their distance, Hizbollah's leaders were able to claim they had no direct knowledge of Islamic Jihad, and more importantly, they kept Iran from being directly linked to Islamic Jihad's terrorist campaign against Israel and the West.

During this same time frame, Hizbollah's role also began to change. As part of an organization designed to spread the Shiite revolution, Hizbollah was not content to act only as an umbrella group to support terrorism (Enteshami, 1995; Reuters, 1996a). Its leaders wanted to develop a revolutionary movement similar to the structure that gripped Iran in 1978 and 1979. Lebanon was inundated with several militias fighting for control of the government, and Nasrallah saw an opportunity. By following the pattern of the Amal militia, he began changing the structure of Hizbollah. In 1985, he established regional centers, transforming them to operational bases between 1987 and 1989. Taking over the organization after the death of Musawi, Nasrallah created a regional militia by 1990. In 1991, many of Lebanon's roving paramilitary groups signed a peace treaty, but Hizbollah retained its weapons and revolutionary philosophy. It became the primary paramilitary force in southern Lebanon (U.S. Department of State, 1996).

According to an analysis by Reuters (1996b), Hizbollah is currently fighting an undeclared war with Israel (see Box 10.1 for a sampling of its paramilitary activities). Vowing to disrupt the peace process and continue the revolution, members strike Israel in a style reminiscent of the early days of Fatah. The terrorist group it once commanded, the Islamic Jihad, has expanded and taken on a life of its own. Although Hizbollah conducts its own terrorist operations, it behaves more like a militia seeking control of Lebanon. Because most of the Lebanese militias were disarmed in 1991, Hizbollah's triumph in keeping its structure and weapons have placed it in a position of power. LikeAbu Nidal, its structure allows it to act as a power broker in a world of shadow warfare.

By the same token, the paramilitary structure of Hizbollah has made it more of a conventional fighting force than a terrorist group since 1991. This results in a particular type of fighting. Unlike Islamic Jihad or the Abu Nidal group, Hizbollah's bases are in the open. When it strikes Israel, the Israeli Defense Force strikes back. Civilians caught in the crossfire are often at the mercy of opposing factions. In one tragic exchange, Israeli artillery shells hit a Palestinian village in April 1996, even though the shells were aimed at Hizbollah rocket launchers. Unfortunately, this type of exchange is nothing new to the area.

THE ISLAMIC JIHAD

Although Hizbollah found an ally in the Islamic Jihad when it came to the Bekaa Valley in 1982, the Iranian Revolution was not directly responsible for the birth of this terrorist group. Islamic Jihad began as a political movement inside the Muslim Brotherhood. Actually, there are several Islamic Jihads, and they are mostly nationalistic factions of the same movement. The group that receives greatest attention emerged after the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and it came from the link with Hizbollah. This Islamic Jihad perfected three tactical innovations of terrorism: a dynamic "umbrella" organizational structure, the use of suicide bombers, and the shift away from hijackings and hostage-takings to individual kidnappings.

According to official Israeli reports (Israeli Foreign Ministry, 1996), Lebanon's Islamic Jihad was born in Israel and is currently commanded from Syria. Its leader, Dr. Fathi Shekaki, created the group in 1981. After the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, his fanatics flocked to Hizbollah and Hassan Fadlollah, the spiritual leader of Hizbollah. Shekaki and Fadlollah were immediately attracted to one another by similar visions, and Fadlollah brought Shekaki's organization under Hizbollah's umbrella.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry states that Shekaki participated in the "conference management" style of Hizbollah but took the organizational structure a step further. If Musawi and Nasrallah (the two leaders of Hizbollah) were looking for distance between terrorist activities and Iran, Shekaki saw the Hizbollah model as a new method for structuring terrorism. Rather than operating as a single entity, he broke Islamic Jihad into a multitude of smaller groups, creating distance between any terrorist act and the terrorist group. Each operation could literally have its own small terrorist group, and Islamic Jihad could hide in a flow of misinformation. In actuality, Shekaki's Islamic Jihad became an umbrella group, itself under the umbrella of Hizbollah.

Robin Wright (1986, pp. 84Ð86) writes that the structure of Islamic Jihad was different than anything the West had ever faced before. Most groups could be identified by an infrastructure and a support network. This was not the case with Islamic Jihad. It was a dynamic network distributing information from the secrecy of Baalbek. It contained a fluctuating number of secret organizations and cells. Although U.S. officials talked of state-sponsored terrorism, this group had no clear links to Iran. Islamic Jihad was a hidden army. As a result, its structure confused Western intelligence sources for nearly a decade.

To strike, Shekaki chose a new weapon: the suicide bomber. Amir Taheri (1987) states that after the first suicide bombing in 1983, Islamic Jihad launched a devastating suicide bombing campaign in Lebanon. In 1984, its activities spread to Kuwait and Tunisia, and it became clear that the struggle was not just for Lebanon but for the Islamic revolution. By 1986, in Taheri's estimation, fighting had moved to Europe. This brand of international terrorism is endorsed because it involves a holy war against all parties resisting the Islamic revolution. Taheri refers to it as the "holy terror."

The use of suicide bombers frightened and baffled the West, but it was logically explicable in terms of the conflict, according to Maxwell Taylor and Helen Ryan (1988). Taylor and Ryan examine the role of fanaticism in Shiite terrorism and conclude that the use of suicide bombers was particularly successful in Lebanon. A suicide bomber became an inexpensive guided missile ensuring the success of an attack.

SOURCE: Israeli Foreign Ministry, April 1996.

After a series of bombings in 1983 and the retreat of the U.S. Marines from Beirut, the weakness of Western defensive systems was completely exposed. Military forces from France, Israel, and the United States had employed a fairly sophisticated security system appropriate to peacekeeping situations in Western diplomacy. In several instances, suicide bombers penetrated these defensive perimeters and struck targets with relative ease.

Taylor and Ryan suggest this demonstrates a fundamental weakness of technologically based defense: None of the defenders had predicted the role of suicide in the Lebanese conflict. Taylor and Ryan argue it is necessary to define terrorism in Middle Eastern terms rather than to extrapolate fromWestern norms. From theWestern perspective, suicide attacks seem rooted in illogical fanaticism.Yet, this interpretation does not fit the Shiites fighting in Lebanon. Bombing was a logical policy-in fact, one of the few policies that worked against established military power. Because delivery of the bombs had to be guaranteed if the policy was to work, it was also logical to employ sacrificial warriors as delivery sources.

Shekaki also used another tactic, kidnapping. The development of specialized hostage rescue teams in the United States, Great Britain, and Germany forced Islamic Jihad to search for new hostage-taking tactics. Airplanes were hijacked, but hostages had to be dispersed. New Western rescue units, such as the British Special Air Service, the German GSG-9, and the American Delta Force, made traditional methods of taking hostages too risky. Kidnapping developed as an attractive alternative to massive hostage taking. Counterterrorist forces might be able to free hostages in a single incident, but dispersed kidnapping victims were another issue.

Islamic Jihad toyed with the idea of kidnapping in 1983, and by the next year, they launched a wholesale kidnapping campaign. At one point, they held more than 40 Western hostages. Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad saw they could not only gain the attention of the West with kidnappings, but also influence the behavior of Western governments.

The kidnapping policy of Islamic Jihad had several practical functions. It could be used to punish a country for acting against the Shiites. Hostages could be released for propaganda value, or, when an enemy took action against Islamic Jihad or its supporters, hostages could be executed. Finally, threats of harm to hostages or additional kidnappings could be used to influence another government's actions.

Tactical innovation came as a surprise to theWest. In a special article prepared for the New York Times, Philip Taubman (1984) writes that the United States had few solid leads on the Islamic Jihad, despite enhanced intelligence efforts. In a related article, Eric Pace (1984) describes the innovative use of car bombs in the Middle East. TheWest seemed at a tactical loss when dealing with Islamic Jihad. The Israelis took a different approach. Instead of mapping the hierarchy and flow of money, Israel identified the group's leaders and went after them.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry (1996) says Shekaki was captured and deported in 1988, but he resurfaced in Damascus in 1989. In the aftermath of the Persian Gulf War, Islamic Jihad moved its activities to Israel. Directing operations from Syria, Shekaki continued the struggle against Israel. When Arafat accepted the Israeli olive branch and elections in the occupied territories, Shekaki abandoned support for the Intifada (a general uprising) and returned to terrorism.

Shekaki addressed the issue in an interview with Time magazine (1995). He spoke of no peace until Israel was destroyed. He also reiterated his willingness to employ human-guided missiles, the suicide bombers. Unlike Hamas, he stated that Islamic Jihad was willing to accept a liberated Palestine devoid of a united Arab realm. The U.S. Department of State (1996) took such statements at face value, pointing to threats for an expanded suicide bombing campaign in 1995. Shekaki was killed in Malta in 1995.

Shekaki's successor, Dr. Ramadan Abdallah Sallah, has maintained the Shekaki philosophy. The Israeli Foreign Ministry (1996) says that as of 1992, Islamic Jihad is no longer able to hide as easily as it could in its early stages. Israeli and Western intelligence agencies have developed internal profiles of the group, and some of its leaders are known. More importantly, the growth and emergence of Hizbollah removed the umbrella covering of Islamic Jihad. The Shekaki faction was forced to operate like most other terrorist groups.

Following elections in the occupied territories, Islamic Jihad, like Hamas and Hizbollah, began a no-holds-barred campaign to disrupt the peace process. Israeli soldiers were kidnapped and executed, and bombings increased. The Israelis responded with controversial measures. Specialized squadrons of selected soldiers would raid suspected terrorist hideouts. Under this policy, suspects were interned while all their resources, including their homes, and the resources of their supporters were destroyed. Several suspected terrorists had been killed during these operations, and hundreds of homes were bulldozed into the ground.

The U.S. Department of State (1996) sums up Islamic Jihad's threat well. The State Department says it is a loose affiliation of several fanatical groups. It still probably receives aid from Iran, but the convoluted nature of the group makes it difficult to expose. Islamic Jihad does not have a hierarchy or infrastructure similar to other groups. Because it is so loosely bound, any one of the many groups may act autonomously.

HAMAS

One of the most volatile militant organizations in the Middle East is the Islamic Resistance Movement, better known as Hamas. Unlike Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad, it grew from the Palestinian movement. Mirroring the philosophy of the Rejectionists, Hamas's position is that the state of Israel should not exist. The only acceptable solution to the Palestinian problem is to eliminate Israel and create a united Arab realm. According to Hamas, the state of Israel and anyone who supports it are abominations to Islam.

To understand Hamas, it is necessary to go back to the events right after World War I. Because of the British promises, many Arabs felt that the entire Middle East, from North Africa to the Iranian border, would be united under one great Arabic banner, dar al-Islam. When European powers divided the area, taking control of some regions and placing their Arab allies in control of others, many Arabs were infuriated. One group of frustrated Muslims took action. Founded in Egypt about 1925, the Muslim Brotherhood rejected the new territorial lines. They called for unification of the entire Arab realm under the law and control of Islam.

In 1967, the Muslim Brotherhood began to grow in the occupied territories. Unlike the Ba'athists who expressed unity through modern socialism, followers of the Muslim Brotherhood wanted to purify Islam and unite with other Arabs under religious law. In some ways, the philosophy of the Muslim Brotherhood was a combination of the religious intensity of the Iranian Revolution and the unification principles of the Ba'athists, but the Muslim Brotherhood primarily represented ethnicity more than politics or religion. Their call for unity was as old as the Q'ran.

The group registered as a religious organization with the Israeli government in 1978, and its stated purpose was to be evangelical. Members attempted to convert followers into a more pristine version of Islam. They worked through universities, schools, and mosques. In the 1980s, however, as Arafat gravitated toward moderation, the Muslim Brotherhood maintained its rigid views on the unification of the realm of Arabs and the necessity to rule through Islamic law. When the demand for Palestinian self-government began to dominate the Palestinian movement, the Muslim Brotherhood rejected the call.

Self-government was abhorrent to the Muslim Brotherhood because no nation should exist outside dar al-Islam. If the fedayeen of Fatah were to betray their people by talk of compromise, the Muslim Brotherhood would take a different path.As a result of their disagreement with the goals of the Intifada, members of the Muslim Brotherhood formed Hamas, an Arabic acronym for the Islamic Resistance Movement, in 1987.The group has been active ever since.

Following the tactics of the old Irgun, Hamas has attempted to outdo former Palestinian terrorists. In its own literature, Hamas says that it is in a war with the Jewish people, as well as the state of Israel. The purpose of every operation is to kill Jews, and by killing Jews, all the Zionist settlers and their allies will be driven from the area. It is not enough to kill only the Jews, however. "Good" Muslims will kill anyone who accepts peace with the Jews or who speaks of an independent Palestine. The only acceptable outcome for Hamas is the united realm of Islam.

Hamas is well-financed and organized. As any large terrorist organization, it is composed of strike units, as well as logistical support columns. Its tentacles reach far outside the Middle East, including support bases in the United States. Ironically, its size has caused a moderate group to emerge from the ranks of the fanatics. Arafat has tried desperately to work with the moderates to stop the spread of terrorism. The goal of Hamas terrorists is to disrupt the peace process. They may succeed. Since 1989, they have been responsible for several hundred terrorist attacks.

Being a large organization, tens of thousands strong according to a 1996 State Department estimate, Hamas has a centralized structure with many branches. According to Ahmad Rashad (1996), an apologist for the group, Hamas's strength comes from Palestinian dissatisfaction with the PLO. Rashad states Arafat's softened attitude toward Israel prompted the rise of Hamas in 1987. As enthusiasm grew, Hamas's goal was to become the sole representative of the Palestinian people. Accordingly, it divided its operations into four main spheres: administration, charity, politics, and military affairs.

Rashad states that the most successful military actions have been taken by the Izz el-Din al-Qassam Brigades. Emerging from the military wing of Hamas, the al-Qassam Brigades swelled with recruits after Arafat's renunciation of terrorism in 1993. The brigades are divided into two factions: an intelligence wing and a commando wing.

Ironically, according to Rashad, the intelligence wing does not gather military intelligence. If Rashad is to be believed, the intelligence wing serves as an internal police force. It has three primary duties. First, it enforces Islamic law among the Palestinians, including the execution of offenders. Second, it serves as the main instrument for distributing propaganda throughout the occupied territories. Finally and very interestingly, it is the logistical support network for military operations. Reading through Rashad's propaganda, it is safe to assume the intelligence wing is designed for internal discipline and to supply and hide active terrorists.

The commando wing is designed for terrorist attacks, and it has three primary sections: training, operations, and intelligence. Rashad did not mention bombing or ambushes, two al-Qassam Brigade specialties, but he pointed with pride to "the abduction of enemy soldiers." This admission is quite appropriate. Taking a page from lessons in Lebanon, Hamas has kidnapped and executed individual Israeli soldiers. Although he refuses to identify the total number of commando units, Rashad identifies two groups that operated in the occupied territories and states the remaining groups functioned atlarge. In essence, the military wing is organized in the manner of any large terrorist group.

Hamas represents the continuing struggle for control of the Palestinian voice. Whereas the PLO has rejected terrorism, Hamas has embraced it, and it has become a rallying point for those wishing to continue the struggle with Israel. If anything, Hamas represents the issue so aptly identified by Ahmad Khalidi (1995). There can been no end to terrorism, Khalidi says, until the rights of Palestinians are guaranteed. Hamas will certainly maintain its appeal to disenfranchised Palestinians until that time.

THE RISE OF OSAMA BIN LADIN

To understand the rise of Osama bin Ladin, it is necessary to keep two things in mind. First, there is a trend among Islamic fundamentalists to attempt to bridge the theological gap between Sunnis and Shiites. This trend began to develop in Iran about 1988. According to Dov Waxman (1998), Iran has moved from a postrevolutionary, nationalist phase to the real politics of pan- Islam. That is, Iranian leaders slowly moved away from their blind allegiance to Shiaism and began supporting militant Sunnis. Revolutionary Iranians began sending money and support to Sunni terrorist groups in Lebanon, believing Iranian Shiites and Lebanese Sunnis were working for the same cause. Militant Sunnis followed suit, calling for peace between Sunnis and Shiites. Osama bin Ladin, a Saudi Arabian, was one such Sunni.

The second important factor in the rise of bin Ladin was the Soviet- Afghan War (1979Ð1989). In 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Seven major guerrilla groups formed to resist the Soviets, and the United States enthusiastically joined the fray with arms and economic support. The resistance fighters called themselves the Holy Warriors, the mujahadeen. Embraced by the U.S. government, they traveled the United States calling the Soviets "foreign devils" and "infidels." Few of Ronald Reagan's political leaders noticed that the mujahadeen leaders used the same terms to describe Americans.

In 1989, the Soviets retreated from Afghanistan in complete disarray. Not only had they lost the war, but the Soviet Union also soon found itself in a state of collapse. Yael Shahar (1998) says the mujahadeen saw the fall of the Soviet Union as a sign of total victory. The Soviet Union had not collapsed under the weight of political, economic, and military factors, but in the minds of the mujahadeen, it fell by the hand of God. The Soviet retreat was a sign of God's power over Satan, and if God could bring down the Soviet Union through the work of the mujahadeen, other evil nations were doomed to destruction. The primary targets of the mujahadeen were Israel and the United States. One of the mujahadeen leaders who fervently believes in this view is Osama bin Ladin.

Yosseff Bodansky (1999) writes the most detailed biography of bin Ladin, although the work is polemical and does not seek objectivity. Bodansky says bin Ladin was one of 51 children born to a rich Saudi Arabian construction magnate in 1957. Bin Ladin received a university education and joined the family business, but he soon left Saudi Arabia to join the Afghan fight against the Soviet Union. At first, he lent support to the mujahadeen, later forming his own unit of guerrilla fighters.

While in Afghanistan, he fell under the influence of Sheik Abdullah Azzam, a doctor of Sharia (Islamic law). Azzam had been working for the Palestinians in the mid-1970s, but he became disillusioned with their nationalism and emphasis of politics over religion. Azzam believed Islam should rule over all forms of conflict. He left the Palestinians for a Saudi university to teach Islamic law.

Azzam was the answer to bin Ladin's prayers. As the rich Saudi construction engineer sought a path to holy war, he found the theology of Azzam to his liking. According to Azzam, the realm of Islam had been dominated by foreign powers for too long. It was time for all Muslims to rise up and strike Satan. The Soviet-Afghan War was just the beginning. The mujahadeen were in a holy war against all things foreign to Islam.

Bodansky points out the United States would hardly have been excited about funding such a group of rebels, but the Pakistani Intelligence Service (ISI) intervened. The ISI was concerned with the growing threat of the Soviet Union, but it had its own agenda for national security. Pakistan offered to act as the surrogate for the United States, training the mujahadeen and providing their base camps. According to Bodansky, all money, weapons, and other logistics would be funneled through the ISI. The American Central Intelligence Agency took the bait, and the ISI prepared for war against America's enemy. It also prepared for a larger war without telling the CIA.

Osama bin Ladin was in the midst of these activities. Training in Pakistan and Afghanistan, he financed mujahadeen operations and taught the guerrillas how to build field fortifications. By 1986, he left the training field for the battlefield. Enraged with the Soviets for their wholesale slaughter of Afghan villagers and use of poison gas, bin Ladin joined the front ranks of the mujahadeen. Allied with hundreds of radical militants throughout the world, Osama bin Ladin became a battlefield hero. When interviewed for ABC News by John Miller (1998), bin Ladin would not discuss these exploits. He simply stated that all Muslims are required to fight in the jihad.

The ISI was spreading the jihad. Bodansky argues that while watching the disputed Kashmir province (an area claimed by both India and Pakistan), leaders from the ISI were not content to limit their war to the Soviet Union. In 1986, the ISI began filtering some of the arms intended for the mujahadeen to Sikh terrorists in India. When this diversion was successful, the ISI began filtering arms and logistics to Muslim militants in Kashmir. Bodanksy says Shiite militants in Iran noticed the ISI actions and began to view the Afghan war as an expression of Islamic unity. In the meantime, Pakistan began to see itself as a leader in the pan-Arabic movement.

Things did not go as well for Azzam. When the Soviets were preparing to withdraw, the ISI created its own Afghan guerrilla force and used it to take control of major areas of Afghanistan. Azzam believed the United States was behind this action. Before he could take action on his own, he was killed in a terrorist attack by unknown assailants. Bin Ladin accepted the status quo and enjoyed warm relations with the ISI. He returned to Saudi Arabia after the war to resume his construction business.

The Saudi Arabian government was not to happy to see bin Ladin return. Not attractive to the Saudi royal family, bin Ladin was immensely popular with the people. Saudi Arabia is not an open democracy that tolerates diverse opinions and dissension, so bin Ladin's political activities were limited. He brought several mujahadeen-his "Afghans"-to Saudi Arabia with him and put them to work on construction projects. The Afghans had job security, and bin Ladin became independently wealthy.

The situation changed in 1990. Saudi Arabia houses two of the most holy shrines in Islam, the cities of Mecca and Medina. To millions of Muslims, including bin Ladin, these are sacred areas that must be protected by Muslims. This is considered holy ground. In 1990, Saddam Hussein, leader of Iraq, invaded Kuwait. The Saudi royal family appealed for help, and thousands of non-Muslim troops arrived in the holy land to fight Saddam Hussein. The American-led coalition called this military buildup "Desert Shield." When "Desert Shield" became "Desert Storm" in February 1991, radical Muslims were appalled to find Muslims fighting Muslims under American leadership. After the war, the Saudi government allowed American troops to be stationed in Saudi Arabia. This was too much for bin Ladin. He thought of declaring his own war.

Bodansky says bin Ladin was influenced by the pan-Islamic movement and the role of Iran. Putting aside differences between Shiites and Sunnis, radical Muslims found Satan arrayed against Islam; Satan came in the form of the United States. Bin Ladin worked with the Iranians to bring eschatological Sunnis and Shiites together in an organization called the International Muslim Brotherhood, but he wanted to go further. By April, he was training and financing terrorist groups and calling for the overthrow of unsympathetic Muslim governments.

PBS Front Line (1998) says these actions brought a Saudi crackdown, and bin Ladin was forced to flee. He first went to Afghanistan and then to Sudan. Bodansky states bin Ladin found friends in the radical government of Sudan, and he expanded his operations. By the end of 1992, bin Ladin had nearly 500 Afghans working for businesses that he established in Sudan. He also saw internationalism as the best means for striking the United States, and he refused to base his operations in any single country. In December 1992, a bomb exploded in a hotel in Yemen, a hotel that had been housing American troops. Front Line says U.S. intelligence linked the attack to bin Ladin.

DECLARING WAR ON THE UNITED STATES

Osama bin Ladin redefined the meaning of terrorism in the modern world. To understand this, it is helpful to compare his movement to the Palestinian movement. The PLO tried to become a state military organization, and it failed. It first operated in Jordan, then Lebanon, then Tunisia, and finally it renounced terrorism. Violence could only be carried out by splinter criminal groups on a subnational level, and these groups could not be controlled by the PLO. Abu Nidal's version of terrorism, on the other hand, used multiple support bases for Palestinian radicals. Instead of becoming a state, he moved within many states with many different types of organizations, eventually hiring out his terrorists to state supporters. Osama bin Ladin differs in his approach from both forms of violence. With the wealth of his construction empire as backing, bin Ladin transcended the state and operated on his own.

Yael Shahar (1998) argues bin Ladin's entrepreneurial efforts give him the freedom to finance and command his own terror network. His connections with his Afghans and his reputation as a warrior give him legitimacy. Bin Ladin does not need a government to support his operations. He has the money, personnel, material, and infrastructure necessary to maintain a campaign of terrorism. He only needs a place to hide.

According to Front Line, bin Ladin went on the offensive in 1993. Using his contacts in Sudan, he began searching for weapons of mass destruction. His Afghans sought to purchase nuclear weapons from underground sources in the Russian Federation, and he began work on a chemical munitions plant in Sudan. Bodansky says he also sent terrorists to fight in other parts of the world. Bin Ladin's Afghans went to Algeria, Egypt, Bosnia, Pakistan, Somalia, Kashmir, and Chechnya. U.S. intelligence sources also believe they came to the United States, and they linked him to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Bin Ladin was active in Somalia when American troops joined an endemic civil war to bring food to the area. In October 1993, a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter was downed while on patrol in Mogadishu. U.S. Army Rangers went to the rescue, and a two-day battle ensued in which 18 Americans lost their lives. In an interview with ABC News's John Miller, bin Ladin claimed he trained and supported the troops that struck the Americans.

Bin Ladin was also involved in assassination attempts. In 1993, his Afghans tried to murder Prince Abdullah of Jordan. In 1995, U.S. intelligence sources believe he was behind the attempted assassination of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. According to Front Line, bin Ladin called for a guerrilla campaign against Americans in Saudi Arabia in 1995.

Bombing also entered bin Ladin's arsenal of mayhem. In 1995, his Afghans killed five American service personnel and two Indian soldiers with a truck bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In 1996, he struck in Dharan, killing 19 Americans with another truck bomb. Bin Ladin called his group of Afghans, al-Qaeda or The Base.

Bin Ladin followed these actions by calling for a holy war against the United States and its allies. In 1996, Osama bin Ladin officially "declared war" on the United States. He followed this by two religious rulings, called fatwas, in 1998. Magnus Ranstorp (1998) argues these writings reveal quite a bit about the nature of al-Qaeda and bin Ladin. First, bin Ladin represents a new phase in Middle Eastern terrorism. He is intent on spreading the realm of Islam with a transnational group. Second, he uses Islam to call for religious violence. Bin Ladin is a self-trained religious fanatic ready to kill in the name of God. Finally, bin Ladin wants to bring death. Whether with conventional weapons or weapons of mass destruction, bin Ladin's purpose is to kill. In his fatwa of February 1998, he calls for the killing of any American anywhere in the world.

In August 1998, bin Ladin's terrorists were behind two horrendous attacks in Africa, bombing the American embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The Nairobi bomb killed 213 people and injured 4,500. The Dar es Salaam explosion killed 12 and wounded 85. An FBI investigative report gives an indication of bin Ladin's methods.

BIN LADIN'S BOMBINGS

Bombing has been one of Osama bin Ladin's primary terrorist tactics. He has been linked to the 1993 New York City World Trade Center bombing, a bombing in Kuwait, and three bombings targeting American military personnel. Despite his involvement in murder, no one was prepared for the attacks he launched on August 7, 1998. Bin Ladin's attacks in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam drew the attention of the world.

According to the FBI (2000), Osama bin Ladin and Mohammed Atef began planning an East African operation against the United States after American intervention in Somalia in 1992 and 1993. Atef, who runs the military and training wing of al-Qaeda, began building an infrastructure for a terrorist bombing in Kenya about 1994, with the assistance of Wadih El-Hage, an American citizen from Texas. Another group under the leadership of Abu Ubaida, one of bin Ladin's associates, established a base in Tanzania. Both groups purchased houses with a large garage and a high fence surrounding the property. Both of these bases served to hide the activities of the terrorists.

In Nairobi, the terrorists assembled a team, including a military leader, bomb technicians, truck drivers, and weapons specialists. The initial plan was to attack the embassy with a truck and two terrorists. One terrorist was to frighten Kenyans away from the perimeter of the embassy building, while the other was to drive the bomb-laden truck inside. The primary explosive agent was TNT. When the truck approached, the driver and his assistant found the driveway blocked. The assistant fled the scene, while the driver committed suicide by detonating the bomb. The terrorist succeeded in creating much property damage, but the human carnage was horrific. Although bin Ladin's terrorists wanted to murder Americans, they managed to kill or maim most of the Kenyans who happened to be passing by the embassy, only killing a few Americans.

A similar team was assembled in Tanzania, except the plan called for a single suicide bomber. Once again, the team used a house surrounded by a privacy fence to plan the attack. The terrorists made no attempt to warn Tanzanians in the area. Shortly after the attack in Nairobi, a single terrorist drove a truck loaded with explosives to the U.S. embassy in Dar es Salaam and detonated the bomb. This time bin Ladin's group only murdered Tanzanians. No Americans were killed.

The ambiguity of American counterterrorist policy emerged in the wake of the bombing. Was this a military matter, or should it be handled as a breach of international law? The United States responded in two ways. First, FBI antiterrorist task forces composed of federal agents, state, and local police officers went to both scenes. In the subsequent investigation, two arrests were made and a fuller picture of al-Qaeda began to emerge. Task force investigators testified before a federal grand jury and arrest warrants were issued for bin Ladin, Atef, and other members of al-Qaeda.

President Clinton, however, had another response as well. Armed with intelligence of possible locations of bin Ladin's bases, and with possible evidence of chemical weapons production in Sudan, Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack against selected targets. The missiles destroyed a factory in Sudan, although subsequent reports questioned the material being produced there, and missiles also landed on six bases in Afghanistan. Bin Ladin escaped. Critics claimed these actions were designed to divert attention from Clinton's impending impeachment trial. Regardless, the cruise missiles symbolized a substantial departure from the antiterrorism task force's legalistic approach to the bombings.

Bin Ladin remains popular among Muslim radicals. He has established links with Egyptian terrorist groups and has sent his Afghans to many different countries. In June 2000, his followers began launching suicide bombings against Russian soldiers in Chechnya. Ranstorp (1998) argues bin Ladin will eventually tumble because his theological tirades do not reflect the basis of Islam. He is theologically untrained and does not enjoy the support of Muslim clerics. However, he will continue terrorist operations, and American planners need to ask the question: Do we handle bin Ladin as a military or law enforcement problem?

B. A Sociological Look at the Role of Religion in Afghanistan

The Historical Context

Before the nineteenth century, mountainous Afghanistan lay in the path of invaders from China, Persia (ancient Iran), and the Indian subcontinent. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,the country became a battleground for the British and Russian empires and, after World War II, for the United States and the Soviet Union. In 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan to support a secular government. U.S. observers called Afghanistan "the Soviet Union's Vietnam," a title that history has borne out.

Supported materially by the United States, Afghanistan's military resistance to the Soviets was mobilized in large part through religious institutions that proclaimed a "holy war." The Soviet exit in 1989 left a ravaged country full of religiously charged armed rival factions. When the Taliban government took power in 1996, it justified many of its new policies on religious Islamic grounds. Westerners tend to see such policies as simply fanatical and irrational and to overlook the histories that led up to them. They also tend to disregard the parallels that can be drawn between the role of religion in Afghan society and its significant role in our own.

What is religion? What is its connection to society? How have outspoken religious leaders recently become so influential in government in many parts of the world, including the United States?

In explaining how sociologists view and study religion as an aspect of social life, this chapter helps us make sense of events in Afghanistan.

In the early morning hours of September 27, 1996, the Taliban captured Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan. Here is how the event was reported by Mark Austin of Independent Television News (ITN):

MARK AUSTIN, ITN: On a hill overlooking Kabul, these are Afghanistan's new soldiers of God, praying they say for peace and stability in a countr y that's known only conflict for nearly two decades. But below them is a battle-torn city where the fear of war is fast being replaced by a fear of repression. It's symbolized by the white flag of the Taliban militia, heavily armed religious students who patrol the streets, enforcing their vision of Islamic law. The penalties for disobedience: flogging or even death. Their first edict, women must not work, must not be seen uncovered on the streets. Men must grow beards and pray five times a day. The only sounds from the radio, Islamic prayer and poetry. All music and entertainment is banned here. Television shops are being closed down, TV's and video recorders destroyed, tapes hung from trees.

[Taliban] SPOKESMAN: We will confiscate it and destroy it stage by stage.

MARK AUSTIN: At the gates of the presidential palace, we took tea with one group of militia men who told us their goal was a pure Islamic society, free of crime and corruption. But when we toured the palace itself, they proudly showed us works of art they destroyed.

[Taliban] SPOKESMAN: The painting is against Islam.

MARK AUSTIN: After seventeen years of war and suffering, what this city is now experiencing is the most extreme brand of Islam anywhere in the world. The Taliban takeover may have brought temporary peace of a kind, but for the people of Kabul, it's peace at a price. These are the child victims of the Taliban assault on Kabul, appalling injuries caused by shelling and rocket fire. But their tragedy is compounded by the imposition of strict Islamic laws. Eighty percent of the nurses and 40 percent of the doctors here are women, and now most are too frightened even to leave their homes. These are the hands of one of the city's top surgeons. She won't risk being identified but says it's almost as if women no longer exist.

SURGEON: I can't go to my job. I can't help my people because they said the women must sit in the houses, and they can't go outside. It's really bad for us. I'm very sorry, and I want to leave this country.

MARK AUSTIN: Many are already leaving Kabul. Aid workers say more than 100,000 have fled in the last few days. Reports of arrests and beatings abound in this city, and for the women here, the veil conceals the fear that children do not hide. The Taliban are urging people to stay, but there's a sense of panic, and the exodus continues, leaving those who remain to come to terms with life under new rulers with new rules and an existence that many women here say is taking them back to the dark ages. ( Online NewsHour 1996)

Why Focus on Afghanistan?

In this chapter, we focus on Afghanistan. At the time of this writing, two-thirds of the country was under the control of an Islamic group known as the Taliban. The Taliban rebels received headline news coverage beginning in 1994 (but especially in1996, after gaining control of the Afghan capital, Kabul). Much of the coverage focused on the Taliban's brutal execution of the ex-Afghan President Najibullal and his brother and its imposition of a strict and harsh version of Islamic law on the local populations. The news focus on this Islamic group, to the neglect of larger historical context, is consistent with how the media cover Islam in general.

The images of repression and violence are consistent with the "snapshot" images that many Americans associate with the Muslim religion, or Islam. For many, Islam evokes images of the November 1995 explosion of a U.S. military training and communication center in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia; the 1993 World Trade Center bombings in New York City; the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbee, Scotland; and the stepped-up airport security in the wake of the Gulf War with Iraq in 1991.

Whatever the event, one idea seems to dominate the coverage: some Islamic group-the Movement of Islamic Amal, the Islamic Jehad organization, the Hezbollah (Party of God), or now the Taliban-is responsible. In other words, each event becomes reduced to the actions of religious fanatics acting solely from "primitive and irrational" religious conviction. This focus masks more important political, geographic, and economic factors and causes viewers to lose sight of the larger questions: For example, why has Afghanistan experienced civil war for the past 20 years? Is the Taliban's version of Islamic law consistent with "Islamic principles"? How did the Taliban rise to power? In an October 9, 1996, U.S. Department of State press statement, spokesman Nicholas Burns suggested that the situation in Afghanistan somehow goes beyond religion:

There's a great interest in what happens in Afghanistan, because it is a pivotal country in terms of where it is situated in that part of the world, and I've just listed some of the issues that are of concern to us [such as terrorism, narcotics, human rights, and the treatment of women]. So, we're going to maintain a close view of the events. We'll have contact with the Taliban and others, and we'll just have to proceed on a step-by-step basis to see if we can establish better and closer contacts. (Burns 1996)

In this chapter, we examine religion from a sociological perspective. Such a perspective is useful because it allows us to step back and view, in a detached way, an often emotion-charged subject. Detachment and objectivity are necessary if we wish to avoid making sweeping generalizations about the nature of religions, such as Islam, that are unfamiliar to many of us.

When sociologists study religion, they do not investigate whether God or some other supernatural force exists, whether certain religious beliefs are valid, or whether one religion is better than another. Sociologists cannot study such questions because they adhere to the scientific method, which requires them to study only observable and verifiable phenomena. Instead, they investigate the social aspects of religion, focusing on the characteristics common to all religions, the types of religious organizations, the functions and dysfunctions of religion, the conflicts within and between religious groups, the way in which religion shapes people's behavior and their understanding of the world, and the way in which religion is intertwined with social, economic, and political issues.

Here we begin with a definition of religion. Defining religion is a surprisingly difficult task and one with which sociologists have been greatly preoccupied.

What Is Religion? Weber's and Durkheim's Views

Figure 15.1 shows the "major religions" of the world. But what makes something a religion? In the opening sentences of The Sociology of Religion, Max Weber (1922) states, "To define ‘religion,' to say what it is, is not possible at the start of a presentation such as this. Definition can be attempted, if at all, only at the conclusion of the study" (p. 1). Despite Weber's keen interest and his extensive writings about religious activity, he could offer only the broadest of definitions: religion encompasses those human responses that give meaning to the ultimate and inescapable problems of existence -birth, death, illness, aging, injustice, tragedy, and suffering (Abercrombie and Turner 1978). To Weber, the hundreds of thousands of religions, past and present, represented a rich and seemingly endless variety of responses to these problems. In view of this variety, he believed that no single definition could hope to capture the essence of religion.

Figure 15.1 Major Religions of the World World
The map shows where certain large religious groups predominate around the world. There is much overlap, however-for example, millions of Catholics in the United States, millions of Muslims in India, many Protestants in Latin America. Other distinct religions do not appear on the map because they do not dominate a single large geographic area-for example, Judaism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism (the Parsis). The term syncretismrefers to compatible combinations of belief systems, such as Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Shinto in China and Japan (see "The World's Major Non-Christian Religions" later).

Like Max Weber, Emile Durkheim believed that nothing is as vague and diffused as religion. In the first chapter of his book The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, Durkheim ([1915] 1964) cautions that when studying religions, sociologists must assume that "there are no religions which are false" (p. 3). Like Weber, Durkheim believed that all religions are true in their own fashion—all address the problems of human existence, albeit in different ways. Consequently, he said, those who study religion must first rid themselves of all preconceived notions of what religion should be. We cannot attribute to religion the characteristics that reflect only our own personal experiences and preferences. In The Spiritual Life of Children, psychiatrist Robert Coles (1990) recounts his conversation with a 10-year-old Hopi girl, which illustrates Durkheim's point. The conversation reminds us that if we approach the study of religion with preconceived notions, we will lose many insights about the nature of religion in general:

"The sky watches us and listens to us. It talks to us, and it hopes we are ready to talk back. The sky is
where the God of the Anglos lives, a teacher told us. She [the teacher] asked where our God lives. I said, I don't know. I was telling the Truth! Our God is the sky, and lives wherever the sky is. Our God is the sun and the moon, too; and our God is our [the Hopi] people, if we remember to stay here [on the consecrated land]. This is where we're supposed to be, and if we leave, we lose God." [The interviewer then asked the child whether she had explained all of this to the teacher.]
"No."
"Why?"
"Because — she thinks God is a person. If I'd told her, she'd give us that smile."
"What smile?"
"The smile that says to us, You kids are cute, but you're dumb; you're different—and you're all
wrong!"
"Perhaps you could have explained to her what you've just tried to explain to me."
"We tried that a long time ago; our people spoke to the Anglos and told them what we think, but they
don't listen to hear us; they listen to hear themselves." (p. 25)

Consider as a second example that many critics view the hijab, or modest dress of Muslim women, as evidence that the women are severely oppressed. Although women in the Middle East certainly do not have the same rights as men, critics should not be so quick to assume that the hijab is the source of oppression, especially when we consider the view that some Muslim women hold toward American dress customs:

If women living in western societies took an honest look at themselves, such a question [as to why Muslim women are covered] would not arise. They are the slaves of appearance and the puppets of male chauvinistic society. Every magazine and news medium (such as television and radio) tells them how they should look and behave. They should wear glamorous clothes and make themselves beautiful for strange men to gaze and gloat over them. So the question is not why Muslim women wear hijab, but why the women in the West, who think they are so liberated, do not wear hijab? (Mahjubah 1984)

The conversation between Cole and the Hopi child and the discussion of hijab show that preconceived notions of what constitutes religion and uninformed opinions about the meaning of religious symbols and practices can close people off to a wide range of religious beliefs and experiences.

In formulating his ideas about religion, Durkheim remained open to the many varieties of religious experiences throughout the world. He identified three essential features that he believed were common to all religions, past and present: (1) beliefs about the sacred and the profane, (2) rituals, and (3) a community of worshipers. Thus Durkheim defined religion as a system of shared rituals and beliefs about the sacred that bind together a community of worshipers.

Beliefs About the Sacred and the Profane

At the heart of all religious belief and activity stands a distinction between two separate and opposing domains: the sacred and the profane. The sacred includes everything that is regarded as extraordinary and that inspires in believers deep and absorbing sentiments of awe, respect, mystery, and reverence. These sentiments motivate people to safeguard what is sacred from contamination or defilement. To find, preserve, or guard that which they consider sacred, people have gone to war, sacrificed their lives, traveled thousands of miles, and performed other life-endangering acts (Turner 1978).

Definitions of what is sacred vary according to time and place. Sacred things may include objects (chalices, sacred documents, and books), living creatures (cows, ants, birds), elements of nature (rocks, mountains, trees, the sea, sun, moon, or sky), places (churches, mosques, synagogues, birthplaces of religious founders), days that commemorate holy events, abstract forces (spirits, good, evil), persons (Christ, Buddha, Moses, Mohammed, Zarathustra, Nanak), states of consciousness (wisdom, oneness with nature), past events (the crucifixion, the resurrection, the escape of the Jews from Egypt, the birth of Buddha), ceremonies (baptism, marriage, burial), and other activities (holy wars, just wars, confession, fasting, pilgrimages).

Durkheim ([1915] 1964) maintains that the sacredness springs not from the item, ritual, or event itself, but rather from its symbolic power and from the emotions that people experience when they think about the sacred thing or when they are in its presence. These emotions are so strong that believers feel part of something larger than themselves and become outraged when others behave inappropriately in the presence of the sacred thing.

Ideas about what is sacred are such an important element of religious activity that many researchers classify religions according to the type of phenomenon that their followers consider sacred. One such typology consists of three categories: sacramental, prophetic, and mystical religions (Alston 1972).

In sacramental religions, followers seek the sacred in places, objects, and actions believed to house a god or a spirit. These locations may include inanimate objects (relics, statues, crosses), animals, trees, plants, foods, drink (wine, water), places, and certain processes (such as the way in which people prepare for a hunt or perform a dance). Examples of a sacramental religion include the various forms of Native Spirituality. An excerpt from the "Statement of Walter Echo-Hawk Before the United States Commission on Civil Rights" illustrates the sacramental qualities:

First, I should tell you something about traditional or tribal religion, as native religion is vastly different from the Judeo-Christian religions most of us are familiar with. Because native religions are so different, the religion of the "redman" has never been understood by the non-Indian soldiers, missionaries, or government officials. (1) It is important to note that there are probably as many native religions as there are Indian tribes in this country. (2) None of these religions or religious tenets [has] been reduced to writing in a holy document such as the Bible or Koran.1 (3) None of these religions have man-made churches in the Judeo-Christian sense; rather the native religions are practiced in nature, at sacred sites, or in temporary religious structures—such as a tepee or sweat lodge. (4) The religious beliefs are tied to nature, the spiritual forces of nature, the natural elements, and the plants and creatures which make up the environment. . . . Natives are dependent upon all these things in order to practice their many religious ceremonies, rituals and religious observances. (Echo-Hawk 1979:280)

In prophetic religions, the sacred revolves around items that symbolize significant historical events or around the lives, teachings, and writings of great people. Sacred books, such as the Christian Bible, the Muslim Koran, and the Jewish Torah hold the records of these events and revelations. In the case of historical events, God or some other higher being is believed to be directly involved in the course and the outcome of the event (a flood, the parting of the Red Sea, the rise and fall of an empire). In the case of great people, the lives and inspired words of prophets or messengers reveal a higher state of being, "the way," a set of ethical principles, or a code of conduct. Followers seek to imitate this life. Some of the best-known prophetic religions include Judaism as revealed to Abraham in Canaan and to Moses at Mount Sinai, Confucianism (founded by Confucius), Christianity (founded by Jesus Christ), and Islam (founded by Mohammed).

In mystical religions, followers seek the sacred in states of being that, at their peak, can exclude all awareness of one's existence, sensations, thoughts, and surroundings. In such states, the mystic becomes caught up so fully in the transcendental experience that earthly concerns seem to vanish. Direct union with the divine forces of the universe assumes the utmost importance. Not surprisingly, mystics tend to become involved in practices such as fasting or celibacy to separate themselves from worldly attachments. In addition, they meditate to clear their minds of worldly concern, "leaving the soul empty and receptive to influences from the divine" (Alston 1972:144). Buddhism and philosophical Hinduism are two examples of religions that emphasize physical and spiritual discipline as a means of transcending the self and earthly concerns.

Keep in mind that the distinctions among sacramental, prophetic, and mystical religions are not clearcut. In fact, most religions incorporate or combine elements of other religions. Consequently, the majority of religions cannot be classified into a single category, although one category often predominates.

According to Durkheim ([1915] 1964), the sacred encompasses more than the forces of good: "There are gods [that is, satans] of theft and trickery, of lust and war, of sickness and of death" (p. 420). Evil and its various representations, however, are generally portrayed as inferior and subordinate to the forces of good: "in the majority of cases we see the good victorious over evil, life over death, the powers of light over the powers of darkness" (p. 421). Even so, Durkheim considers superordinary evil phenomena to fall under the category "sacred" (as he defines it) because they are endowed with special powers and serve as the object of rituals (confessions, baptisms, penance, fasting, exorcism) designed to overcome or resist their negative influences.

Religious beliefs, doctrines, legends, and myths detail the origins, virtues, and powers of sacred things and describe the consequences of mixing the sacred with the profane. The profane encompasses everything that is not sacred, including things opposed to the sacred (the unholy, the irreverent, the contemptuous, the blasphemous) and things that stand apart from the sacred, although not in opposition to it (the ordinary, the commonplace, the unconsecrated, the temporal, the bodily) (Ebersole 1967). Believers often view contact between the sacred and the profane as being dangerous and sacrilegious, as threatening the very existence of the sacred, and as endangering the fate of the person who made or allowed the contact. Consequently, people take action to safeguard sacred things by separating them in some way from the profane. For example, some people refrain from speaking the name of God in frustration; others believe that a woman must cover her hair or her face during worship and that a man must remove his hat during worship.

The distinctions between the sacred and the profane do not mean that a person, object, or idea cannot pass from one domain to another or that something profane cannot ever come into contact with the sacred. Such transformations and contacts are authorized through rituals—the active and most observable side of religion.

Rituals

In the religious sense, rituals are rules that govern how people must behave in the presence of the sacred to achieve an acceptable state of being. These rules may take the form of instructions detailing the appropriate context for worship, the roles of various participants, acceptable dress, and the precise wording of chants, songs, and prayers. Participants must follow instructions closely so as to achieve a specific goal, whether it be to purify the participant's body or soul (confession, immersion, fasting, seclusion), to commemorate an important person or event (pilgrimage to Mecca, Passover, the Last Supper), or to transform profane items into sacred items (water to holy water, bones to sacred relics). During rituals, behavior is "coordinated to an inner intention to make contact with, or to participate in, the invisible world or to achieve a desired state" (Smart 1976:6).

Rituals can be as simple as closing one's eyes to pray or having one's forehead be marked with ashes; they can also be as elaborate as fasting for three days before entering a sacred place to chant, with head bowed, a particular prayer for forgiveness. Although rituals are often enacted in sacred places, some are codes of conduct aimed at governing the performance of everyday activitiesÑsleeping, walking, eating, defecating, washing, dealing with the opposite sex.

The Taliban has received worldwide attention for the code of conduct that it has imposed on those under its rule and for the severe punishments issued to those who violate these codes. For example, women who appear in public must be covered from head to toe; they are not permitted to leave their homes without an acceptable reason or to work outside the home even as health care workers or as distributors of international aid. Members of the Taliban have sought out and destroyed things they consider un-Islamic, including tape recorders, cassettes, toys, TVs, and car radio antennas (Amnesty International 1996a, 1996b).

According to Durkheim, the nature of the ritual is relatively insignificant. Rather, the important element is that the ritual be shared by a community or worshipers and evoke certain ideas and sentiments that help individuals feel part of something bigger than themselves.

Community of Worshipers

Durkheim uses the word church to designate a group whose members hold the same beliefs with regard to thesacred and the profane, who behave in the same way in the presence of the sacred, and who gather in body or spirit at agreed-on times to reaffirm their commitment to those beliefs and practices. Obviously, religious beliefs and practices cannot be unique to an individual; they must be shared by a group of people. If not, then the beliefs and practices would cease to exist when the individual who held them died or if he or she chose to abandon them. In the social sense, religion is inseparable from the idea of church. The gathering and the sharing create a moral community and allow worshipers to share a common identity. The gathering, however, need not take place in a common setting. When people perform a ritual on a given day or at given times of day, the gathering is spiritual rather than physical.

Durkheim ([1915] 1964) uses the term church loosely, acknowledging that it can assume many forms: "Sometimes it embraces an entire people . . . sometimes it embraces only a part of them . . . sometimes it is directed by a corps of priests, sometimes it is almost completely devoid of any official directing body" (p. 44). Sociologists have identified at least five broad types of religious organizations (communities of worshipers): ecclesiae, denominations, sects, established sects, and cults. As with most classification schemes, the categories overlap on some characteristics because the classification criteria for religions are not always clear.

ECCLESIAE    An ecclesiae is a professionally trained religious organization governed by a hierarchy of leaders, which claims everyone in a society as its members. Membership is not voluntary; it is the law. Consequently, considerable political alignment exists between church and state officials, so that the ecclesiae represents the official church of the state. Ecclesiae formerly existed in England (the Anglican church), France (the Roman Catholic church), and Sweden (the Lutheran church). The 1987 Afghanistan constitution stated that the religion of Afghanistan is Islam. Today Islam is the official religion of Bangladesh and Malaysia, Iran has been an Islamic republic since the Ayatollah Khomeini took power in 1979, and Saudi Arabia is a monarchy based on Islamic law (World Almanac and Book of Facts 1991 1990).

Individuals are born into ecclesiae; newcomers to the society are converted; dissenters often are persecuted. Those who do not accept the official view tend to emigrate or occupy the most marginal status in the society. The ecclesiae claims to be the one true faith and often does not recognize other religions as valid. In its most extreme form, it directly controls all facets of life. In Afghanistan, for example, non-Muslims must conform to Islamic legal and unwritten restrictions and are prohibited from proselytizing (Kurian 1992).

DENOMINATIONS    A denomination is a hierarchical organization in a society in which church and state usually remain separate; it is led by a professionally trained clergy. In contrast to an ecclesiae, a denomination is one of many religious organizations in the society. For the most part, denominations tolerate other religious organizations; they may even collaborate to address and solve some problems in the society. Although membership is considered to be voluntary, most people who belong to denominations did not choose to join them. Rather, they were born to parents who are members. Denominational leaders generally make few demands on the laity, and most members participate in limited and specialized ways. For example, they may choose to send their children to church-operated schools, attend church on Sundays and religious holidays, donate money, or attend church-sponsored functions. The leaders of a denomination do not oversee all aspects of the members' lives. Yet, even though laypeople vary widely in lifestyle, denominations frequently attract people of particular races and social classes— that is, their members are drawn disproportionately from specific social and ethnic groups.

Eight major religious denominations exist in the world—Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Taoism, and Shinto—each dominant in different areas of the globe (see "The World's Major Non-Christian Religions"). For example, Christianity predominates in Europe, North and South America, New Zealand, Australia, and the Pacific Islands; Islam predominates in the Middle East and North Africa; Hinduism predominates in India (see "The Visibility of Major Christian Denominations by State").

SECTS AND ESTABLISHED SECTS    A sect is a small community of believers led by a lay ministry, with no formal hierarchy or official governing body to oversee the various religious gatherings and activities. Sects typically are composed of people who broke away from a denomination because they came to view it as corrupt. They then created the offshoot in an effort to reform the religion from which they separated.

All of the major religions encompass splinter groups that have sought, at one time or another, to preserve the integrity of their religion. In Islam, for example, the most pronounced split occurred 1,300 years ago, approximately 30 years after the death of the Prophet Mohammed. The dividing issue related to Mohammed's successor. The Shia maintained that the successor should be a blood relative of Mohammed; the Sunni believed that the successor should be selected by the community of believers and need not be related by blood. After Mohammed's death, the Sunni (encompassing the great majority of Muslims) accepted Abu-Bakr as the caliph (successor). The Shia supported Ali, Mohammad's first cousin and son-inlaw, and they called for the overthrow of the existing order and a return to the pure form of Islam. Today Shiaism represents the dominant religion in the Islamic Republic of Iran (95 percent), and Sunni Muslim dominates in the Islamic Republics of Pakistan (77 percent) and Afghanistan (84 percent). These divisions within Islam have existed for so long that Sunni and Shia have become recognized as established sects, renegades from denominations or ecclesiae that have existed long enough to acquire a large following and widespread respectability. In some ways, established sects resemble both denominations and sects. As you might expect, several divisions exist within each established sect, as splinter groups attempted to reform some policy, practice, or position held by the religious organization from which they separated.

Similarly, several splits have occurred within the Christian churches. In 1054, for example, the Eastern Orthodox churches rejected the pope as the earthly deputy of Christ and questioned the papal claim of authority over all Catholic churches in the world. The Protestant religions owe their origins to Martin Luther (1483–1546), who also challenged the papal authority and protested many of the practices of the Roman Catholic church.² Divisions also exist within various Protestant sects and between Catholics. Offshoots of the Roman Catholic church, for example, include Maronites, Greek Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Jacobites, and Gregorians.

²This protest was dubbed the Reformation because it involved efforts to reform the Catholic church and to cleanse it of corruption, especially with regard to paying for indulgences (the forgiveness of sins upon saying specific prayers or performing specific good deeds at the order of a priest). Luther believed that a person is saved not by the intercession of priests or bishops, but by private and individual faith (Van Doren 1991).

People are not born into sects, as they are with denominations; theoretically, they convert. Consequently, newborns are not baptized; they choose membership later in life, when they are considered able to decide for themselves. Sects vary on many levels, including the degree to which they view society as religiously bankrupt or corrupt and the extent to which they take action to change people in society.

CULTS    Generally, cults are very small, loosely organized groups, usually founded by a charismatic leader who attracts people by virtue of his or her personal qualities. Because the charismatic leader plays such a central role in attracting members, cults often dissolve after the leader dies. For this reason, few cults last long enough to become established religions. Even so, a few manage to survive, as evidenced by the fact that the major world religions began as cults. Because cults form around new and unconventional religious practices, outsiders tend to view them with considerable suspicion.

Cults vary according to their purpose and to the level of commitment that the cult leaders demand of converts. They may draw members by focusing on highly specific, but eccentric interests, such as astrology, UFOs, or transcendental meditation. Members may be attracted by the promise of companionship, a cure from illness, relief from suffering, or enlightenment. A cult may meet infrequently and strictly voluntarily (such as at conventions or monthly meetings). In some cases, however, the cult leaders may require members to break all ties with family, friends, and jobs and thus to come to rely exclusively on the cult to meet all their needs.

A Critique of Durkheim's Definition of Religion

Durkheim's definition of religion relies on the most outward, most visible characteristics of religion. Critics argue, however, that the three essential characteristics—beliefs about the sacred and the profane, rituals, and a community of worshipers—are not unique to religious activity. This combination of characteristics, they say, applies to many gatherings—sporting events, graduation ceremonies, reunions, and political rallies—and many political systems (for example, Marxism, Maoism, and fascism). On the basis of these characteristics alone, it is difficult to distinguish between an assembly of Christians celebrating Christmas, a patriotic group supporting the initiation of a war against another country, and a group of fans eulogizing James Dean or Elvis Presley. In other words, religion is not the only unifying force in society that incorporates these three elements defined by Durkheim as characteristic of religion. Civil religion represents another such force that resembles religion as Durkheim defined it.

Fundamentalism

In "Popular Conceptions of Fundamentalism," anthropologist Lionel Caplan (1987) offers his readers an extremely clear overview of a complex religious phenomenon—fundamentalism, a belief in the timeless nature of sacred writings and a belief that such writingsapply to all kinds of environments. In its popular usage, this term is applied to a wide array of religious groups in the United States and around the world,including the Moral Majority in the United States, Orthodox Jews in Israel, and various Islamic groups in the Middle East.

Religious groups labeled as fundamentalist are usually portrayed as "fossilized relics . . . living perpetually in a bygone age" (Caplan 1987:5). Americans frequently employ this simplistic analysis to explain events in the Middle East, especially the causes of the political turmoil that threatens the interests of the United States (including its need for oil). Such oversimplification misrepresents fundamentalism, however, and it cannot explain the widespread appeal of contemporary fundamentalist movements within several of the world's religions.

THE COMPLEXITY OF FUNDAMENTALISM    Fundamentalism is a more complex phenomenon than popular conceptions lead us to believe. It is impossible to define a fundamentalist in terms of age, ethnicity, social class, or political ideology, because fundamentalism appeals to a wide range of people. Moreover, fundamentalist groups do not always position themselves against those in power; in fact, they are equally likely to be neutral or to support existing regimes fervently. Perhaps the most important characteristic of fundamentalists is their belief that a relationship with God, Allah, or some other supernatural force provides answers to personal and social problems. In addition, fundamentalists often wish to "bring the wider culture back to its religious roots" (Lechner 1989:51).

Caplan (1987) identifies a number of other traits that seem to characterize fundamentalists. First, fundamentalists emphasize the authority, infallibility, and timeless truth of sacred writings as a "definitive blueprint" for life (p. 19). This characteristic does not mean that any definitive interpretation of sacred writings actually exists. Any sacred text has as many interpretations as there are groups that claim it as their blueprint. For example, even members of the same fundamentalist organization may disagree about the true meaning of the texts they follow.

Second, fundamentalists usually conceive of history as a "process of decline from an original ideal state, [and] hardly more than a catalog of the betrayal of fundamental principles" (p. 18). They conceptualize human history as a "cosmic struggle between good and evil": the good results from one's dedication to principles outlined in sacred scriptures, and the evil is an outcome of countless digressions from sacred principles. To fundamentalists, truth is not a relative phenomenon; it does not vary across time and place. Instead, truth is unchanging and knowable through the sacred texts.

Third, fundamentalists do not distinguish between the sacred and the profane in their day-to-day lives. Religious principles govern all areas of life, including family, business, and leisure. Religious behavior, in their view, does not take place only in a church, a mosque, or a temple.

Fourth, fundamentalist religious groups emerge for a reason, usually in reaction to a perceived threat or crisis, whether real or imagined. Consequently, any discussion of a particular fundamentalist group must include some reference to an adversary.

Fifth, one obvious concern for fundamentalists is the need to reverse the trend toward gender equality, which they believe is symptomatic of a declining moral order. In fundamentalist religions, women's rights often become subordinated to ideals that the group considers more important to the well-being of the society, such as the traditional family or the right to life. Such a priority of ideals is regarded as the correct order of things.

ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM    In The Islamic Threat:Myth or Reality? professor of religious studies John L.Esposito maintains that most Americans' understanding of fundamentalism does not apply very well to contemporary Islam. The term fundamentalism has its roots in American Protestantism and the twentieth-century movement that emphasizes the literal interpretation of the Bible. Fundamentalists are portrayed as static, literalist, retrogressive, and extremist. Just as we cannot apply the term fundamentalism to all Protestants in the United States, so too we cannot apply it to the entire Muslim world, especially when we consider that Muslims make up the majority of the population in at least 45 countries.

Esposito believes that a more apt term is Islamic revitalism or Islamic activism. The form of Islamic revitalism may vary from one country to another, but seems to be characterized by the following themes:

A sense that existing political, economic, and social systems had failed; a disenchantment with and at times a rejection of the West; a quest for identity and greater authenticity; and the conviction that Islam provides a self-sufficient ideology for state and society, a valid alternative to secular nationalism, socialism, and capitalism. (Esposito 1992:14)

In "Islam in the Politics of the Middle East," Esposito (1986) asks, "Why has religion [specifically Islam] become such a visible force in Middle East politics?" He believes that Islamic revitalism represents a "response to the failures and crises of authority and legitimacy that have plagued most modern Muslim states" (p. 53). Recall that after World War I, France and Britain carved up the Middle East into nationstates, drawing the boundaries so as to meet the economic and political needs of Western powers. Lebanon, for example, was created in part to establish a Christian tie to the West; Israel was envisioned as a refuge for persecuted Jews when no country seemed to want them; the Kurds received no state; Iraq became virtually landlocked; and resource-rich territories were incorporated into states with very sparsepopulations (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates). Their citizens viewed many of the leaders who took control of these foreign creations "as autocratic heads of corrupt, authoritarian regimes that [were] propped up by Western governments and multinational corporations" (p. 54).

When Arab armies from six states lost "so quickly, completely, and publicly" to Israel in 1967, Arabs were forced to question the political and moral structure of their societies (Hourani 1991:442). Had the leaders and the people abandoned Islamic principles or deviated too far? Could a return to a stricter Islamic way of life restore confidence to the Middle East and give it an identity independent of the West? Questions of social justice also arose. Oil wealth and modernization policies had led to rapid increases in population and urbanization and opened up a vast chasm between the oil-rich countries, such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and the poor, densely populated countries, such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Western capitalism, which was seen as one of the primary forces behind these trends, seemed blind to social justice, instead promoting unbridled consumption and widespread poverty. Likewise, Marxist socialism (a godless alternative) had failed to produce social justice. It is no wonder that the Taliban and other Muslim groups in Afghanistan reject Western capitalism and Marxist socialism because the disintegration of Afghanistan is a product of the Cold War between the United States and the former Soviet Union.

For many people, Islam offers an alternative vision for society. According to Esposito (1986), five beliefs guide Islamic activists (who follow many political persuasions, ranging from conservative to militant):
1. Islam is a comprehensive way of life relevant to politics, state, law, and society.
2. Muslim societies fail when they depart from Islamic ways and follow the secular and materialistic ways of the West.
3. An Islamic social and political revolution is necessary for renewal.
4. Islamic law must replace Western-inspired or Western-imposed laws.
5. Science and technology must be used in ways that reflect Islamic values to guard against the infiltration of Western values.

Muslim groups differ dramatically in their beliefs about how quickly and by what methods these principles should be implemented. Most Muslims, however, are willing to work within existing political arrangements; they condemn violence as a method of bringing about political and social change.

The information presented in this section points out the complex interplay of religion with political, economic, historical, and other social forces. Fundamentalism cannot be viewed in simple terms; rather, any analysis must consider the broader context. A focus on context allows us to see that fundamentalism can represent a reaction to many events and processes, including secularization, foreign influence, failure or crisis in authority, the loss of a homeland, and rapid change.

Part III: The Globalization Process and Terrorism from an Anthropological Perspective

The globalization process in recent years has sparked strong debate and outright confrontation, one example being the street demonstrations that occurred in Seattle and Genoa, Italy on the occasion of international trade and economic meetings. Garrick Bailey is an anthropologist from the University of Tulsa and the co-author of the cultural anthropology text Humanity: An Introduction to Cultural Anthropology, Fifth Edition (2000) by Peoples and Bailey. The following essay is taken from the upcoming Sixth Edition revision (summer of 2002) and examines how anthropology can help us understand the forces at work in the globalization process and how these forces may contribute to the rise of terrorism

A. Globalization

Until the violent street protests at the meeting of the World Trade Organization at Seattle in late 1999 few Americans had given more than passing attention issues of globalization and free trade. To most globalization seemed to be part of the natural evolution of the world economic system which had during the decade of the 1990's resulted in economic prosperity for the United States. We assumed that globalization was or eventually would bring prosperity to the rest of the peoples of the world as well. Since Seattle virtually every major international economic meeting or summit has brought increasing numbers of protesters into the streets. At the G-8 meetings in Genoa, Italy in the summer of 2001 between 100,000 and 150,000 demonstrators filled the streets. Why? What the problem? The protestors have been variously labeled as "anti-capitalists", "anarchists" , "environmentalists" and even "Ludites". No single label can readily be applied to these protesters since they range widely in their concerns about the effects of globalization and in their ideologies. Globalization is not simply an economic issue. Globalization has far reaching political, social and cultural implications for the world's peoples. In the proceeding chapters we have raised in boxes some of the more specific questions concerning globalization. In this chapter we are going to discuss the history of globalization together with some of its consequences.

It was not until the 1980's that the term globalization first came into common usage. Today, although we hear and use the term almost daily, most of us would find it difficult to define. Globalization is not a thing or a product, but rather a process. Globalization refers to the world wide changes which are increasingly integrating and remolding the lifes of the people of the world. Most commonly we speak of the global economy and think of globalization primarily in economic terms. While economic changes are certainly the driving force behind globalization, globalization is having, or potentially has, far more profound effects on our way of life than merely what we eat, what we ware and how we make our living. Globalization has had and is having profound effects on the political, social and cultural institutions of the peoples of the world as well. Globalization began 500 years ago, with the voyage of Collumbus and has had two stages of development. The earliest stage, the period from about 1500 to the mid-twenieth century, saw the development of a global trade network which eventually connected, either directly indirectly, vertually every group of people in the world. The second stage, which began to develop at the end of World War II, saw the development of global marketing of products and the emergence of a global economy.

The Emergence of the Global Economy

Over the past fifty years the process of globalization has entered a new and different phase. A global economy has started to evolve. In its essence the global economy is simple, the creation of a global market and the integration of peoples and all communities into this market. Global trade involved the exchange of goods between regionali markets. In the global economy all labor, goods and services will be bought and sold on the global market.

We can readily see some effects of the global economy. The price we pay for a sack of flour in Kansas or a gallon gasoline in Texas is already determined in large part by the world price for wheat and oil. Similarly the price we pay in Detroit for a Ford is no longer solely influenced by competition from General Motors, but by oversea auto manufacturers as well. Foreign imports not only place American companies in competition with foreign companies, but also put American workers in direct competition with their foreign counterparts. American farmers, oil producers, businesspeople and workers are now finding that hey have to compete on a global market for the prices they can charge for their goods and labor. This has both good and bad points. It has resulted in cheaper prices in the United States for man manufactured goods. However, it has also ment the loss of jobs, as companies, in order to compete, are closing their domestic manufacturing plants and laying off their relatively high paid American workers, building new plants overseas staffed by low paid foreign workers and importing the products back to the United States for sale. As a result many American companies are no longer producing the products they sell in the United States.

Many scholars argue that the global economy differs qualitatively from global trade in that implicite in the global economy is an underlying and unifying ideology, capitalism, and a single objective, the production of wealth. Capitalism is an ideology based on Western (European) cultural beliefs and values. For a people to survive, let alone prosper, in the new emerging global economy, they have to adopt Western cultural ideas. Thus it is that the global economy is not merely resulting in the restructuring of the world economic system, but is having far ranging cultural and social consequences for the people's of the world as well. In earlier chapters we have highlighed t in special boxes many of the potential cultural implications of the global economy. In the last part of this chapter we are going to discuss the development of the global economy and the some of the other social and economic problems which are becoming evident.

The world today, at the being of the twenty-first century, is a far different place from what it was when your grandparents were young. The past fifty years have seen vast changes in the lives of vertually all of the people of the world. The Second World War was a major watershed in human history . As we have seen, before World War II the world economic system was dominated by European controlled colonial empires. The British, French, and Soviet (or Russian) empires were the largest. However, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and Italy also had overseas possessions. Even the United States had the Phillipines, Guam, Samoa, and Puerto Rico. Global trade existed, but their was no integrated global economy. These empires had been created for only one reason, the economic enrichment of the "home country" or colonial power. The colonial powers were primarily interested in politically controlling the peoples of their colonies while economically exploiting their resources. Colonies were the economic monopolies of the home country. Thus India, South Africa, Kenya and the other British colonies served as monopolized sources of raw materials for English factories, as well as protected markets for English manufactured goods. Economic development within the English colonies was limited to increasing the production of raw materials needed by English factories and the elimination of goods produced locally which would compete with goods made in England. Trade between the colonial possessions of the empire and other countries was highly controlled and regulated from London. A similar relationship existed between the home country and the colonies of other colonial powers as well.

Even if political barriers had not inhibited trade, there were still the problems of geography and distance. International telephone service was extremely limited and most communications had to be sent by mail. International air line travel was in its infancy. The vast majority international travelers went by train or ship. As to the international moving of raw materials and manufactored goods, compared to today, shipping was slow, expensive and frequently difficult. Thus markets were protected not only by trade barriers, but also geography as well. As a result, even within the colonial empires, regions were usually self-sufficient in their basic economic needs. The people raised the food they ate, built and furnished the houses they lived in out of locally produced goods, and tailored the clothes they wore out of locally produced materials. Imports were usually limited to high value goods or products that could not be made or found locally, while exports consisted of goods or products not needed for local use or consumption.The development of the global economy thus required both changes in political structures, as well as new technological innovation.

Three major changes have occurred since the end of World War II that have profoundly altered the course of human history and made the developing global economy possible. The most basic of these changea was the disintegration of the colonial empires and the elimination of many of the political barriers to trade. Although the precise number varies depending on how one defines an "independent" or "autonomous" country, at the beginning of World War II there were at best only about sixty political independent countries in the world. Following the war the colonial empires began to disintegrate. Independence movements had already started in many colonial areas prior to the war and the war had devestated the economies of many of the colonial powers such as England, France and the Netherlands. Needing to rebuild their home economies, they lacked the resources needed to suppress the independence movements in their colonies. The war had also resulted in the United States emerging as the strongest economic and military power in the world. After the war United States began pressuring their European allies to grant independence to their colonies. The were two reasons behind the actions of the United States. The United States was ideologically opposed to colonialism, granting independence to The Phillipines immediately following the war. The second was that United State companies wanted direct access to the resources and markets of colonial Africa and Asia. As a result betweem 1946 and 1980 eight-eight new countries were carved out of the old colonial empires and given political independence. The collapse of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia during the 1990's resulted in the creation of eightteen new countries. Today there are about 200 independent countries, over three times the number that exist prior to World War II. With the end of colonialism, the peoples of Africa and Asia had the freedom to manage their own economic affairs. These "new" countries could now sell their raw materials and products on the global market and purchase imported goods from any country they wished. Even more importantly, these former colonies could now establish local industries to complete with those of the industrialized powers of Western Europe and North America.

The second critical change was in the development of new technologies, associated with production, transportation and communications. Today we can extract more raw materials and produce more manufactured goods and food using only a fraction of the physical labor required prior to World War II. Technology has greatly improved labor effecience allow people to produce greater supplus of goods. At the same time the cost of shipping raw materials, food stuff and manufactured goods, as well as the time in transit has been dramatically reduced. Ocean going cargo ship are still the primary means of international transport. However, ships and shipping have changed dramatically. During World War II the standard military supply ship built by the United State government was 440 feet in length and capable of carrying 9,000 tons of cargo. In contrast modern cargo ships are commonly 700 feet in length and care about 25,000 tons of cargo. However, even larger are the supertankers, which may be as long as 1200 feet long and capable of carrying 500,000 tons of oil. The important difference is not just the relative size of the ships but also speed with which ships can be loaded and unloaded. Fifty years ago cargo was load and unload piecemeal. Starting in the late 1950's some shippers began loading cargo in 20 and 40 foot boxes, or containers. The containers were loaded at the factory and sent via truck or train to the port and were loaded directly on to the ship by cranes. This greatly increased the speed in which a cargo ship could be loaded and unload. By the late 1960's and early 1970's contain shipping became the norm and new cargo ship were being designed and constructed to carry standardized containers. A ship which took ten days to load or unload piecemeal, now can now be load or unload in less than a day. Container shipping not only dramatical increased the speed which goods could be shipped, but drastically reduced labor costs as well. Container ships required smaller crews and many fewer dock workers to load and unload. The development of container shipping has been one of the key elements in the growth of international trade and thus the global economy.

Just as container shipping has reduced the time and cost of moving goods, airline travel has greatly reduced the time and cost of moving people. Business trips are a critical aspect of international trade. Trips that took days, weeks and even months in the 1940's and 1950's, have been reduced to hours and days. The Corcorde even makes it possible for an individual to travel from New York to London and back in a single day.

The last twenty years has been of time of rapid change in information and communications technology. Communications satellites, personal compertors, cell phones and other new technologies have totally revolutionised our communications systems and our abilities to store, access and analyse information. Today letters, messages, photos, music, videos, and even whole databases can be sent or accessed, while products can be bought or sold and money transferred twenty-four hours a day, instantaneously, to or from any part of the world, via the Internet. In terms of communication it does not make any difference if the other company or other branch of the company, is on the other side of town or the other side of the world. In fact there are small companies advertising their merchandise on web pages, and selling them to customers throughout the world via e-mail. Today one can literally create and operate a global business from a home office. Effective communication is a key element in business and without the internet, an integrated global economy could not exist. Technological advancement in transportation and communications has not merely made the world smaller, for many purposes it has been geography irrelevant.

A third factor has been the emergence of international finance. Prior to World War II the international flow of capital was extremely limited. Foreign investment was highly risky particularly to underdeveloped poorer countries. Wheither the loan was to a foreign government or a foreign company, there was always the question of repayment. As long a the empires existed banks and companies would make investments in colonial possessions, knowing that they would have legal protection. However, with the end of colonialism and the emergence of over 100 new countries the problem became greater. Most of the people in the world today live in underdeveloped countries. The economic growth of these countries requires the development of their infrastructures; communications systems, transportation systems and even education system to train workers in skills. The development of infrastructure requires capital which many of these countries do not have. Similarly companies in these underdeveloped countries find it difficult to secure sufficent local investment capital for their needs.

In 1945 the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) were created to help war-ravaged Europe and Japan reestablish their industrial base. These two institutions have played a pivotal role in the creation of the global economy. The World Bank has been the major conduit for economic development loans to underdeveloped nations. The role of the World Bank is now been supplemented by numerous European, American, and Japanese banking houses that have become international financiers.

Loans provided to these capital-poor countries have allowed them to more quickly adopted high-cost technology and increase their economic productivity. With these funds, underdeveloped countries have constructed irrigation systems, expanded transportation and communication systems, expanded port facilities and developed local industries. In the past decade alone these loans have amounted to hundreds of billions of dollars. An unappreciated consequence of these loans is the stimulation of exports of developed countries, because most of these funds are used to purchase needed technology and equipment from the United States, Europe and Japan. At the same time most of the economic development projects funded by these loan have focused on increasing the production of goods and raw materials needed by these industrialized countries, which in turn lowers the global market prices of these items.

In the global economy money flows both ways across international boundaries in search of greater profits. United States banks, companies and individuals have more than $4 trillion invested in other countries Conversely, foreign banks, companies and individuals have similar amounts invested in the United States. Of the $3.5 trillion in U.S. government debt, 38 percent is owed to foreign individuals or banks, with the largest share owned by Japanese. Japanese Bank in turn have made more than $290 billion in loans to other Asian countries.

Globalization: The Continuing Process.

While the global economy is already dramatically effecting the lifes of all vertually everyone, it is important to note that it is still in the process of developing. Some issues remain to be resolved and some new economic institutions are now starting to evolve. The process of globalizating the world market is far from complete.

While we have a global economy we still lack free trade. Every one of the 200 or so countries in the world still has regulations concerning imports and exports, as well as it own labor laws, environmental laws and other business regulations. In addition, almost every country still has its own currency, currency regulations and laws concerning banking and other financial concerns. Regulation of the economy is one of the primary concerns of government. However, in a fully integrated and operative global economy there can be no local or national differences. The World Trade Organization is in the process of attempting to negociate the elimination of all import and export laws or controls as well as any other laws that inhibit the free flow of goods or services between countries. The result will be free trade, a world in which companies and individuals may buy and sell any legal goods or services, at any price agreed upon, in any country in the world without government regulation. In all disputes, the World Trade Organization, not the governments involved would be the final judge. As we discussed in box 11.1 some scholars see the World Trade Organization evolving in to a de facto world government . The global economy also requires an international control of currencies, banking and other financial transactions. The International Monetary Fund is assuming the role as regulator of international monetary transactions. Most countries have their own currencies. Exchange rates for currencies are complex and volatile. In international financial transfers, varying exchange rates are an added expense. Recognizing that the use of different currencies makes integrating economies more difficult, most of the countries of the European Union will change to a single currency, the Euro, in January 2002. Some have indivduals suggested that fully integrated global economy will require a single global monetary unit and the elimination of all national currencies.

Traditional we have thought of corporations, like individuals, as having national identities. Ford, General Motors and General Electric are "American" companies. These companies are incorporated in the United States, their stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange, and their corporate headquarters are in the United States. However, companies such as these are increasingly becoming international, manufacturing and selling products throughout the world. Globalization is eroding the link between corporations and countries of origin. This is result in the emergence of what are now being termed transnational corporations. For centuries, if not longer, some companies have produced goods for export and had overseas offices and operations. Thus the distinction between traditional national corporations and transnational corporations is not presise. A transnational corporation is one which has most of its employees, produces and sells most of its products or services, and generates most of its gross revenues outside the national boundaries of its "home" country.

Nokia, a "Finish" company, known primarily for its cellular phones, is an example of a transnational corporation. Just prior to the collapse of tech stocks in 2000, Nokia had the highest capitalization value, the total value of it stock, of any company in Europe.

Originally a paper manufacturer, Nokia was found in 1865. In 1967 Nokia merged with the Finish Rubber Works and Finish Cable Works, the later producing telephone wire and cable. The new Nokia quickly focused on telecommunications, producing first radio telephones and later data modems. By the 1980's Nokia was becoming a major producer of computers, monitors and TV sets. In 1987 Nokia produced the original handheld portable telephone. The 1990's was a period of rapid growth for the company as it maintained its position as the major producer of cellular phones in the world. Today Nokia markets products in over 130 countries, has research and development projects and programs in 15 different countries (including the United States, Canada, Australia, Sinapore, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Germany and England), while components and assembled products are produced in 10 different countries (such a the United States, Mexico, Brazil, Malausia, China, South Korea, Japan Hungary, Germany and England).

The production of components and assembled products shows the problem of national origin of goods in the global economy. Nokia has six major suppliers; Philps Electronics, a Dutch company, produces their speakers in Austria and the display screens in China; Sanyo Electric, a Japanese company, produces their barrier in Mexico; Hitachi makes their power amplification modules in Japan; Infineon Technologies make their semiconductor chips iin Germany; while R.F. Micro Devices and Texas Instruments produce their radio frequency integrated circuits and digital signal processors in the United States. Today most Nokia products are designed outside the country by non-Finish engineers and technicians, to manufactured and assembled in countries other than Finland, to be sold in 130 countries in the world, in order to produce wealth and profits shared by investors from all parts of the world. While its corporate headquarders may still be located in Finland and its major management decision are still made in Finland, is Nokia still a "Finish" company, or is it a global company with its main offices in Helsenki? The only difference Nokia and American, German, English and Japanese transnational corporations is one of degree. Finland is a country of only 5 million people.

As the global economy continues to evolve all major corporations, in order to economically compete, will have to become transnational corporations. The result will be a change in the relationship between a country and "its" corporations. It use to be said that "what is good for General Motors is good for America". There was truth in this saying in that General Motors and the United States were so economically linked that the economic health of one could not be separated from that of the other. With transnational corporations the same can not be said. What is economically good for a transnational corporation may adversely effect the economy of their "home" country. We are already experiencing some of this as American companies close their domestic plants and shift their production to Mexico, China or some other country with low labor cost.

Population Growth and Inequaties in the Global Economy.

Probably the least controversial aspect of globalization has been the improvement in health of the worlds peoples. At the end of World War II the World Health Organization (WHO) was created as part of the United Nations to address global health concerns. Working with private and government health organizations and agencies, the WHO defined issues and attempt to direct resources to address particular health problems. Of particular concern was the infant mortality rates in most of the underdeveloped countries of the world. By improving sanitation systems, nutritional standards and health care delivery systems in underdeveloped countries the WHO has help to drastically lower infant mortality rates. In addition the WHO has developed programs for the eradication of epidemic deseases. In 1946 malaria was a major health concern throughout most of the Americas, Africa, Asia and the Pacific. In India alone it was estimated that 800,000 people a year died from the desease, while globally several million people died annually. Malaria is an insect-borne disease spread from one infected human to another by anopheles mosquitoes. Lacking vaccines, the only way to eliminate the disease was to destroy the mosquitoe populations that spread it. Using DDT, the WHO in 1948 launched a program program for the elimination of malaria. By the 1960's wide spread use of DDT had dramatically reduced the death rate from malaria. In the mid-1960's, India reported no deaths from the diseases. At one point it was thought that malaria might be eliminated altogether. However, the discovery that DDT had numerous environmentally distructive side effects lead to limitations on its use as a pesticide. This, together with the evolution of a new DDT resistent anopheles mosquitoe end the hope of eliminating malaria. Even though the malaria program was not totally successful, tens of millions of lives were saved.

Smallpox has been a major health problem since the ancient period. This virus, spread by human hosts, either through the air or by touch, can kill up to 40% of an infected population. In the 1960's there were on the average between 10 and 15 million cases a year, and 2 million death from smallpox. In 1967 the WHO lunched a vaccination campaign designed to eliminate smallpox and with ten years totally eliminated the virus. In 1980, after three years during which no new cases were reported from anywhere in the world, the WHO was able to announce that the smalpox virus had been eliminated.

In addition to the malaria and smallpox programs the WHO had worked and continues to work to improve health conditons by assisting in the development of health care delievery systems thoughout the world. As a result infant mortality have declined dramatically and life expectances have increased in virtually even part of the global. In the last fifty years the worlds population has jumped from 2.5 billion to over 6 billion people. The efforts of the WHO has been the primary contributing factor in this rapidly growth.

While health conditions among all people's has improved, birth rates differ widely among the world's peoples. As a result some regions of the world have seen their population grow far more rapidly that other regions. The most stricking differences are between the developed and undeveloped world. The birth rates of the developed countries of Western Europe, North America and Japan have droped dramatically. In the most extreme cases some of these countries now have negative growth rates. In Italy for example, if the present trend continues, the population will decline from its present 57 million (2000), to only 45 million by 2050. Japan also has a negative growth rate which if it continues at it present rate will result in its population declining from 126 million to only 101 million by 2050.

In sharp contrast are the birth rates of the people of Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and most of Asia. The populations of these regions are increasing at rate averging almost 2% per year or more. In the next half century it is projected that the population of India will increase by over 500 million, while that of neighboring Pakistan will jump by almost 200 million. In 1950, Nigeria, the largest country of Sub-Saharan Africa had a population of only 31 million, By 2000 their population had grown to 123 million. Even given a projected deline in birth rate, it is still estimate that by the year 2050, Nigeria will be home to over 300 million people.

The regional differences in population growth rates are rapidly changing the geographical distribution of the world population. If we compare the worlds population changes by regions and by percentages, and limit it to only to the period from 1950 to 2025, we can see quickly these changes are occuring and how significant the change will be (see Table 16.1 ).

Table 16.1

(source: Robbins1999:148)

By 2025, and most of us will still be alive in that year, the population of the developed countries of the world will constitute only about 1/6th of the world's population. The rapidly growing majority of the world population are both improvished and non-western in cultural heritage.

There is no doubt that the emergence of the global economy has great benefited the developed world and the United States in particular. In terms of tangeble material wealth alone Americans can see a vast change in their life style. In the past 50 years the size of the average new American home has more than doubled, from 900 square feet to over 2,000 square feet. The quantity of our material positions has grown proportionally to fill the new space. Fifty years ago the typical american family owned only a single automoble, today that same family owns two or more. Today we also eat out more and travel more and further. The developed countries Western Eruope and Japan have seen similar increases in the relative wealth. In contrast most of the underdeveloped countries of Latin American, Africa and Asia have not participated in this new prosperity. The result has been increasing inequalities in the distribution of wealth in world. In 1960 it was estimated that the richest 20% of the world's population had 30 times more income than the poorest 20%. By 1999 this ratio had risen to 74 to 1 and was still increasing. It is not just that many people in the world are not sharing in this new wealth, their standards of living are actual declining. Since 1980 the per capita incomes in over 1/3 of the countries of the world have actually declined. Today 1.2 billion people, 1/5 of the world's population, are attempting to exist on incomes of less than $1.00 per day. The distribution of the world's wealth has become so skewed that the total assets of the three richest individuals in the world exceed the annual income of the poorest 600 million, while the richest 200 individuals in the world have wealth that exceeds the annual income of the poorest 2.4 billion peoples.

The problems is not just that a significant wealth gap exist between the rich and poor of the world, but that the gap is rapidly increasing and there appears to be no way to reverse the trend. It is not merely a question of half or more of the world's population left behind by the global economy, they are being left out of participation. In the new global economy these people do not play a significant role either as producers or consumers. A group of people's ability to participate in, let alone prosper, from the evolving global economy is directly link to their access to information and communications technology. In most countries in the world only a small minority of the population has access to telephones, let alone state of the art information and communications technology. What some have termed a digital divide now separates the world's people into those who have access to this new technology and those whose access is limited or non-existant.

The new technology is expensive and the countries which lack it poor. Presently 41 countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America are termed "heavily indebted nations", meaning that they can not even make the interest payments on their existing foreign loans. They are not just poor and indebted, their debts are increasing. Since 1980 the combined debts of these countries have risen $55 billion to over $200 billion. Not only do the people of these countries lack this new technology, they lack the capital to acquire it and the educational skill to make use of it if they had it. They are caught in a cycle of increasing poverty from which there appears no excape.

If we look at the world as a whole, we fine that both the global economy and human populations are growing rapidly. However, if we begin to examine this issue country by country or region by region, we quickly discover that there is an inverse correlation between economic growth and population growth. Generally speaking countries and regions with high economic growth usually have low population growth rates, while countries with rapid population growth most commonly have slow or even negative economic growth rates.

Sub-Saharan Africa in many ways typifies the problems of the underdeveloped regions of the world. The people of this region are basically dependent upon agriculture. They have, relative to their population, limited marketabe natural resources and little in the way of industry. Not only do these countries have poorly developed educational and transportation systems and a lack of information and communications technology, they do not have the financial resources available to acquire or develop them. With the highest birth rate in the world, Sub-Saharan Africa has already reached the crisis point. For the past two decades the populations of these countries has grown much fast than their economies. Increasing populations have resulted in an over utilization of agricultural resources and a deterioration of their land base. Since the early 1960's per capita food production has dropped by 16 per cent. As a result, today the people of this region are over 20 per cent poorer in economic terms than they were in the mid-1970's.

With more than 500 million people Sub-Saharan Africa is already overpopulated. It is estimated that about 40 percent of the region's population live on less than $1 per day and are chronically undernourished. In the next 50 years it is estimated that this population will grow by an additional one billion people. The countries of Sub-Saharan Africa faced the virtually impossible task of developing their economies to met the needs of this expanding population. Economic conditions are only going to become worse as an ever increasing percentage of the population goes hungry. Similar, although not as severe, conditions exist in much of Latin America and Asia as well. Economic development can not keep pace with population growth and already impoverished people are becoming poorer and poorer.

There are two possible solutions to the growing economic problems of the underdeveloped world/ One answer would be to create massive economic development programs to increase agrciltural and industrial production, linked to programs to reduce the population growth rates. Howeve, such programs would literally cost trillions of dollars and would have to be financed by the developed countries of the world. The only other solution is for a mass migration of people from the underdeveloped to the developed countries of world. This migration has already started.

The greatest movement of people in human history is already underway. This migration taking two forms. First is rural to urban migration which is occuring in every country the world. The second is the migration of people from poorer countries to wealther countries. Just before World War II, about 50 percent of the total population of the United States and Europe was urban, compared with only about 8 to 10 percent for Africa and Asia and 25 percent for Latin America. Today, about 75 percent of Americans and 70 percent of Europeans are city dwellers. However, the urban populations of Asia and Africa have jumped to between 25 and 30 percent, and in Latin America the urban population has increased to more than 60 percent. The growth rate of urbanization has thus been highest outside Europe and North America. In fact, the world's most rapidly growing cities are located in underdeveloped nations: Bandung (Indonesia), Lagos (Nigeria), Karachi (Pakistan), Baghdad (Iraq), and Bogata (Columbia). In some of these cities the growth rate has been phenomenal. In the 1950s, Bogotá, Columbia, had a population of only about 650,000; by 1995 its population was over 5 million. Similar increases are common in many Latin American, Asian, and African nations. Most cities in the underdeveloped world lack the large industrial complexes capable of employing the great masses of people migrating into them, but their small-scale industries, transportation services, and government jobs, although limited, offer greater economic opportunities than do the increasingly overcrowded rural regions.

While most migration has been within countries, the growing trend is toward international migration. The United Nations estimates that 150 million people, or almost 3% of the world's population now lives in a country other that the one in which they were born. Many argue that this number is a conservative figure. The main difficulty in discussing internation migration is that it takes so many forms. There are legal immigrants who are in the process of becoming citizens of another country. However, not all countries allow such immigrants. There are other immigrants who have temporary legal status to live in another country; guest workers, students, and refugees. Then there are illegal immigrants, individuals who have illegally taken up residence in another country. However, the distinction between these categories is often blurred as in many cases individuals who come as "students" and "refugees" are in reality actually coming in search of jobs.

As their industrial economies expanded during the 1950s and 1960s, many Western European countries began experiencing labor shortages. West Germany initiated a "guest-worker" program to actively recruit foreign laborers, first in southern Europe, Italy, and Spain, and later in Yugoslavia and Turkey. Concurrently, French factories began recruiting Arab workers from their then North African colonies, particularly Algeria. In the 1950s, England began experiencing an influx of West Indians from its possessions in the Caribbean. In the 1960s, a wave of Pakistani and Indian immigrants also settled in England. Other Western European countries experienced a similar phenomenon, although usually on a smaller scale.

By the early 1970s, when the economic growth of Western Europe began to slow, large non-European communities were well established in most of the major cities. When West Germany ended its guest-worker program in 1974, it had hosted 2.5 million foreign workers, a number equal to over 10 percent of its total labor force. Through various means the West German government tried to repatriate these guest workers and their families, but failed. France, England, and other Western European countries have considered stricter immigration laws to stop the continuing influx of African and Asian workers, but the number of new immigrants is increasing despite tighter controls. By the 1990 almost 10 percent of the population of Western Europe were recent immigrants.

The United States has always allowed for relatively large numbers of legal immigrants. Since World War II, about 25 percent of American population growth has been the result of immigration. However, migration patterns to the United States have changed dramatically in the postwar period (see Figure 16.4). In the 1950s, well over one-half the immigrants to the United States were still coming from Europe; the second largest group, about one-third, were coming from Latin America. In the 1960s, the flood of immigrants began to increase. From only about 300,000 persons per year in the 1960s, the number of immigrants jumped to more than 400,000 per year in the 1970s and to more than 700,000 per year in the 1980s. As the number of immigrants increased, the origin of the immigrants shifted markedly. Proportionally, the number of Latin-American immigrants remained about the same, and European immigration declined. The major increase change was in the number of Asian arrivals, from less than 10 percent of all immigrants in 1950 to more than 40 percent by the 1980s. As a result, between 1980 and 1990 the number of Asian Americans more than doubled, from 3.5 million (1.5 percent) to almost 7.3 million (2.9 percent), whereas the number of Latin Americans increased almost 50 percent, from 14.5 million (6.4 percent) to more than 22 million (9 percent).

Although Europe and North America have been the primary destinations for most international migrants, other regions with high income, labor shortages, or both have experienced major influxes of immigrants. Many of the oil-rich Arab countries—Libya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Quatar, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates—have recruited foreign workers from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Egypt, and from among Palestinian refugees. Indeed, in some of the smaller of these countries foreign workers outnumber native Arabs.For example foeign worker contitute almost 60% percent of the population of Kuwait.

Over he last twenty years international immigration patterns change. While the main objective of most immigrants is still to reach either the United States or Western Europe, any wealther country can be the destination. Whereas in the past most immigrants to the developed countries were from Latin American, East Asia or South Asia, the numbers of immigrants from Africa, the Middle-east, and the former republics of the Soviet Union are growing. Although in recent decades the United States and the countries of Western Europe have increased their legal immigration quotas in all categories, the numbers of individuals wanting to immigrate has increased far more rapidly. The reasons why the ranks of immigrants are growing so dramatically are simple. In every part of the world there is, thanks in large part to satellite dishes, no television reception are most of the programs are American or Western European. On television they see life in the developed countries and realize that there is an alternative to the desperate poverty around them, if only they can get there.

The borders of the developed countries of the world are being overwhelming by increasing waves of illegal immigrants from improvished countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America. Their desperation is such that they will take any risks to excape their world of hopeless poverty. Illegals from Mexico cross the deserts of the southwest on foot with no water. Migrants from Nigeria, Ghana and other west African countries travel cross the Sahara, on foot, on camels, and in old trucks to try and reach the Mediterranian coast where,if lucky, they might find a small boat that will take them across to Spain and Europe. Some individuals have literally walked most of the way from Afganistan to German. Chinese families mortgage everything they own to paid a snakehead, a smuggler, to take one of their family members to the United States or Europe. Individuals with no property place themselves in debt bondage to criminal gangs of smugglers, working their debt off in illegal sweat shops or brothels in New York City, Rome or some other city in the developed world. For many of these people, no personal expense is to great or no danger to frieghtening to stop them from attempting to reach their objective.

In addition to the millions of legal immigrants in the United States there are an estimated 9 million illegal immigrants. Most of the illegals in the United States are from Latin America, however, the come from all parts of the world, Africa, Asia and Europe. The actual number isunknown, they cross from Mexico nighly and the government has no idea as to how many individuals are in the country on expired visas. The only reliable figure we have is that 1.6 million illegals were deported in 2000.

The problem with illegals in Western Europe is not a great as in the United State, but it rapidly growing. It is estimated that there are already between 3 and 3.5 million illegal immigrants. However, they also estimate that this number is growing by addition 500,000 a year. The potential immigration problem for Western Europe is best shown by the growing immigrant population of the bordering country of Yugoslav. In 1997 Yugoslav began admitting Chinese on student visas. Inspite of its poor economy, economic sanctions and bombing by NATO, in four years the Chinese "student" community in Belgrade has grown to number between 75,000 and 100,000.

Other developed are also facing the problem of growing populations of illegal workers. Japan estimates that about 250,000 Koreans, Filipinos, Chinese and Thais are illegally living and working in Japan. Korea estimates its number of illegals at about 200,000 and Australia estimates that it has an illegal population of about 60,000. However, the country with proportionally the greatest problem possible South Africa which inspite of a high unemployement rate has estimated 4 million illegals, out of a total population of 43 million. The economy of South Africa may not be good by American or Western European standards, but compared to those of the war torn countries of central Africa, it is a paradise.

Already many people in the United States and Western Europe are complaining of the growing numbers of immigrants. The same is true in other countries that feel themselves inundated by foreigners. In Lybia there have been riots in which sub-Saharan Africans immigrants have been killed, and in South Africa some of the illegals have been murdered. If people think the problem is bad today, they need only wait for tomorrow. If the economic inequaties of the global economy are not currected, and the economies of the underdeveloped countries are not dramatically improved, the rate of immigration will only increase. There are hundreds of millions more only waiting for the opportunity to move.

Consequences of Globalization and the Global Economy

Globalization is multifacited and its effects and consequences are far reaching. The global economy is creating an increasing economic interdependence of the world's people, not just in technology, manufactured goods, and clothing, but food as well. The global economy is producing tremendous new wealth, while at the same time producing poverty and an increasingly skewed distribution in wealth. The global economy is resulting in the greatest migration in human that is changing the ethnic mix of all the world's cities and literally changing the complextions of the cities of Western Europe and the United States. In Western Europe today one seeing increasing numbers of people from Africa, the Middle-east and all parts of Asia. In the United States one sees not only increasing numbers of peoples from Africa, the Middle-east and Asia, but Latin America as well. From its earliest beginnings in the United States the media was used as a marketing tool by industry, to change peoples needs and tastes. The now global media has not changed. It is still a marketing tool. However, today it is attempting to sell to the world not only material goods, but western (primarily American) lifes styles, values and beliefs as well. Some argue that, wheither intended or not, the global media now serves as a means of Western cultural propoganda, that is threatening and eroding the cultural traditions of the non-Western peoples of the world.

The events of September 11, 2001 have left a deep impression not just on the minds of Americans, but people throughout most of the world. Why would any one hate the United States so much that they would sacrifice their own lifes in order to inflect such damage and carnage? Why would eightteen men commandere jetliners to crash them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? It is obvious that they were part of a much larger, well organized and financed Middle-eastern Islamic group. Since no organization has taken credit , let alone state why this act was taken, we can only speculate. As many commentators have pointed out, the attack does not appear to be directly related to American support for Isreal against the Palestinians, or any other particular action of the United States. The issues are much deeper and more fundamental.

In his recent book Runaway World, Anthony Giddens (2000: 22) states " The battleground of the twenty-first century will pit fundamentalism against cosmopolitan tolerance." By fundamentalists peoples Giddens means those people on the world who are adherents to traditional (non-Western) cultural values and practices. In contrast cosmospolitan people are those peoples who have embraced the cultural values and practices of globalization, in other words peoples who have or have adopted Western cultural traditions . Thus he sees that conflict in the twenty-first century will be between the west and the traditional rest. Giddens is not first suggest that there will be increasing conflicts between peoples from different cultural traditions or "civilizations". Samuel Huntington (1993) in his study The Clash of Civilizations ? suggested the increasing possiblity of such conflicts (see Box 17.3). The difference between them is that Giddens clearly places these conflicts within the context of globalization.

Over the past forty years oil production has resulted in prosperiety for many of the peoples of the Middle-east. As a result of this wealth, few non-western peoples have been as exposed to western cultural influences as the Islamic peoples of this region. Tens of thousands of Middle-eastern students have studied at universities, colleges and technical schools in the United States and Europe. Still more Midde-eastern individuals have visited the United States and Europe on business or vacation trips. Even those who have remained at home have not excaped exposure to western culture. In most of the countries of the modern Middle-east western cultural influences are pervasive. They see western television programs, they watch western movies, they listen to western music, frequently wear western cloths and visit western web sites on their pc's. Even western foods are locally available. McDonald's are now found in many of the major cities. Many clerics and traditional leaders in the Islamic Middle-east have come to view western culture as the ultimate source of evil and degeneracy; corrupting their people, and threatening to destroy their traditional values, norms and beliefs. In 1979, the government of Iran was overthrowned, and an Islamic republic established which has worked to eliminate all traces of western influences from Iranian society. Anwar Sadat, the President of Egypt was assassinated in 1981 by religious extremous. But, they were unable to gain control of the Egyptian government. More recently the Tiliban gained control of Afganistan and estalish an Islamic republic, attempting to remove all foreign influences. For the past few years the western oriented government of Algeria has been locked in an increasing vicious and bloody civil war with Islamic fundamentalists.

Throughout the Islamic Middle-east there are growing fundamental movements whose objects are to overthrow their existing secular governments and reestablish Islamic cultural supremacy by erasing western cultural influence. To these people the western controlled global economy and growing influence of western culture are inseperable. The United States is seen as the center of the western world and thus the ultimate source of their problems.

To the men who flow the jetliners into the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, they were not terrorists, but holy warriors sacreficing their lifes in a just and righteous cause. It was not as much an attack on the American people, as much as it was a symbolic attack on western civilization. It was not an attack on buildings or property, but an attack on the two greatest icons and at the very heart of the global economy.

Globalization has made the world smaller and geography no longer relevant. The oceans of the world no longer separate us, nor protect us, from another other. The problems of one region of the world quickly become the problems of another and problems of the Middle-east have become the problems of America.

Part IV: Domestic Tensions

Because of the intense media scrutiny on the terrorist attacks and the fact that the terrorists were of Middle Eastern origin, there is the potential of prejudice and discrimination against Americans of the Islamic religion and of Middle Eastern ethnicity. A number of hate crimes have been already reported against Americans of Middle East ethnicity. Sociologists study the causes and effects of prejudice, discrimination and racism. Authors Margaret Andersen and Howard Taylor examine prejudice from a sociological perspective in their textbook, Sociology: Understanding a Diverse Society, Second Edition (2002). At the end of this section, you may take a self quiz, which will help you explore various commonly held prejudices. The quiz is taken from Diana Kendall's text, Sociology In Our Times: The Essentials, Third Edition (2002)

Many people use the terms prejudice, discrimination, and racism loosely, as if they were all the same thing. Typically, in common parlance, people also think of these mostly in individualistic terms, as if the major problems of race were the result of individual people's bad will or biased ideas. Sociologists use more refined concepts to understand race and ethnic relations, distinguishing carefully among prejudice, discrimination, and racism.

A. Prejudice

Prejudice is the evaluation of a social group, and individuals within that group, based on conceptions about the social group that are held despite facts that contradict it and that involve both prejudgment and misjudgment (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew, 1971; Jones, 1997). Prejudices are usually defined as negative predispositions or evaluations, rarely positive. Thinking ill of people only because they are members of group X is prejudice. The negative evaluation arises solely because the person is seen as a member of group X, without regard to countervailing traits or characteristics the person may have. A negative prejudice against someone not in one's own social group is often accompanied by a positive prejudice in favor of someone who is in one's own group. Thus, the prejudiced person will have negative attitudes about a member of an out-group (any group other than one's own) and positive attitudes about someone simply because he or she is in one's in-group (any group one considers one's own).

Most people disavow racial or ethnic prejudice, yet the vast majority of us carry around some prejudices, whether about racial–ethnic groups, men and women, old and young, upper class and lower class, or straight and gay. Prejudice is what social scientists call a variable—it varies from person to person. Five decades of research have shown definitively that people who are more prejudiced are also more likely to stereotype others by race or ethnicity, and often by gender, than those who are less prejudiced (Adorno et al., 1950; Jones, 1997; Taylor et al., 1997; Worchel et al., 2000). Nevertheless, everyone possesses some prejudices.

Prejudice based on race or ethnicity is called racial–ethnic prejudice. In-groups and out-groups in this case are defined along racial or ethnic lines. If you are a Latino and dislike an Anglo only because he or she is White, then this constitutes prejudice. It is a negative judgment ("prejudgment") based on race and ethnicity and very little else. In this example, Latino is the in-group and White is the outgroup. If the Latino individual attempts to justify these feelings by arguing that "all Whites have the same bad character,"then the Latino is using a stereotype as justification for the prejudice. Similarly, gender prejudice exists in our society. There are negative prejudices based on gender, and ingroup and out-group are defined by gender. Finally, there is class prejudice, the negative evaluation of people solely on the basis of their social class, but little reference to anything else about them. Note that prejudice can be held by any group against another. Thus, African Americans can be prejudiced against Whites or against Hispanics and Asian Americans. African Americans of West Indian (Caribbean) descent may be prejudiced against non-West Indian African Americans. Such prejudice does exist, although sociological research has found that recent concerns that there is a backlash of prejudice by African Americans against Hispanics and Asian Americans is generally less than prejudice by White Americans toward these groups (Cummings and Lambert, 1997).

Prejudice is also revealed in the phenomenon of ethnocentrism,which we examined in Chapter 3 on culture. Ethnocentrism is the belief that one's group is superior to all other groups. The ethnocentric person feels that his or her own group is moral, just, and right and that an outgroup —and thus any member of the out-group—is immoral, unjust, wrong, distrustful, or criminal. The ethno- centric individual uses his or her own in-group as the standard against which all other groups are compared. Generally, the greater the difference between groups, the more harshly the out-group will be judged by an ethnocentric individual and the more prejudiced that person will be against members of the out-group.

The Effects of Prejudice.

Our judgments about other people can hardly escape being influenced by our feelings (prejudices) about their group as a whole. Several studies show this dramatically (Sweeney and Haney, 1992; Ugwuegbu, 1979). In one study, White students were asked to serve as jurors in a mock rape trial. Each read a hypothetical, but very realistic, account of the rape of a nineteen-year-old White woman by a twenty-one-year-old man. Four different accounts (experimental conditions) were used. In one account, the alleged rapist was a Black man, and the evidence against him was strong (both the female victim and an eyewitness identified the rapist). In another, the alleged rapist was Black and the evidence against him was weak (neither the female victim nor the eyewitness could identify the rapist). In two other accounts, the evidence followed a similar pattern, but the rapist was a White man. The results were interesting. On a scale of blame, the Black man was always blamed more than the White man, regardless of whether the evidence was weak or strong. The strength of the evidence made a slight difference. Both alleged rapists were perceived as more culpable when the evidence was strong as opposed to weak. The point is that race has an effect on the amount of blame attributed to the alleged rapist—in addition to the effect of the strength of the evidence. Race by itself has a clear and separate—even bigger—effect.

The results were similar no matter what the race of the juror, although a Black juror was somewhat less likely than a White juror to attribute blame to the Black alleged rapist. Strikingly similar results have been obtained, when possible, in actual rape trials in real courts by comparing trials with defendants of a different race and trials with differing evidence strength (Loewen, 1982; Sweeney and Haney, 1992).

Racial and ethnic prejudice also has a marked effect on people's political views and on how they vote. This is shown in studies that incorporate a separate measure of the amount of the individual's prejudice and relate this to voting preferences. For example, when Jesse Jackson, the Black minister and political activist, ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1984, he was opposed most by Whites who were highly prejudiced, whereas less prejudiced Whites were more likely to favor him (Sears et al., 1988). The difference was attributable to prejudice itself, not the objective advantages and disadvantages of the candidate.

Whether one is for or against affirmative action and similar programs, one's prejudice predicts fairly accurately how one will respond to a particular program, regardless of relevant, objective facts about the situation. For example, the more prejudiced a White person is, the more likely he or she will oppose busing to achieve racial balance in schools (Jessor, 1988; Kluegel and Bobo, 1993). Prejudice is not the only reason one might oppose busing, but prejudice is part of the picture.

The same holds with regard to affirmative action policies on behalf of Asian Americans. The more strongly an individual is prejudiced against Asian Americans, the more that person will object to any governmental program that benefits Asian Americans, such as monetary reparations to the Japanese American families who were unjustly interned in concentration camps after U.S. entry into World War II. The same is true for other kinds of educational and political programs geared to benefit Asian Americans (Takaki, 1989; Takagi, 1992).

Prejudice and Socialization.

Where does racial–ethnic prejudice come from? How do moderately or highly prejudiced people end up that way? People are not born with stereotypes and prejudices. Research shows that they are learned and internalized through the socialization process, including both primary socialization (family, peers, and teachers) and secondary socialization (such as the media). Children imitate the attitudes of their parents, peers, and teachers. If the parent complains about "Japs taking away jobs " from Americans, then the child grows up thinking negatively about the Japanese, including Japanese Americans. Attitudes about race are formed early in childhood, at about age three or four (Allport, 1954; Van Ausdale and Feagin, 1996). There is a very close correlation between the racial and ethnic attitudes of parents and those of their children (Ashmore and DelBoca, 1976). The more ethnically or racially prejudiced the parent, the more ethnically or racially prejudiced on average will be the child. Later in life, peers will reinforce these negative feelings, for example, by jeering at Japanese American children on their way to school in the morning.

A major vehicle for the communication of racial–ethnic attitudes to both young and old is the media, especially television, magazines, newspapers, and books. For many decades, African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asians were rarely presented in the media, and then only in negatively stereotyped roles. The Chinese were shown in movies, magazines, and early television in the 1950s as bucktoothed buffoons who ran shirt laundries. Japanese Americans were depicted as sneaky and Untrustworthy. Hispanics were shown as either ruthless banditos or playful, happy-go-lucky "Pedros" who took long siestas. American Indians were presented as either villains or subservient characters such as the Lone Ranger's famed sidekick, Tonto. Finally, there is the drearily familiar image of the Black person as subservient, lazy, clowning, and bug-eyed, a stereotypical image that persisted from the late nineteenth century all the way through the 1950s and early 1960s (Thibodeau, 1989).

The late 1960s, which included the Black Power movement and greatly increased civil rights activity in the country, saw some improvements in media stereotypes, which continued into the 1970s and 1980s. During this time, the media became somewhat less culpable in fostering racial and ethnic prejudice. TV programs such as The Cosby Show, featuring an African American doctor (played by Bill Cosby), his lawyer wife (played by Phylicia Rashaad), their well-educated children, and their positive interactions with Whites and Asians, may have contributed to blunting anti-Black prejudice. The Huxtables were a well-to-do family headed by Black professionals and thus could serve as positive role models for Black youth, but they also underscore what African Americans and other minorities in society have not attained. As one critic wryly noted from observing other Black sitcoms, Black people seem to be doing better on TV than in real life (Gates, 1992).

Despite the Huxtables, careful content analyses have shown that improvements in the portrayal of minorities on television have been minimal. For example, positive crossrace interactions have always been infrequent, even into the 1990s. During this period, positive interactions between Blacks and Whites (those in which Blacks and Whites interact as professional equals or friends) have been a mere 5 percent or less of total interactions, including dramas, comedies, and other types of television shows (Wei et al., 1990).

B. Self Quiz About Intolerance

How Much Do You Know About Culture and Intolerance Toward Others?

Answers to the Sociology Quiz on Culture and Intolerance Toward Others

1. False. Among the core American values identified by sociologists is the belief that one's own racial or ethnic group should be valued above all others. Inherent in this belief may be the assumption of racism—that members of racial–ethnic categories other than one's own are somehow inferior.
2. True. Although some people associate all rap music with "gangsta rap," which glorifies violence, drug use, and hostility toward women, other forms of rap music discourage such behavior and draw attention to the severe economic barriers that increasingly divide poor African Americans in central cities from middle- and upper-middleclass African Americans.
3. True. The Confederate flag has become an emotional symbol that continues to divide whites and African Americans in the South.
4. False. Hatred for members of other racial and ethnic groups—like other forms of prejudice and discrimination—is learned from the individuals with whom we associate. It is not rooted in human biology.
5. True. Polls show that high rates of immigration are related to an increase in anti-immigrant sentiment.
6. False. Although the desire to protect the supremacy of the English language in the United States dates back to colonial times, the framers of the Constitution chose in 1780 not to establish a national language. They thought that a national language was inconsistent with the cultural composition of the new nation.
7. True. Individuals speaking languages other than English have been the victims of verbal and physical abuse by individual bigots and members of hate groups, who view such persons as "outsiders who should go back home."
8. False. Recent polls have shown that as the United States has increased in diversity, most dominant group members are not becoming more tolerant. Three examples demonstrate this point: recent demands in this country that immigration laws be more strictly enforced, renewed interest in establishing English as the "official"
language of the United States, and pressure to eliminate affirmative action programs that might otherwise benefit minority-group members.

Sources: Based on Harvard Law Review, 1987; Herek and Berrill, 1992; Dyson, 1993; and Levin and McDevitt, 1993.