Afghanistan- Today's Terrorism Is More Fatal with Modern Techniques

(MENAFN- Daily Outlook Afghanistan) Earlier terrorism wasnot a widespread phenomenon as it is today in contemporary political system ofthe world. In the 1960s national security was perceived as the ability of anation to protect its internal values from external threats. In the 1990s thenotion of national security has been greatly enlarged to mean the capacity tocontrol those domestic and foreign conditions that the public opinion considersnecessary for its autonomy, prosperity and well being. It has been interpretedby some to mean any condition which might degrade the quality of life of theinhabitants of a state. In this confused perception of security the terroristshas a ready field to exploit. The relationship between the citizen and thestate having snapped, terrorists target the citizens with greater violence andin the least expected places. In response to the terrorists' use of violencethe state uses its military apparatus. In the process it alienates thepopulation. The increasing reliance on the military cannot and does not stopterrorist activity. It in fact increases the vulnerability of the citizens.
Helpful methods andgrievous threats
The threats we facefrom terrorism are constantly changing in all sorts of ways. It is not easy ata time when commercial airlines can be used as flying bombs, and when terroriststrategy is planned by internet, mobile phone, satellite and coded messages onwebsites. It has now become a global phenomenon with increasing and rather wellidentifiable links between different terrorist group and organisation. They useeach other's areas for recruitment and training, exchange of illegal weapons,engage in joint planning and ventures and also provide administrative and otherlogistic support. This type of terrorist activities show a new dimension due tocircumstances characterised by the advancement of science, technology anddiverse social, economic, political and historical reasons conditioning it. Thedevelopment of computer science, satellite and mobile links have also affectedthe modernisation of terrorist activities. It is also feared that weapons ofmass destruction previously controlled by governments can now be purchased onthe black market. It is said that not only the weapons but also the scientistswith the knowledge of how to make them are available.
Meanwhile, experts interrorism believe that the next big threat will come from the practitioners ofbiological terrorism. Dr. Raymond A. Zilinskas, a microbiologist and formerUN–SCOM inspector, recently discussed three categories of bioterrorism. Lowtechnology bio-weapons are delivered in food or water, causing food poisoning.Such acts are extremely difficult to prevent, but rarely have much more thanlocal impact. High technology bio weapons disperse agents over a larger area,but the use of foggers or sprayers is beset with technical problems. Explosivemunitions as dispersal devices kill the agents in the explosion. There is alsobioscience-based technology in which bacteria might be genetically engineeredto be resistant to all known antibiotics, while viruses may be made moreresistant to environmental factors. Dr. Zilinskas warns, ‘Nevertheless, we canexpect that in the not too distant future, some well–trained molecularbiologist will utilise her or his knowledge for military or terroristpurposes.' A 1999 Federal Research Division (FRD) study examined some changesfrom terrorists of the past, especially the emergence of terrorist acts carriedout by individuals and members of small, adhoc groups largely unknown tosecurity organisations. Tactics, as well as sources, had changed, with thegreater use of suicide attacks and attacks by women and children. A verysignificant concern was the possible use, by terrorists, of Weapons of MassDestruction (WMD). Researchers for a 1999 General Accounting Office had alsoconcluded that this is not a hypothetical fear but it also must be assessed interms of possible damage, …except if using toxic industrial chemicals,terrorists would need a relatively high degree of sophistication tosuccessfully and effectively process agents, improvise a device or weapon anddisseminate the agents to cause mass casualties …Effectively disseminating bothforms of agent (dry or liquid) can pose technical challenges in that the properequipment and energy sources are needed.
New weapons applied
However, in thiscontext, above all is the fact that terrorists, while having at their disposalall the arms of the system, have also another fatal weapon: their own death. Ifthey limited themselves to fighting the system with its own weapons, they wouldbe immediately eliminated. If they did not oppose the system with their owndeath, they would disappear as quickly as a useless sacrifice: this has almostalways been the fate of terrorism until now and the reason why it could not butfail. Everything changed as soon as they allied all available modern means tothis highly symbolic weapon. The latter infinitely multiplies their destructivepotential. Many terrorist organisations employ attacks in which the death ofthe attacker is not a risk, but is a certainty if the attack is carried out.Several operations have used trucks loaded with explosives and driven into thetarget. The driver either manually set off the explosives, causing his owndeath as well as deaths in the target. For example, the 9/11 attack involvedthe deaths of both the hijackers that took control of the aircraft, and thosethat flew it into the target. The suicide attacks have both a psychological anda practical effect. Going back to the World War II Japanese Kamikaze, who usedsuicide attacks against purely military targets, the recipients of the attackswere impressed, and to some extent demoralised, by the determination of theenemy. Current terrorists use the suicide attacker's brain as an equivalent tohigh technology and obtain psychological benefits as a result. Terrorism isviolence for a cause and terrorists always want the world to know about theirexistence, their causes and the power they wield. When they strike but don'tseek publicity then they are working as a proxy.
Groups also help eachother
The terrorists oftoday have a global network and little firm information is available about thetype of data used by network analysts. The experts in general mostly rely onnewspaper and other media reports, but it is certain that they maintain a highdegree of connectivity and considerable redundancy. The dynamic units are probablysmall, with high personnel turn over and considerable structural equivalence.The network is not managed in the strict hierarchical sense, but a centralleadership appears to plan major moves, to provide training, finance andlogistical support but to permit considerable autonomy at the local level. Suchstructures contrasts markedly with typical governmental hierarchies. In fact,to understand networks, one has to interview people; learn about their friends,relations and contacts; describe the relationships; reduplicate so thateveryone is represented only once in the network, albeit in multiple roles;describe their movements; determine the processes of fission and fusion thatcreate their particular dynamics; and connect the dots. For the terrorists evennationality matters less than the commitment. The force is composed of avariety of ethnic and national groups, whose belief presumably binds them tothe cause, and not necessarily to a given organisation or leader. The breakdownof such a network, whether on the local or global scale, depends obviously ontwo factors: money and trust.

MENAFN0109201901750000ID1098952571