What would you do to combat ISIS or ISL?

We are constantly bombarded, no pun intended, with images of bombings, executions, and other unimaginable terrorist acts. Newspapers, magazines, TV programs, and other media fill their programs with unspeakable acts of cruelty – man versus man. There is no lull in the continuing slaughter of innocent people. The main culprits are fanatical people who twist their religious beliefs to justify their actions.  There is no letting up!

There is little agreement regarding what to do in response.  The choices are limited, but time is running out.  So what are the choices?

·      Some justify the barbaric actions of terrorists as rooted in injustices and age-old grievances. They blame unemployment, colonialism, revenge for the loss of family members, and intolerance of others with different beliefs and culture. These people suggest that we should open-up a dialog and work toward political accommodation. 

·      Others believe that the most appropriate way to combat the spread of terrorism is to surround the cells wherever they are and destroy them. The belief is that force must be met by force, and that the problem will not go away until every terrorist is wiped out from the earth. Their assumption is that this problem cannot be contained and/or resolved with half measures. 

·      Another group sees the problem as a rite of passage.  Young disenchanted folks performing unspeakable acts out of rage or deeply felt religious fervor. They suggest that the solution rests among their midst, e.g., their elders, kinfolk, or ethnic group. The problem is that the rite of passage has been going on for more than 30 years. 

Group Dynamics

Years ago, when I was studying group dynamics, I was taught that groups respond to threats in three ways to defend themselves:

1.    Flight – they use logic and rationality to make the problem go away or to reduce its threat.  This intellectual exercise satisfies the need to try to make sense of things we do not fully understand.

2.  Fight – they invoke the use of force to bring about resolution to the problem confronting the group.  By wiping out the threat, order is restored and one can return to normalcy.

3.  Flow – they use the proverbial California defense of "going with the flow." This “whatever” response is an attempt at postponing dealing with something with which you rather not.

The three strategies above mirror the three choices I presented above. I guess my group dynamics lesson has not been repealed by father time. Regardless of the choice one might advocate, it is crystal-clear that we are stuck.   We are polishing the brass while the ship is sinking. 

ISIS or ISL

     ISIS or ISL is a new phenomenon. They are a fundamentalist Sunni group attacking and slaughtering other Sunnis and Shiites. They despise Christians and Jews. They view others who believe differently as infidels who must be converted or executed. They view everybody else as an enemy, an evil that cannot be tolerated. Dogma is their god. Un-repentance is their style.

     Bombing them from the air is a way to keep them away, perhaps contain them, but is it really the solution? Sending emissaries to try to negotiate with them has been fruitless, except when we are willing to pay ransom for the release of our captives. Hoping that the countries affected solve the problem has been also ineffectual. So what else should we try? 

     I remember a quotation I heard from Osama bin Laden, when commenting on his native culture: “A strong horse is better than a weak horse.” 

     Is our approach that of a strong horse or a weak one? You are the judge.