My Plan to End Religious Terror and Violence and Achieve Lasting Peace by TC

Martin Luther King III said, “We all have to be concerned about terrorism, but you will never end terrorism by terrorizing others” (Subzero Blue). Terrorism has been around since people have roamed the earth. There has always been conflict between groups of people. Is there really any true way to end terrorism? While there may not be a clear answer to this question, it is important to understand that any ground gained on the fight to end terrorism will take time and will be a process; it is a process because simply making one adjustment or taking one action, will not bring about a great enough change to end terrorism altogether. There have been several plans developed to put a stop to terrorism, some of which were found in Juergensmeyer’s Terror in the Mind of God. One important proposal includes making a compromise between the two groups. Another strategy, not outlined in the text is to develop a way to “humanize” each group. Finally, changing the United States’ political policies would also lessen the threat of terrorism.
When a compromise is struck between the terrorists and the terrorized, in essence, terrorists are winning. “This is the outcome for which every religious activist, understandably, has yearned” (238). However, this type of solution can only be successful at ending terrorism if 100% of both groups are satisfied with the compromise. It may be impossible to achieve that kind of acceptance. "A few activists may be appeased, but others may be angered by what they regard as a sellout of their principles" (240). An example of this type of failure can be seen when looking at the situation in Israel. The Palestinians and the Jews have been fighting over the land that they consider to be their holy land for centuries. “In an attempt to inspire peace amongst the two groups, some of the land of Israel has been divided between them” (Essay #1, Paragraph 2). This decision was made between Yasir Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin. Rabin believed that “Israelis believed in peace and were ‘ready to take a risk for it’” (Learning Unit 3). Unfortunately, not all of the Jews and Palestinians agreed with the decision of their leaders. “Instead of creating peace for Jews and Palestinians, there has only been more conflict because of the close proximity to each other” (Essay #1, Paragraph 2).
Part of the procedure of terrorism for many groups includes a way to dehumanize their enemy. For example, Rev Michael Bray, a Christian anti-abortion activist, “accomplishes the task of depersonalization by creating jokes about abortion clinic workers. “Bray explained that jokes that ‘mock evildoers’ reinforce a ‘right posture’ of ‘loathing, not happy tolerance’”” (176) (Essay #3, Paragraph 3). By taking away the enemy’s humanity, the act of killing them does not seem wrong. In order to end this type of motivation, governments that are known to be targets for terrorism need to work on a way to humanize their image. If the two sides can find a way to become more understanding of one another’s viewpoints, there would be no cause for terrorism. Perhaps the United States could accomplish this by sending more aid, wanted aid, to the developing countries. These countries may be in need of food, clothing and healthcare; they are not interested in the United States’ “military aid” that it is infamous for giving. By forming a rapport of understanding with the countries that are inhabited by terrorists, terrorism is sure to decrease.
Finally, the United States should change some of their political policies. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the United States is notorious for stepping in to other countries’ affairs when not wanted. It has gained the title of “global police.” By entering into these different countries unsolicited, the United States has become a focal point for terrorist threats. This is most likely why the World Trade Center and Pentagon were targets of terrorism. Osama bin Laden targeted America because he regards the United States as “‘the biggest terrorist in the world’” (182). Every time there is a problem within other countries of the world, the United States military is sent in to moderate. Clearly, this has had adverse effects on America. “The U.S. State Department’s counterterrorism unit reported that during the 1990s, 40 percent of all acts of terrorism worldwide were waged against American citizens and facilities” (182). If the United States were to change its political policies to decrease its actions in other countries’ affairs, this percentage may decrease proportionately. Less military force from the United States will mean less animosity against the United States.
There are many strategies to ending and decreasing terrorism. Whether these plans will work is yet to be seen. The only thing one can do is to try them and hope that the plans will be a success. Will terrorism ever end? That is a question that cannot be answered today. Nonetheless, it is imperative that each individual does his/her part in terminating terrorism. The world can be changed one person at a time.

Works Cited
“Subzero Blue.” December 14, 2005.
http://www.subzeroblue.com/archives/001670.html