Boaz Ganor, founder and Executive Director of the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism, describes democracy’s main struggle to survive against terrorism:  defending personal rights while ensuring the public security of citizens.

Phenomena such as political violence, terrorist attacks and guerilla warfare have been present throughout humanity’s existence, and continue today.  Throughout the years, such acts have manifested differently, according to a group’s specific political objectives, or the nature of the terrorist organization itself.  Ultimately, terrorism – the calculated use of violence against a civilian population to attain political, religious or ideological goals – continues to be the most effective instrument in achieving political objectives.

“In the past, terrorist attempted to influence politics through attacks directed at specific individuals, such as, for example, government officials”, explains Boaz Ganor, founder and Executive Director of the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism.  “With the expansion of democracy as the form of government across continents, terrorist groups had to modify their operations to achieve the desired goal.  Instead of directly targeting political bodies, they began to mark civilians, instilling fear and creating panic in order to realize their political objectives”.

Accoridng to Ganor, technological advances have contributed significantly to this type of terrorism.  Weapons have become smaller, lighter, more lethal, easier to transport and more difficult to locate.  Civil transportation means, especially air transport, provide terrorists with easy accessibility to their targets, and a rapid means of escape.  “But above all else, contemporary terrorism has benefited from the development of modern communication means.  First and foremost, the television delivers real-time broadcast across the globe through the use of satellites, thus becoming the ideal tool for terrorists to deliver their messages.

Nevertheless, television is not the only modern instrument aiding terrorist organizations.  The democratic system itself, its ethics and values, have certainly influenced the development and actions of these groups.  “When liberal democracies are forced to deal with a terrorist attack, they are faced with an extremely challenging dilemma: on the one hand they are obliged to defend their citizens’ security, but on the other hand, they must honor democratic values  such as freedom of expression, and ensure universal ethical values”, explains Ganor.  “From a democratic perspective, taking measures against terrorism may actually jeopardize democratic, ethical values, while not taking action may result in the destruction of the democracy itself.  In some situations, the presence of terrorism, together with an increasingly frustrated or angry population, may inspire the welcoming of a dictator who promises ‘to end this unacceptable situation, once and for all’”.

Much has been said and published regarding the relationship between means of communication and terrorism.  Many claim that terrorism could not exist, or at least could not have grown to its current proportions, if it were not for contemporary news media; that is, terrorist organizations depend on the media to spread their messages, gain attention for their fatal acts, and influence public opinion through widespread intimidation.

“Terrorist organizations have been aware of the crucial function that contemporary media plays in society for awhile now, so they use that entity as a voice box for their messages”, states Ganor.  “Terrorists plan their actions so that they receive the most publicity possible.  The location, type of attack, time of attack, and manner in which a terrorist body claims responsibility for its actions, all assure the most coverage possible.  It’s no coincidence that terrorists have consistently chosen venues for their activities where media presence would be ensured”.

One of Yasser Arafat’s cohorts and the mastermind behind the terrorist attacks at the 1972 Olympic games, Abu Daoud, publicly admitted that he purposely chose the venue to take advantage of the concentrated media coverage.  “Through Munich, we were able to force our case into the homes of 500 million people ….” Stated Daoud, “… before Munich, we were simply terrorists. After Munich, at least people started asking, 'Who are these terrorists? What do they want?' Before Munich, nobody had the slightest idea about Palestine.”  Sometimes the terrorists even invite the media to the site of the event as it is occurring and demand that the press interview either the terrorists themselves or their hostages in order to send a message.  On other occasions, they have taken control over radio or television stations and forced the transmission of a public message.

Terrorist attacks are always accompanied by a psychological war against the public and its ethical values.  By means of in discriminatory acts, terrorist organizations try to destabilize a population and convince the government that submitting to the terrorists’ conditions and demands is more important than any other political decision.

Since the objective of terrorism is to attack the values of the civil population, from a strategic point of view, terrorism must be confronted using the same metaphoric weapon, or psychological warfare.  Governments must concentrate all of their intellectual and physical efforts to preserving the ethical values of its citizens, strengthening morale and their capacity to collectively face the stark reality of contemporary terrorism.

PURCHASE THE ONLINE SECURITY MANAGEMENT COURSE.  

PSOSONLINE© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part prohibited without the prior written consent of PSOS.