Model for the Eradication of Terrorism

Order this book online at www.trafford.com

or email orders@trafford.com

Most Trafford titles are also available at major online book retailers.

© Copyright 2012 Litofe Sloj Silika, PH.D.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written prior permission of the author.

Created in the United States of America.

ISBN: 978-1-4669-2054-5 (sc)

           978-1-4669-2053-8 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012904846

Trafford rev. 06/26/2012

www.trafford.com

North America & international

toll-free: 1 888 232 4444 (USA & Canada)

phone: 250 383 6864 ♦ fax: 812 355 4082

Contents

Preface

Chapter 1: Retrospective

Chapter 2: Terrorism, Senders and Targets Model

2.1. Synopsis

2.2. Description:

Chapter 3: Operation Enduring Freedom: Analysis

Chapter 4: Simultaneous Implementation of a Triple-Track Approach to Terrorism

4.1. Actions Oriented toward bin Laden’s Terror Network and Rogue States

4.2: Actions Oriented toward Honestly, Courageously, and Evenhandedly Solving Big Conflicts around the World

4.2.1 How to Effectively and Efficiently Put an End to Years of Israelis and Palestinians’ Conflict: Silika’s Approach

4.2.2: Regarding Congo’s Holocaust due to Museveni and Kagame’s Senseless Invasion and Occupation of Eastern Congo

4.2.3 Regarding the Darfur’s Genocide

4.3. Actions toward Revitalizing United States Economy and Consolidating Its Middle Class

4.3.1 Smith’s Spiral Self-Regulatory Economy and the Madoff’s $65 Billion Ponzi Scheme

4.3.2 Marx’ Model of the Demise of Free Pure Market Capitalism, and the Effect of Outsourcing on Unemployment in the United States

A. On Strictly Domestic Short and Medium Terms (i.e., 1–4 Years)

B. In Long Term (i.e., 5 Years +)

4.3.3 Implementation of Silika’s Model of Capitalism with Human Face

Chapter 5: Concluding Remarks

References

Preface 

Ten years after September 11, 2001, a date that consecrates the day that the United States of America felt victim to the most vicious terrorist attack in its recent history, it becomes increasingly critical to spell out what terrorism is and what it is not. Indeed, in the aftermath of May 1, 2011, a historical date during which President Obama announced to the American people and to the rest of the world that US special forces has killed Osama bin Laden, the mastermind and prime person responsible for the barbaric attack of September 11, it becomes increasingly critical to clearly establish a distinction between what constitute terrorist activities as opposed to freedom fighter activities. The answer to this question will help the United States, Britain, and allies to effectively and efficiently prosecute the war on terror worldwide and, in turn, make the earth, our global village, a better and safer place to live. From this perspective, this essay pursues four major objectives.

The first objective is to provide a standard and nonpartisan definition of terrorism. This first démarche is extremely important in the sense that it will allow both senders and targets to avoid mischaracterizing and/or misusing these concepts and, as such, speak the same language as far as terrorism and terrorists are concerned. From this standpoint, this essay highlights three basic misconceptions.

The first misconception is that while the United States, Britain, and the rest of the world consider bin Laden and his al-Qaeda networks as terrorists, bin Laden and his followers see their networks as an "Islamic Vanguard Resistance Movement. This is the reason why they label their militants as Jihad Fighters," meaning people who are committed to use all means necessary to put an end to the West’s injustice, domination, and exploitation. In other words, for bin Laden and most of his followers, the United States and most of its allies are undoubtedly terror nations. This is what bin Laden is implying in his credo:

What America is tasting now is something insignificant compared to what we have tasted for scores of years. Our nation [the Islamic world] has been tasting this humiliation and this degradation for more than 80 years. Its sons are killed, its blood is shed, its sanctuaries are attacked, and no-one hears and no-one heeds.¹

In light of this bin Laden’s credo, the question that we are asking him and/or any of his followers is how he (bin Laden) and/or his followers can logically and humanly justify their barbaric massacre of 224 innocent civilians at the US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania, in 1998? Indeed, most of the 224 innocent civilians massacred in 1998 and thousands of others wounded were citizens of sub-Saharan Africa: a part of the world where most of its inhabitants are hardly surviving with less than $1 a day. A part of the world where about 4.8 million of children die before the age of five by lack of appropriate nutrition and adequate health infrastructures; a part of the world where most of its inhabitants had nothing to do with either the United States’ occupation of Muslims’ holy land or with the death of millions of children in Iraq and in Palestine. These are some of the many reasons that bin Laden and his followers advanced to justify their 1998 barbaric attacks. Similarly, during their terror attacks of September 11, 2001, in the United States, thousands of innocent civilians of more than eighty nations were decimated. Once again, these innocent civilians had nothing to do with either the United States’ occupation of Muslims’ holy land or the death of millions of children in Iraq and in Palestine.

As it can be observed, senders and targets are not speaking the same language. This quid pro quo on who is a terrorist and who is not and, alternatively, what constitute terrorist activities as opposed to freedom fighter activities is the main source of what arrow no. 10 of our Terrorism, Senders and Targets model visualized in figure 2, terms: terrorists’ unsuspected allies, i.e. people, states, or institutions, which, although they themselves claim to be part of senders, but in reality they are nothing but targets’ and/or terrorists’ whistleblowers. In other words, people who continue to keep in touch with bin Laden and his terror networks and as such helps them perfect their survival mechanisms. The existence of these terrorists’ unsuspected allies has a negative impact on the United States, Britain, and allies’ effectiveness and efficiency in prosecuting the war on terror worldwide.

The second misconception is that during his heroic fight against the apartheid regime in South Africa, the ruling white apartheid minority South African regime considered Nelson Mandela, the beloved South African’s civil right icon and the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize winner, as well as several senior members of his African National Congress (ANC), as terrorists. Indeed, for several years, the United States, Britain, and many western countries, which were humanly supposed to protect Mandela and his comrades, actually betrayed them by aligning themselves with the ruling white apartheid minority. To add insult to the injury, until mid-2008, that is eighteen years after that Mandela was released from prison, where he unjustly spent almost three decades (i.e., twenty-seven years) of his life, the United States still had him in its terrorism watch list. In other words, the United States continues to consider Mandela as a terrorist, even when this African’s civil rights icon was serving from 1994 to 1999 as the first South African president elected in a free, fair, multiracial, ethnic, and cultural democracy. Given this hiatus, the general perception is that as goes the defense of the United States, Britain, and western allies’ interests, so goes the definition of terrorism and terrorists worldwide. This general perception is another source of terrorists’ unsuspected allies who continue to significantly impede the United States, Britain, and allies’ effectiveness and efficiency in prosecuting the war on terror worldwide.

The third misconception is that in sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, and many other areas around the world, more often than not, dictators of the so-called friendly nations and/or client states to the United States, Britain, and allies are cynically using the words terrorism and terrorists to discredit legitimate oppositions. Indeed, in order to silence legitimate oppositions, dictators of the so-called friendly nations to the United States, Britain, and allies are Machiavellianly labeling leaders of political parties, university professors, scholars and academicians, journalists, lawyers and civil rights advocates, students, and many other freedom fighters, who are critical to their corruptions and other political and economic misdeeds, as terrorists. By doing so, these dictators are reassured of receiving the sympathy and all kinds of supports from the western world. These supports allow them to indefinitely hang on to power, perpetuate their dictatorship, and above all, subjugate, with impunity, their own citizens under the broad umbrella of fighting terrorism and protecting the United States, Britain, and allies’ best interests. The cases of Yoweri Kaguta Mesevni, the president of Uganda, and Paul Kagame, the president of Rwanda, which will be critically analyzed in this essay, are very illustrative in this regard. Furthermore, recent events in Tunisia and Egypt show how Presidents Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt attempted to play the Machiavellian game of labeling their citizens participating in spontaneous, peaceful, and nonviolent demonstrations to denounce these two dictators’ corruptions and other political and economic misdeeds as nothing but real terrorists. From this perspective, it can be said that the United States, Britain, and allies cannot effectively and efficiently eradicate and/or minimize domestic and/or international terrorism unless both senders and targets have the same understanding of the concepts terrorism and terrorists. Chapter I: Retrospective addresses this issue.

The second objective, the crux of this essay, is to answer two fundamental questions. The first question is why is it that most terror attacks inflicted on the United States in recent years have been macabre works of radical Islamic groups? The second question is how can the United States, Britain, and allies effectively and efficiently eradicate and/or minimize terrorism worldwide? Chapter 2: Terrorism, Senders and Targets Model, Synopsis, and Description addresses these questions conceptually.

The third objective, considered as thermometer of the war on terror, is to solve the following equation: Eradication of Terrorism (ET) =

What this equation is implying is that the United States, Britain, and allies cannot successfully eradicate or minimize domestic and/or international terrorism unless their means, strategies, and basic requirements adequately address terrorism’s root causes, effectively weaken and/or totally eradicate terrorists’ survival mechanisms, and keep in check the unknown variables. Chapter 3: Operation Enduring Freedom: Analysis tackles this equation factually.

The fourth and last objective of this essay is to emphasize that the United States, Britain, and allies cannot eradicate and/or minimize domestic and/or international terrorism unless the United States, exercising the leadership associated with its unique position of the world’s single superpower in collaboration with its allies, simultaneously and evenhandedly implements the triple-track approach to terrorism. This approach consists of three basic sets of actions. First, actions oriented toward effectively and efficiently dismantling bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terror networks, including neutralizing leaders of rogue states that continue to support them. Second, actions oriented toward addressing terrorism’s root causes and honestly, courageously, and evenhandedly solving big conflicts that continue to ravage several countries around the world. It is from this perspective that this essay tackles: years of Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the recent Congo’s Holocaust due to Museveni and Kagame’s invasion and occupation of eastern Congo, and the ongoing genocide in Darfur. Third, actions oriented toward revitalizing the United States’ economy and consolidating its middle class in order to ensure its unwavering support to the United States and allies’ agenda of eradicating and/or minimizing terrorism worldwide. Chapter 4: Simultaneous Implementation of a ‘Triple-Track Approach’ to Terrorism analyzes these issues.

A systemic and deductive analysis of these four objectives suggests that: Given the perpetual presence of terrorists’ unsuspected allies and unknown variables in our equation, the United States, Britain, and allies will never be able to completely eradicate terrorism. However, what they can do is to effectively and efficiently minimize it. That is, to live with it and treat it as we treat manageable diseases such as diabetes mellitus, high blood pressure, and so on. Furthermore, our analysis suggests that in order to be effective in doing so, the United States, Britain and allies must—in their political, economical, military, and cultural interactions—emphasize and promote strategies and/or policies capable of putting into practice three basic ideas and/or philosophies. The first idea is that of putting in practice the second greatest commandment of all time:

Love your neighbor as you love yourself. (Matthew 22:37–40) That is:

Treat others in the same way that you would like them to treat you.

This second greatest commandment of all time, which is consistent with the United States founding fathers’ philosophy of "That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," is not and should not be simply a slogan, a dream, or pious wish. It must be a universal culture: a way of life that cements the manner that the United States, Britain, and allies interact politically, economically, militarily, and culturally among themselves and with the rest of the world. Furthermore, our analysis suggests that an effective implementation of the moral ethic endowed into the second greatest commandment of all time must, politically, go hand in hand with an effective implementation of Silika’s model of self-management of local entities and rule of law illustrated in figure1, which is the second greatest idea of this essay. And economically, with a worldwide implementation of Silika’s model of capitalism with human face illustrated in figure 13, which