However beneficial, all of these sweeping changes in the technology have also opened the door for extremists, fundamentalists, and sanitation intent on unspeakable acts of violence. Gus Martin’s essay, “Globalization and International Terror” describes how Globalization has created a cultural backlash as a new global identity is rejected, the new profile and operating model for the new global terrorist, and how we may need to evolve and change our security policies and procedures to combat this new global threat.
Martin begins by discussing how globalization has brought about more than economic changes but has also changed the cultural identities of every country in the world and that these identities have expanded beyond local and nationalism; now inclusive of a global identity that many reject. These new challenges to identity have created transnational “fault-lines” as predicted by Samuel Huntington in his article “The Clash of Civilization”.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
In addition Benjamin Barber in his essay, “Jihad vs. McDowell”, also predicts that “retaliations of humankind by war and bloodshed” will be brought about by Globalization as these small countries and tribes will driven by parochial hatreds and battle against the homogeneities of their cultures. It is this clash of culture and the rejection of this ewe global identity that has caused the growth in terrorism by fundamentalists and nationalists in the globalizes world. The new ideologies of globalization, such as gender equality and freedom of speech”, represent a threat to these religious fundamentalists.
Within Robertson and White’s essay “What is Globalization”, they state that gender biases and patriarchal societies have now been forced to change as women are educated in massive numbers. Many long held ideals and beliefs will be brought into question as the globalization carries with it both idealism and individualism which are both in conflict with many collectivist cultures and fundamentalists. Robertson and White describe the poly-ethnicity of globalization being self-limiting since it can homogenate the very cultures and values we cherish.
This clash of values and ideologies creates and fuels the new global terrorists, as religious clerics and leaders build upon nationalistic and religious pride to recruit and retain followers. Kant in his essay, “Universal History from a Cosmopolitan view’, might see this strife as both inevitable and as progress to the ultimate universal society. Though I agree that there will be strife and wars, these new breed of global terrorists seem only to bring about large scale death and destruction, not the betterment of society or mankind.
I wonder how Kant would view the nation-less fundamentalists who kills women and children in order to make the evening news as evolutionary in the progression of humanity. It is clear that the new global terrorists are a potential by-product of globalization as the intrusiveness of global idealism has created friction in many religious and fundamentalist countries. The perception hat globalization benefits wealthy nations and leaves the 3rd world countries behind is also part of the cultural clash.
Many fundamentalist terror groups see these products and services as pushing Western idealism and therefore contrary to their own beliefs. This lack of benefit is found in Robert Parameters essay “The Global Food Fight”, which discusses the many benefits that genetically manipulated seeds and crops could have on the developing nations. The only caveat is that the manufacturers are only developing them for the affluent nations who can afford them. The technological advances that may help these developing nations solve their food problems are not given as chance due to the lack of perceived profitability.
This rejection of the developing nation only fuels the belief that the globalization is an effort to colonize the developing nations; that they will have to be subjugated to the wealthier nations. The mass media and internet pushing a global consumer based society, which often parallels individualism, is in direct conflict with many collectivist cultures. Within Martins essay the process of Globalize is defined as a cultural or economic process that are unimpeded by national territory or official jurisdictional constraints”, in this same manner so have terrorist groups evolved.
Terrorism once was nationalized and within the confines of the country that was plagued with so called revolutionaries and insurgents. As the world has gone global, so has terrorism, with the new Global Terrorists utilizing the technology and the mass media to influence the international community quickly and cheaply. The new terrorists are also technological as’. N. Y and understand how to utilize the publicity tooth good and bad to impact the policies of nations and international groups.
A key example is the 3/11 bombing of the Spanish train that killed 191 people and brought about a negative swing in the public opinion in the war of Iraq and Afghanistan. After that bombing, the EX. countries removed military support and public opinion moved against the occupation and US led efforts. It is this key example that became a model for Global Terrorists everywhere. The fact that this bombing directly changed the policies of Spain and led to the removal of support of most EX. nations, was a clear victory on the part of the terrorists.
This victory has set AH-Qaeda as the model by which all new Global terrorists should use when dealing with a globalizes enemy. The use of media, the internet, has given the small most insignificant group an unfiltered voice on the world stage. Much like Thomas Friedman’s book, “The World is Flat” explains how the global world has leveled the playing field for small independent Journalists, so has it leveled the playing field for terrorist networks and cells to have instant access to major news and media outlets.
Al-Jazzier regularly plays these terrorist messages to the Arab and Muslim world, further enriching the circuiting power and support for these types of violent groups. The new model of the Global terrorist is to pick high profile symbolic targets with the aim of causing massive casualties on civilian populations. They carefully make tapes and filter messages to the media to claim their involvement and broadcast their fundamentalist anti-western or anti-global message.
This is done for several reasons, the first is publicity and the second is the garner support from like-minded states and/or religious zealots. The biggest concern the world has for these group, especially AH-Qaeda, is the use weapons of mass destruction. These radiological, chemical, or biological weapons used on high-population centers could disrupt the international community and change the world as we know it. A nuclear or dirty bomb detonated in New York City could have disastrous effects on the world economy; and the global terrorists know it.
Martin also poses the question “What causes Terrorism”, and profiles the nations that are prone towards generating and being centers for the development of these groups. As nations are plagued with poverty and instability (potentially civil wars) without the rule of law these types of roofs can be formed. Skilled workers and the intellectual class leave the country for more opportunities and the authoritarian regimes can lose control of areas of the country that become centers for terrorists cells to grow.
Another aspect that assists with the formation of terrorism is posed by Drumstick and Taylor in “Urban Worlds and Global cities” where the creation of massive urban slums as globalization forces manufacturing Jobs to leave the cities and countries. These urban slums are ripe grounds for terrorists to recruit new followers who are disillusioned with the liberalized world; blaming the loss of the Jobs on the iniquities of the West or more affluent countries. At the end of Martin’s essay he starts to the narrative around what the world needs to do to combat this new global threat.
Since these new global terrorists have no conventional military and do not fight traditional warfare; so we must develop new more clandestine ways to hunt down and eliminate this threat to globalization and our own society. Fighting a shadow war, as Martin describes it will take new policies and security measures often at the sake of many civil liberties. An example is the US Patriot Act, which was passed giving the government the right to wire taps, searches, and taping of cell phone conversations of its own civilian and domestic population.
This is unprecedented legislation in the United States, as this goes right against many of the ideals and freedoms we in the United States hold sacred; namely, the right to privacy, due process, and freedom of speech. Though, I think that the sacrifices of some civil liberties is something we may have to do in the name of securing ourselves against this immediate threat, I don’t think that Martin goes far enough in his post-script of 9/1 1 and 3/1 1 .
One of the questions we must ask ourselves within the global community is how to repair the “fault-line” between the Western-Islamic/Arab nations. Is withdrawal of the troops out of pan-Arabic countries enough to stop the attacks? Are there economic development acts we can do to help bring up these developing nations into the global community like India has with the outsourcing described within Friedman’s book? By helping and assisting these nations become global citizens, perhaps we can bridge some of the hatred and reduce the effectiveness of the fundamentalist groups.
The more we connect these nations and make them interdependent with everyone else, the less likely they will be to engage or support these types of activities. In my opinion, integration and interdependence are the two great ways to ensure the peace. China and Japan, in Friedman’s book is a great example, they have become interconnected and interdependent and though they share long historical hatreds, in the name of economic prosperity have now started outsourcing Jobs from Japan to China in the Daily province. This is a great example of how to combat the cultural backlash.