Understanding Terrorism Since 9/11: A Nigerian Perspective -By Henry Chukwuemeka Onyema

This year makes it twenty years since the infamous attack on the World Trade Centre, the Pentagon and White House by a group of nineteen Al-Qaeda terrorists. Perhaps only the heinous attack on Pearl Harbour by Japan approximates the impact and transformation that onslaught brought in USA. Both attacks ushered USA into wars: Pearl Harbour into World War 2; 9/11 into the yet-to-end war on terror.

It is not as if the scourge of terrorism did not exist in our world before 9/11. Indeed, this monster has been on the rampage as far back as the nineteenth century and beyond. How many people recall that the World Trade Centre was first attacked on February 26 1993 by terrorists who had affiliations to Al-Qaeda? I just cite this example for readers to realize that the monster did not start sucking blood on September 11 2001. But what etched 9/11 on the world’s consciousness were its sheer audacity; casualty level; sophistication, and above all, target: the tragedy of the world’s only superpower flattened by a supposedly group of ragtag young men at the peak of her glory as the master of the international arena in a world where the Cold War had ended in her favour.

Since then the forces of terror have been on the march globally, and Nigeria is not immune from their onslaught. From rather humble beginnings Nigeria has graduated into a major player in the world terrorism league. According to the Global Terrorism Index for 2020, Nigeria ranked third after Afghanistan and Iraq respectively in this ‘league.’ The report is a very sober reflection of what terrorism has done to Nigeria since the Islamic fundamentalist group, Boko Haram, first burst on the scene in the early 2000s. It is accessible at www.visionofhumanity.org.

Understanding terrorism is not easy. Defining the term itself is a problem. There is this saying that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Personally, I do not buy into this view because a scrutiny of the goals of quite a few of the men and women slaughtering and ravaging globally today has little to do with the concept of freedom, as the term is generally understood. For instance, what freedom are groups like Boko Haram and ISWAP fighting for? They negate the very freedom of others, at least religiously.

However, the tag of terrorist is attributed to individuals and groups for self-seeking purposes, or to demonize those whose affiliations run counter to the ruling Establishment. How many people recollect that the great Nelson Mandela was once labelled a terrorist by the minority white South African government and its European and American backers? From their perspective it was justifiable: Mandela had sneaked out of the racist enclave to form and lead the fighting arm of the African National Congress which unleashed bullets and bombs in the struggle against apartheid. The force was called Umkhonto we Sizwe, Xhosa words that mean ‘Spear of the Nation.’ The Indigenous People of Biafra is a terrorist organization in the eyes of the current Nigerian government but the rampaging bandits in Zamfara and other northern Nigerian states do not have this official nomenclature. Once upon a time, before 9/11, the likes of Osama bin Laden were not terrorists in the books of the US government because of their undenied roles in fighting the defunct Communist Soviet Union for invading Afghanistan. They were allies and freedom fighters in the eyes of Uncle Sam. In the final analysis the terrorist must be defined by what he/she does, irrespective of objective, if the world must regain its sanity and freedom from the self-created monster.

I believe that terrorism, especially the type the world has known since 2001, is caused by these factors, though my list is not exhaustive:

A distorted view of the world, especially those we see as our enemies: Sponsors of terrorism will NEVER allow their recruits see the man behind the mask so that they do not conclude that their enemies are also worthy of life and humanization.

Very easy access to the technology of violence.

The unwillingness or inability, and in cases, ineffectiveness, of the moderate elements of the two religions principally associated with terrorism, namely Islam and Christianity, to speak out against their powerful extremist fringes.

A clash of civilizations which has been on for centuries but only became accentuated since the Cold War ended. The American political scientist Samuel Huntington developed the concept in his 1996 book titled ‘The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.’ Simply put, the concept states that conflicts, clashes and wars in the post-Cold War world will spring from religious and cultural identities which transcend states, borders, ethnicities, etc. Right or wrong, Islam and Christianity, especially when manipulated by unscrupulous power-seekers, have been in a fierce competition for global supremacy. The West (Europe and America) and Jewish Israel are seen by the aggrieved Muslim world as infidel conquerors stomping on their religion, land and oil. Since the end of the Cold War in 1991following the collapse of the Soviet Union, they have risen to extract their pound of flesh. This so-called clash of civilizations thrives even in sub-Saharan Africa where both religions are alien to its people.

The super-structure of terrorism is built on four stages or layers, namely:

The planners: they hoodwink the recruits by standing the holy books on their heads and churning out warped ideologies. They set the agenda; they initiate and plan; they get and organize the resources. They may also sponsor the operations or seek sponsors. They are the ‘messiahs’ who want to strike at the ‘enemy.’

The sponsors: they are the money men and women who channel their resources to causes we may regard as terrorist. Countries and institutions are also involved, usually for strategic or profiteering interests.

The attackers: they are the public faces of terrorism; the suicide bombers; the hijackers; the assassins. They are the brainwashed ones. But let us not think all of them are immature, uneducated or poor. For instance almost all the 9/11 attackers were educated men. The 2005 London terrorist attackers included professionals. Although most of the terrorist elements in Nigeria show antipathy towards education-related targets, significant proportions of their backers and leadership cadres are educated and sophisticated.

It is not only twisted religious precepts that drive these people; have we considered political ideologies, perverted understanding of their history. Eg. the average Fulani terrorists ( otherwise miscalled bandits or herdsmen by Nigerian authorities) believe that historically all lands Nigeria belong to them, and those arguing otherwise are worthy of death; and psychological problems.

The masses: any war against terrorism which ignores this layer will fail. From Canada to Palestine to Nigeria there are otherwise regular people who either silently or openly support terrorist groups. For any suicide attack against their ‘enemy’ they thank their ‘god.’ For any attempt by moderates to stem the bloodshed they vow vengeance. Unfortunately the first and second layers set before them what the masses think they want or will solve their problems but in reality they seek their own sinister purposes. A purpose students of history will tell you has not ended: quest for power, control and domination.

The gross poverty of the people and power-plays by ruling elites in Nigeria who promote and manipulate religion and ethnicity adds hot wood to the terrorist fire burning the country. More than any other strategy, the quest for a fair world should guide everyone who wants an end to terrorism in our world.

Henry Chukwuemeka Onyema is an author, teacher and historian. He published his first book ‘In Love and In War’ in 2020. Reach him at henrykd2009@yahoo.com.