FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Oslo and the War on Terror

by MICHAEL BRENNER

The Oslo attacks should prompt a rethink of the terrorist threat and how we approach it. For the bloody mayhem produced by a single Norwegian has no resemblance to the threat perception that has launched a thousand reports, military action across three continents and the massive invasions/occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Nor is it in any way related to the hundreds of billions of dollars invested in the West’s intelligence machinery.

The strenuous efforts at counter terrorism since 9/11 have all been predicated on the fundamental and unquestioned assumption that the great danger took the form of a clandestine, tightly organized group of fanatical Islamist jihadis dedicated to lethal assaults on the United States and Western Europe. That is what has driven the ‘war on terror’ in all its manifestations. There has been no serious questioning of this core premise during the 9/11 decade despite that paucity of major terrorist attacks and none since the London Underground bombings that caused significant casualties.

Let’s review the many ways in which the Oslo affairs deviates from the prevailing terrorist paradigm. It was the act of one man unconnected to any group or movement; he is a native Christian Norwegian; he had no criminal record; his motivations ? such as we know them ? had to do with local political matters; he easily obtained the raw materials to build powerful explosive devices; he easily gained access to the locations where they were planted. This profile should cause shudders among our counter terror planners and warriors. None of the steps taken since 9/11 had any bearing on his chances of his success ? nor could they. An introspective freelancer indigenous to the locale where he is operating passes undetected through the diverse radar screens in place.

A moment’s reflection illuminates the uncomfortable truth that a handful of willful individuals, however motivated, with more sophisticated skills could wreak havoc on a much greater scale. They need not even be natives so long as they are familiar with the local scene, perhaps through intermittent residency They need not be religious fanatics but rather persons harboring deep feelings of hurt who are moved to exact vengeance for acts that harmed those with whom they are closely related and/or identify. As I suggested, time for a rethink.

Michael Brenner is a Professor of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh.

 

Michael Brenner is a Professor of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh.

More articles by:
May 30, 2016
Ron Jacobs
The State of the Left: Many Movements, Too Many Goals?
James Abourezk
The Intricacies of Language
Porfirio Quintano
Hillary, Honduras, and the Murder of My Late Friend Berta
Patrick Cockburn
Airstrikes on ISIS are Reducing Their Cities to Ruins
Uri Avnery
The Center Doesn’t Hold
Raouf Halaby
The Sailors of the USS Liberty: They, Too, Deserve to Be Honored
Rodrigue Tremblay
Barack Obama’s Legacy: What happened?
Matt Peppe
Just the Facts: The Speech Obama Should Have Given at Hiroshima
Deborah James
Trade Pacts and Deregulation: Latest Leaks Reveal Core Problem with TISA
Michael Donnelly
Still Wavy After All These Years: Flower Geezer Turns 80
Ralph Nader
The Funny Business of Farm Credit
Paul Craig Roberts
Memorial Day and the Glorification of Past Wars
Colin Todhunter
From Albrecht to Monsanto: A System Not Run for the Public Good Can Never Serve the Public Good
Rivera Sun
White Rose Begins Leaflet Campaigns June 1942
Tom H. Hastings
Field Report from the Dick Cheney Hunting Instruction Manual
Weekend Edition
May 27, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Silencing America as It Prepares for War
Rob Urie
By the Numbers: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are Fringe Candidates
Paul Street
Feel the Hate
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
Basic Income Gathers Steam Across Europe
Andrew Levine
Hillary’s Gun Gambit
Jeffrey St. Clair
Hand Jobs: Heidegger, Hitler and Trump
S. Brian Willson
Remembering All the Deaths From All of Our Wars
Dave Lindorff
With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Must Demand Answers
Pete Dolack
Millions for the Boss, Cuts for You!
Peter Lee
To Hell and Back: Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Gunnar Westberg
Close Calls: We Were Much Closer to Nuclear Annihilation Than We Ever Knew
Karl Grossman
Long Island as a Nuclear Park
Binoy Kampmark
Sweden’s Assange Problem: The District Court Ruling
Robert Fisk
Why the US Dropped Its Demand That Assad Must Go
Martha Rosenberg – Ronnie Cummins
Bayer and Monsanto: a Marriage Made in Hell
Brian Cloughley
Pivoting to War
Stavros Mavroudeas
Blatant Hypocrisy: the Latest Late-Night Bailout of Greece
Arun Gupta
A War of All Against All
Dan Kovalik
NPR, Yemen & the Downplaying of U.S. War Crimes
Randy Blazak
Thugs, Bullies, and Donald J. Trump: The Perils of Wounded Masculinity
Murray Dobbin
Are We Witnessing the Beginning of the End of Globalization?
Daniel Falcone
Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen, an Interview with David Hilfiker
Gloria Jimenez
In Honduras, USAID Was in Bed with Berta Cáceres’ Accused Killers
Kent Paterson
The Old Braceros Fight On
Lawrence Reichard
The Seemingly Endless Indignities of Air Travel: Report from the Losing Side of Class Warfare
Peter Berllios
Bernie and Utopia
Stan Cox – Paul Cox
Indonesia’s Unnatural Mud Disaster Turns Ten
Linda Pentz Gunter
Obama in Hiroshima: Time to Say “Sorry” and “Ban the Bomb”
George Souvlis
How the West Came to Rule: an Interview with Alexander Anievas
Julian Vigo
The Government and Your i-Phone: the Latest Threat to Privacy
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail