Acts of War
Whatever the motives of the individual terrorist, terrorism is not a random act.

By Aaron Mannes, Washington-based writer & Middle East analyst
August 15, 2001 12:30 p.m.

ith the June 1 suicide bombing in Tel-Aviv, and the recent bombings in Jerusalem and Haifa, all of Israel's major populations centers have been subject to terrorist attacks. These acts are portrayed as springing from the rage of the Palestinian people. But, whatever the motives of the individual terrorist, terrorism is not a random act. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the PLO are sophisticated organizations with well-defined ideologies and goals.

Terrorism is a cynical, calculated strategy that aims at undermining a society's will to defend itself by creating chaos and engendering a feeling of helplessness. It is the ultimate expression of the ends justifying the means. One of terrorism's immediate goals is to goad the recipient into retaliating. Israeli retaliations further radicalize the Palestinian population, eliminating moderate voices and allowing the Intifada to continue. At the same time, the failure of Israeli measures to stop terrorism pushes Israelis towards despair.

Terrorism is not confined to Islamic Jihad and Hamas. While presenting itself as the alternative to Muslim fundamentalism, the PLO failed to shut down Islamic Jihad and Hamas. With tens of thousands of men in the Palestinian security services, this failure was not due to lack of means, it was due to the PLO's collusion with them. The PLO has, under pressure and to a limited extent, cooperated with Israeli security to prevent attacks. After the major suicide bombings Arafat issued mild condemnations of all killing of civilians. But, Arafat has personally praised suicide bombers. According to the Middle East Media Research Institute, a Washington-based think tank that monitors the media of the Middle East and documents Palestinian incitement and anti-Semitism, Arafat regularly sends his condolences to the families of suicide bombers. The family of the Tel Aviv suicide bomber who murdered 21 Israeli teenagers received a letter from Arafat in which the bomber was praised as, "…the model of manhood and sacrifice for the sake of Allah and the homeland…"

In delegating suicide bombings to Islamic Jihad and Hamas, Arafat created ambiguity about his personal responsibility for terrorist attacks. But his governance of the Palestinian Authority built a terrorist society. While administered by Israel, the West Bank and Gaza had been — by the admittedly low standards of the Arab world — reasonably prosperous and free. The PLO destroyed these modest liberties to create a fertile ground for terrorists. Newspapers submitted to Arafat's control or were closed. The growing Palestinian civil society was curtailed. Arafat destroyed the economy through massive corruption, monopolistic practices, and by allowing a lawless commercial environment. But most importantly, Arafat instituted a culture of death and violence. He orchestrated the media and fabricated school curriculums and summer camps that grimly urged Palestinians, particularly children, to commit martyrdom for the sake of Palestine. For example, a recent sermon given in Gaza and broadcast on Palestinian Authority TV, exhorted, "Blessings for whoever assaulted a soldier... Blessings for whoever has raised his sons on the education of Jihad and Martyrdom; blessings for whoever has saved a bullet in order to stick it in a Jew's head."

The terror has not broken Israel. The Israeli public is united behind Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, whose approval ratings have gone up since his landslide election victory. Israeli defensive measures have been effective, preventing innumerable attacks and using precision strikes to retaliate. Israeli tactics have minimized non-combatant Palestinian deaths.

Israel's strategy has been to retaliate against Palestinian attacks, hoping that these measures will drive the Palestinians back to negotiations. But, the fallout of Israel's response to the Jerusalem bombing has only played into Arafat's hands. By seizing Orient House in Jerusalem — which was used, in contravention of the Oslo agreements, as an official Palestinian office — Israel is castigated by the international community for "escalating the conflict." Rather than deterring the Palestinians from further violence, the seizure of Orient House has become a new rallying point.

However a strictly defensive strategy is also not feasible. Some terrorists will always slip through, undermining Israeli resolve. While most Israelis support stronger measures to counter Palestinian violence, the appeasers in Israel's peace camp continue to call for Israeli restraint and concessions. As the situation drags on Israelis will flee, literally and figuratively, from the intractable reality. As they do so, calls for appeasement will acquire a renewed prominence. But this, as history shows, will reward terrorists and encourage further aggression.

The Palestinians have insisted that terrorism will stop when Israel fulfills certain conditions. But terrorism cannot be used as a bargaining chip and is an unacceptable part of politics. It is, in the words of historian Paul Johnson, "the antithesis of politics… [and] in rejecting politics terrorism seeks to make civilization unworkable." Israel must remember what it once knew with certainty, that any compromise with terrorism threatens civilization itself.