understanding politics, considerations

Muslims and Terrorism in London


July 3rd, 2007 · Europe, Great Britain and Ireland, Islam, Law and Legal Affairs, Religion, World Affairs

Ter­ror­ists recently attempted to det­o­nate two car bombs in Lon­don, and a man tried to ram an SUV filled with explo­sives into a Scot­tish air­port. I will repeat what I stated in a prior post fol­low­ing an attempt to kid­nap and behead a British sol­dier who is a Mus­lim and who had fought in Afghanistan:

I can­not state this strongly enough: The entire Islamic com­mu­nity there needs to weed out the extrem­ists in their midst through what­ever means nec­es­sary. Now. If this does not occur, then I fear that the British peo­ple will not tol­er­ate this threat much longer. They may start harm­ing inno­cent Mus­lims – or worse.

Dur­ing the sum­mer of 2001, I stud­ied jour­nal­ism in Lon­don while work­ing as an intern for a mag­a­zine and as a bar­tender in the evenings. I lived in the south­west neigh­bor­hood of South Kens­ing­ton, and that August the Real IRA (a splin­ter group of the Irish Repub­li­can that was opposed to any peace set­tle­ments) exploded a car bomb in the city. It occurred nowhere near where I lived or worked, but it was still unnerving.

How­ever, I was amazed when I saw the oft-described “stiff upper lip” of the British peo­ple. Peo­ple dis­missed the attack and went on with their lives. No one freaked out. Of course, such a reac­tion a psy­cho­log­i­cal defense that peo­ple develop when faced with a con­stant threats. (Israelis, in par­tic­u­lar, have per­fected this atti­tude. They say, “Eh, what­ever hap­pens, hap­pens.” I some­times wish I had such gump­tion when I thought I was a bad sit­u­a­tion on a Jerusalem bus.)

Fol­low­ing the 9/11 ter­ror­ist attacks, Amer­i­cans did freak out. And these feel­ings, irra­tional though under­stand­able, ulti­mately led to the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, and Guan­tanamo Bay. We did not develop a “stiff upper lip” because we had never needed to do so. This was some­thing com­pletely new and dif­fer­ent. When the next ter­ror­ist attack occurs — and I’m sure it will — I hope that Amer­i­cans will not react in the same way. I like the Con­sti­tu­tion and the fact that the United States is not at war with Iran.

But, does my state­ment that the British take ter­ror­ist threats in stride con­flict with my view that Mus­lims risk neg­a­tive and vio­lent reprisals there if con­tin­ued attacks occur? No. The ter­ror­ist threats posed by the IRA and extrem­ist Mus­lims are not sim­i­lar at all – and I believe they are per­ceived dif­fer­ently by the British public.

The desire of the Irish minor­ity in North­ern Ire­land for inde­pen­dence was ratio­nal and under­stand­able, even if the meth­ods used to achieve that end were hor­rific. The desire of extrem­ist Mus­lisms to estab­lish an Islamic state, among other goals, is com­pletely irra­tional and inane, so the British will be less, well, under­stand­ing. (The debate over the Islamic veil is a sign that such a con­flict is already brewing.) The British will tol­er­ate these ter­ror­ist attacks for a while as part of their cul­tural men­tal­ity, but there will be a break­ing point. And then I fear what would hap­pen next.

Else­where: There is another advan­tage to the British sys­tem of deal­ing with ter­ror­ism, as a Boston Globe edi­to­r­ial notes: “Britain is fight­ing ter­ror­ists with­out brand­ing them unlaw­ful enemy com­bat­ants, with­out tor­tur­ing them, and with­out fright­en­ing the pop­u­lace with evo­ca­tions of an apoc­a­lyp­tic war between good and evil.”

This is espe­cially pos­i­tive because Britain faces a greater threat from ter­ror­ism than the United States due to its prox­im­ity to the Mid­dle East and the larger num­ber of immi­grants in the coun­try.