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

"As we go further and further into the 21st century, a culture of violence continues to grip society as we know it." (Essay #1, 9/30/05, Paragraph 1) This growing culture of violence continues to push the world further and further away from an end to religious terror and violence. This is why the plan I have devised focuses on changing the landscape of our society for the purpose of making lasting peace a realistic goal rather than a pipedream. My plan is not a simple list of tasks, each of the four main steps will likely take years to reach its full effect. But trying to achieve peace and end religious terror in today's world is equivalent to building a skyscraper on a cracked, eroded foundation - it will never last. Many things have to change first; we have to create a climate in which lasting peace can be obtained. This is why the key theme of my plan is "sacrifice"; governments, the media, and the general public must be willing to make sacrifices for my plan to have any chance of success. From my readings of materials in this course, I have identified three major categories of religious terrorists: Hardcore terrorists, such as Osama Bin Laden, are completely devoted to their religious cause and the use of violence. They adopt a "warring attitude" and "no longer (think) compromise is possible...or...did not want an accommodating solution in the first place." (Juergensmeyer, 149) Another category of religious terrorists, Fringe terrorists, are not devoted to the religious cause, but are more than willing to exercise the use of violence. These terrorists are marginal men and are the category most affected by the counter-terrorist measures of secular governments. The final category of religious terrorists are Survival terrorists. This category refers to people who join terrorist groups mainly out of fear and anger over the actions of secular governments. They are completely devoted to their religious cause, but are hesitant to use violence. These are people who once lived normal, peaceful lives until they felt morally obliged to defend the survival of their religion after perceived attacks from secular governments (i.e. wars, the prejudicial societal attitudes towards particular religions, etc) In this paper I will map out my plan to end religious terror worldwide and achieve lasting peace.

The first step of my plan, "Indefinite Isolation" deals with eradication of Fringe terrorists. This step comes from one of Juergensmeyer's scenarios referred to as "Terrifying Terrorists". He states that harsh punishments could "frighten them by raising the stakes associated with involvement in terrorist activity." He also explains that fringe members of these groups are likely to be the most affected. (Juergensmeyer, 231) While Fringe terrorists are marginal men, many of them are willing, and sometimes eager, to die. This is why I propose secular governments take the punishment of death off of the table. Instead of execution, governments should place people convicted of furthering a terrorist act in isolated detention for 25 years-to-life, and people convicted of supporting terrorism/hindering the prosecution of a terrorist act/conspiracy for 10+ years. When these marginal men join religious terror groups, they are seeking "a meaningful life and a proud death." (Essay #3, 11/23/05, Paragraph 4) They are seeking a life where their "actions have a direct effect on the world." (Essay #3, 11/23/05, Paragraph 7) This phase of my plan robs them of this sense of empowerment, as well as the opportunity for martyrdom. Instead of dying in a massive explosion which claims many innocent lives and makes them a noble martyr to the other members of their group, they sit alone in a small cell and are rendered completely insignificant. This will serve to make terrorism a less appealing option for marginal men, it will deter them from this path. The eradication of these Fringe terrorists is not an unimportant objective, as they are used by religious groups as assets, due to their willingness to die, kill, and take great risks. And "...the fewer fringe members a religious terror group has, the fewer (total) members they have, and (the) fewer members they have, the weaker the group is." ("Concluding Weeks", Likelihood of the scenarios 12/5/05, Jon Searing)

The second step of my plan, "Censorship of media", is where the aforementioned theme of sacrifice comes into play. Worldwide news networks and the internet have brought "a new development in terrorism: the extraordinary widening of terror's audience." (Juergensmeyer, 142) "Without being noticed...terrorism would not exist...Terrorism without its horrified witnesses would be as pointless as a play without an audience." (Juergensmeyer, 139) One of the primary reasons why terrorism is so heavily covered by the media today is because terror groups are becoming more and more effective at utilizing the "Theater of Terror". They are using this concept to "captivate (the) audience, to get and keep their attention for as long as (they) want." (Essay #2, 10/26/05, Paragraph 1) The amount of coverage terrorist acts receive is more important to religious terror groups than many people realize. In his conversation with Mark Juergensmeyer, Mahmud Abouhalima said the greatest threat to Islam was media misrepresentation. He stated that "secularism held a virtual lock on media control and that Islam did not have news sources to present its side of contemporary history." (Juergensmeyer, 140) This is an advantage secular governments should use to reduce the climate of fear. They should forbid news stations from showing the horrible destruction and death caused by acts of terrorism. It will not diminish the acts themselves, but it will reduce the "...horror (that travels) far beyond the number of people immediately affected by the blast." (Juergensmeyer, 140) I am not suggesting governments forbid news services from reporting on actual events, the last thing we as a people should do is burrow our heads in the sand and pretend everything is fine. However, the repeated displaying of death, destruction, and mayhem offers nothing positive to society, and only serves to spread fear, encourage hostility, and (indirectly) support terrorism. While this step of the plan would undoubtedly be controversial, it is not completely unfounded. Juergensmeyer himself acknowledges the possibility that terrorist acts "would not happen as frequently, or in the same way, if the enormous resources of the news media were not readily at hand to promote them." (Juergensmeyer, 142) If this step is taken along with the successful adherence to the 3rd step, then we will be on track to a healing process that will eventually lead to the end of religious terror.

The third step of my plan is simply “Avoiding war.” I believe this step is critical for two reasons; 1 - Going to war validates the beliefs of terrorists, and 2 - Going to war sends a terrible message to the people of your country. Juergensmeyer talks of the dangers of a war on terrorism, claiming “that it can play into the scenario that religious terrorists...have fostered: the image of a world at war between secular and religious forces...(and) makes recruitment to their causes easier...” (Juergensmeyer, 230) And when you consider that these religious groups are led by Hardcore terrorists, the stronger they are, the farther away from lasting peace the world is. Going to war helps build up the third category of terrorists I mentioned earlier, Survival terrorists. These are people who feel their religion is being threatened and thus join terror groups out of a sense of moral obligation. So if we can avoid entering into a war against terrorism, we can dramatically reduce the numbers of these Survival terrorists. The “terrible message” I spoke of refers to our governments casting blame for religious violence. For example, the United States invaded Afghanistan only a few weeks after 9/11. This sends a message that Arabs and Muslims are the problem, not just the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. I do not believe the U.S. Government viewed their decision as a war on Arabs, but I do believe it was viewed that way by many people in the American public. Perception is reality, and when a government invades Afghanistan, and enters into a war in Iraq just 17 months later, the public will begin to believe that the entire Middle East is a threat, not just Islamic extremists. And if the general public views any particular religion as a “terrorist religion”, there can never be lasting peace in the world. After events such as 9/11, Muslims should receive our support, not our hatred. As Juergensmeyer points out, "supporting moderate leadership within the communities...would diminish support for the extremists." (Juergensmeyer, 237)

The previous two steps serve to set up this fourth and final step “Establish culture of compassion”. The onus for this step is placed on both secular governments and the people. After the previous three steps have been successfully taken, secular governments can begin a shift from a climate of fear to a climate of compassion. This fourth stage is not attainable unless the previous 3 stages are successfully completed. Society, by and large, takes its cue from the government, and this can be either positive or negative. The American government, for example, has definitely made the public aware of the terrorist threats facing the nation. Whether or not these warnings constitute "scare tactics" is not my concern at this time. But there is no doubt that the public today is not willing to show compassion for devout Christians and Muslims because they fear in doing so, they maybe excusing the actions of their more zealous compatriots. Hate, blame, and vengeance cannot possibly heal the world of terrorism. To end religious terror and violence and achieve lasting peace, the government has to make their people realize that showing compassion and understanding is the right thing to do. Secular governments have to convince their people that there is nothing wrong with a religion that requires its members to pray five times a day, or compels its members to speak out against abortion. In the very last paragraph of his book, Juergensmeyer states that "...religious violence cannot end until some accommodation can be forged between the two (religion and civil society) - some assertion of moderation in religion's passion, and some acknowledgment of religion in elevating the spiritual and moral values of public life." (Juergensmeyer, 243) If this is reached, and people come to the realization that hostility and blame will only incite more religious violence, the world will be on the fast track to the end of religious terror and violence, and a time of lasting peace.

In conclusion, the primary reason why my plan is far-fetched at this point in time is because secular governments are of primary importance to this plan, and right now world peace is simply not a priority. Governments feel pressure from their citizens to "...be vigilant in their surveillance of potential terrorist groups, diligent in their attempts to apprehend those suspected of committing terrorist acts, and swift in bringing them to courts of law." (Juergensmeyer, 237) But I do believe my plan can work if it is executed successfully. It eradicates the Fringe terrorists, who seek only the support and justification to exercise violence, draws the Survival terrorists away from terror groups, and widens the gap between the Hardcore terrorists and their respective religions. Once the fourth stage is completed, the world will undergo a self-healing process. This process will not be short and will often test the patience of the public, secular governments, and religions around the world. But when the self-healing process is completed, the world will be living in a climate of understanding and compassion, where Hardcore terrorists like Osama Bin Laden simply will not be able to survive.