The problem of terrorism in the Middle East and its spread on a global scale is being studied by Yu.
Posted by admin | Filed under Blog
The problem of terrorism in the Middle East and its spread on a global scale is being studied by Yu.
There have been many publications on this subject recently that deserve close attention.
The problem of terrorism in the Middle East and its spread on a global scale is studied by Yu. Fedorov in the article "Global Web of Terror" [13]. The publication explicitly states that the area of ??the Muslim world is the area most affected by extremism and terrorism on the planet, and that it is there that the most dangerous terrorist groups have been formed. The author emphasizes that the conversion of terrorist groups to Islam is not accidental. He recalls that Middle Eastern terrorism grew on leftist ideas, but today, after the global collapse of leftist ideology, Middle Eastern extremism is turning to Islam.
Yu. Fedorov explains this by the problem of attitude to non-believers in Islam; in particular, he speaks of the idea of ??"holy war" so radically preached by radical Islam. The author writes: ".. radical Islam, in contrast to moderate, offers simple, or rather – primitive solutions, accessible to the understanding of the uneducated masses. It clearly indicates the enemy who is responsible for the difficulties experienced by the people, and outlines the way to overcome them – "holy war" for the establishment of true values ??"[13, p. 55]. The author suggests that radical Islam may eventually reach its potential as a terrorist ideology.
In his article, Yu. Fedorov speaks about two main strategies in the fight against terrorism. He defines the first as the starting point of political decisions made on a multilateral basis, with the involvement of representatives of terrorist organizations. The second strategy is force. It is based on the belief that any negotiations with terrorists are not only ineffective but also dangerous, and that terrorists and their supporters must be destroyed or isolated.
The author emphasizes that the first strategy, which he describes as a "strategy of appeasement", has supporters in Europe, while the United States is inclined to use force to solve the problem of terrorism. At the same time, the United States does not want to limit itself to the fight against terrorist organizations. They consider it necessary to fight regimes that support terrorist organizations directly or indirectly.
As early as 1985, an interdepartmental anti-terrorism commission was set up in the United States on the initiative of George W. Bush (then vice president). The report of this commission defines terrorism as follows: "… it is the unlawful use or threat of use of violence against persons or objects for political or social purposes. Terrorism is usually aimed at intimidating or coercing governments, political groups or individuals to changes in their policies or actions "[12, p. 132].
An example of a conflict with increased terrorist activity is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
What caused the emergence and deployment of Palestinian terrorist organizations?
One reason some see is that the Palestinian people have been plunged into a political and military sense: when there is a lack of forces for military action, the people resort to guerrilla warfare, and even more often to terror. Others see the reason for the rampant terror in the region in the weakness of the Palestinian Authority’s leadership, in its inability to deter terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. However, it is clear that terrorist organizations in the region are gaining strength and popularity among the Palestinians, and the death of Arafat only intensified this process.
In our view, it is impossible to understand the causes of terrorism in the region without studying the main problems of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
The president of the Institute for the Study of Israel and the Middle East, E. Satanovsky, wrote in his article "The Palestinian Problem – Age XXI" [11] that for the Palestinian establishment and the Palestinian masses, the priorities of the revolution are more important than the priorities of state-building. He believes that one of the main causes of the conflict is the limited opportunities for the resettlement and assimilation of refugees and their descendants in the Arab world. The author considers the refugee problem to be the main problem of the Palestinian-Israeli demarcation.
E. Satanovsky writes that the aspirations of the Palestinians to create their own state are based on a sober understanding of Palestinian realities: strangers too. As today, people from the Gaza Strip are strangers on the West Bank "[11, p. 109].
According to the scholar, the problem of relations between Jews and Arabs in Palestine is due to the revival of Israel within the resettlement process, and the main cause of the conflict here is that Israel combined national, religious and liberal-socialist ideas "aborigines" … As a result, living in the same country, Arabs and Jews did not form a single society, so most Arabs perceive Israelis as occupiers.
E. Satanovsky sees another important problem of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the fact that power in the Palestinian National Autonomy (PNA) is extremely divided and divided between groups, each of which pursues its own goals. "Power in the PNA is divided between Islamists," security forces "- former" field commanders of the intifada ", leaders of urban clans and" Tunisian revolutionaries "[11, p. 114].
The author writes that the former head of the autonomy J. Arafat practically did not control the former, quarreled with the most influential representatives of the latter and he was only partially controlled by the last two groups. It follows that now, after the death of Ya. Arafat, the chances of the struggle of armed groups escalating into a civil war in Palestine have increased.
E. Satanovsky’s article states that the situation is complicated by the presence of Christian, Jewish and Islamic shrines in Palestine; this is another opportunity for provocation by both warring parties. This article also discusses the role of organizations such as Islamic Jihad and Hamas, which are characterized by the fact that they are not under anyone’s control, and their popularity among the population of the Palestinian Authority is great and continues to grow.
By the way, the author’s conclusion is confirmed by the events that took place on the eve of the PNA elections in January 2005. E. Satanovsky writes that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) has always been an alternative authority. He believes that a government that decides to bring orthodox Islamists under control in the PNA will inevitably become the culprit of the civil war. In principle, this can be attributed to organizations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad and to each of the groups that have real power and are supported by the Palestinian people.
A. Kislov in the article "Arab-Israeli detonator" [4] writes about the possibilities and difficulties of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by the efforts of the world community. The author speaks of the usefulness of the so-called alternative Geneva agreement, developed jointly by the Palestinian and Israeli parties: that the parties do not comply with the obligations under the plan "Road Map".
This is confirmed by the so-called program of A. Sharon, which provided for the withdrawal of all Jewish settlements from the Gaza Strip, but only four settlements from the occupied territories in the West Bank. The author believes that Israel’s construction of a "security wall" in https://123helpme.me/1984-summary/ the Palestinian lands, which was sharply condemned by the world community, has not yielded positive results. It is emphasized that when A. Sharon decided to replan certain parts of the "security wall", it provoked a sharp reaction from Israeli extremists. All this is very similar to the situation in 1993 (the signing of the Palestinian agreement by I. Rabin). It will be recalled that two years later, I. Rabin was killed by a far-right Israeli extremist.
Here I would like to emphasize that the situation in the Palestinian camp is no less tense. It is becoming increasingly difficult for the PNA leadership to negotiate with terrorist groups. Organizations such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Fatah paramilitary wing of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade are increasingly exacerbating the PNA’s already extremely difficult relationship with Israel.
Speaking about such an organization as Hamas, its influence on the territory of the Palestinian Authority, its ties with the AFP, it is worth mentioning N. Glebova’s article "On the relationship between Hamas and the PLO" [1]. The article talks about the creation and operation of Hamas, that the history of Hamas and the AFP is a history of confrontation, periods of truce and compromise, and most importantly, that both forces in their actions were based on their own interests.
For many years, Hamas and the PLO have been in a state of confrontation, the main reason for which is not only differing views on the domestic political system of the Palestinian Authority, but also differences in views on the armed struggle against Israel. Hamas leaders have more extremist views on resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Hamas has always refused to consider the PLO a full representative of the Palestinian people in the Palestinian-Israeli talks and has often tried to disrupt them by committing terrorist acts.
The Hamas leadership has repeatedly stated that the organization’s military wing will continue to fight until Israel withdraws from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and that the organization’s ultimate goal is to destroy Israel.
Another problem in the relationship between Hamas and the PLO was the attitude towards martyrs. The Hamas leadership has repeatedly been outraged that the leadership of the Palestinian Press Agency (WAFA) has refused to publish materials on the activities of the martyrs, as if by order of Arafat himself.
N. Glebova also talks about numerous talks and a truce between Hamas and the PLO and Israel, but all of them ended in violations by Hamas. The article says that Hamas has repeatedly negotiated with Israel and initiated the ceasefire, but according to N. Glebov, this was done because Hamas needed a "break" to gather forces to fight Israel. The author also reminds that, despite all the truces, Hamas has never given up its main goal – the complete liberation of Palestine and the creation of a state in this territory.
Comments are closed.