On Terrorism

Americans are divided about so many things nowadays, including the uprise in random shootings and violence throughout our communities which is igniting both sides of the gun control debate.  One can hardly miss the fiery rhetoric and calls to actions, yet even in this volatile atmosphere, the threat and reality of terrorism does not strictly cleave along partisan lines.  As the recent congressional vote on Syrian refugees illustrated, Republicans and Democrats have found kindred spirits within each party, but there is a real divide on what to do about terrorism that needs context for true understanding and bipartisan solutions. 

Contrasting the national experiences of our nation, a settled nation, with that of Israel, a conquered nation, helps explain the two mindsets of terrorism now seen in this country.  The profound historical experiences of America and Israel has shaped the national mindset and psyche of the people in these two nations.  For our country the psyche is of American exceptionalism.  Americans see our country as a beacon of freedom and the most powerful country in the world that uses its economic and military power for good.  When Israelis are asked to describe their national psyche, they often use the Hebrew word sabra.  Sabra is a tenacious thorny and prickly desert plant with a thick skin that conceals a softer sweeter interior.

American history, from 1776 through the end of the 20th century is one of a settled country.  From thirteen states we expanded westward settling the land until our expanse reached from coast to coast.  With vast oceans separating us from Europe and Asia, with a friendly country to the north and underdeveloped countries to the south we had little concern about being conquered.  We have only been invaded twice, with the only serious threat to our sovereignty happening early in our history during the war of 1812.  Free from fears of invasion we  established the most open, free, and prosperous society on the planet.  We welcomed immigrants and refugees from all over the global, to share in our bounty.  With hard work anyone from any nation, no matter their circumstances, could achieve the American dream.   

Contrast the American experience with that of Israel, where the reality of being conquered has been a constant threat haunting Israelis since the birth of their nation.  In Israel, the threat of terrorism and annihilation makes security take precedence.  Immigration and citizenship is denied to those from countries deemed enemies of the state.  Israel has walled itself off from it's neighbors, and multiple roadblocks screen those entering the country.  Armed guards are stationed at public places and people are searched before entering such spaces.  Restrictions are even placed on the freedom of the press, so that office holders are safe, and state secrets protected.  The restrictions would be unthinkable in our country.  

But should they all be?  Certainly the 9/11 attack on American was psychically searing and cognitively dissonant, but should it change the way our nation looks at security?   That's the question that divides us.  Most Americans never imagined that the most powerful nation in the world, located so far from the upheaval in Europe and the Middle East, would ever be attacked.  Initially united in the path forward, as time passed, perspectives bifurcated into the settled country mindset that we should not let our fears and prejudices undermine our long held and cherished values, and the conquered country mindset that saw Israel as the canary in the coal mine requiring that security be given a higher priority.  The terrifying rise of ISIS and the recent attacks in Paris and San Bernardino has only accelerated and intensified this debate.  Should we hold strong to our American ideals or add more security measures and become more like Israel?  The two views came head to head during the Syrian refugee debate.  Both sides were emotionally moved  by the photo of the body of the Syrian child that washed onto the beach and the videos of desperate refugees marching miles with tiny children, exhausted, desperate, with seemingly nowhere to turn.  Those with the settled country mindset argued that denying entrance to refugees went against American values and who we are as a people.  Photos of the statue of liberty crying flooded the internet, petitions were signed, and lines drawn in the sand.  However, as terror continues to rise around the world, many Americans have adopted a conquered country mindset. Worried about security--flaws in vetting the immigrants, along with the very real threat of homegrown radicalization, they are willing to curtail some individual liberties to protect the homeland and their families.  These two mindsets break on all the other  issues related to terrorism: NSA bulk data collection, Guantanamo Bay, drone strikes, border control, prosecuting terrorists within the criminal justice system, etc,

The debate between these two mindsets is important but is spoiled by the rancorous and vitriolic accusations hurled by each side.  Just as one side needs to stop accusing  the other side of being uncaring and un-American, the other side must stop calling other Americans naive or unable to acknowledge evil.   If each side recognized the historical precedents for the other sides' passionately held views then perhaps each side would listen and debate the issues in a constructive fashion towards reaching a consensus on the way forward.  First, though, we must determine the nature and the degree of threat radical Islamic terrorism presents here in America.  As such, a historical perspective on radical terrorism and the rise and meaning of ISIS will be broached in my next blog. 

As always, I welcome your thoughts.