Criminology of Terrorism Terrorism Has

¶ … Criminology of Terrorism terrorism has become more dangerous because various groups of religious zealots have demonized members of other religions and cultures. One word of warning is worthwhile, especially to those in criminal jus- tice. Demonization is a neutral process. It works for religious terrorists, but it also works for any other group. When police officers dichotomize people into "us and them;' it can be the first step toward demonization.

Police offi- cers regularly hear such expressions as Islamacists, Jewish militants, Christian extremists, and other derogatory phrases used to classify certain groups. Anytime governmental forces use degrading terms to describe groups or par- ticular styles of behavior, they move toward demonization. This is dangerous. The language and the process of demonization have no place in American law enforcement.

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY RELIGIOUS CONFLICTS The last segment of this chapter briefly outlines the major areas of conflict and religious extremism encountered at various points in the text: the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent, Ireland, and the United States. There are many areas of religious conflict in the world today, and these cases have been selected because they are included at various points in the text. India The historical driving force of religious conflict on the Indian subcontinent is the confrontation between Islam and Hinduism.

While Hinduism and Buddhism enjoyed a comparatively tranquil coexistence, the clash between Hinduism and Islam is another matter. Muslin1 invaders began moving into India from Mghanistan around 1000 C.E. They were quite successful, subdu- ing the local population of Hinqus and establishing Muslim dynasties. The Hindus resisted the Muslim presence with violent secret terrorist groups. About 1500, in northwestern India, a mystic claimed that God transcended localized religions. He founded a new religion called Sikhism that combined elements of Hinduism and Islam.

While the Sikhs initially sought peace with Hindus and Muslims, their ideas were militandy rejected. Soon the Sikhs were arming themselves and defending their beliefs. British and French imperialism dominated the subcontinent from 1600 to 1947. The British, who triumphed over the French in the region, took advan- tage of the religious differences in the subcontinent. They played Muslims and Hindus against each other and allowed both groups to distrust the Sikhs.

This helped a small number of British soldiers and officials keep a large native pop- ulation under control, but by 1900, the Hindus and Muslims formed a politi- cal alliance. Members of both religions worked together against Britain in the 1930s, when the Indian independence movement gained momentum. CHAPTER 4 RELIGION AND TERROR 57 Lord Louis Mountbatten, a member of the British royal family who would later be murdered by the Irish Republican Army, negotiated independence for India and created separate zones for Muslims and Hindus.

This gave rise to the modern nations of Pakistan and India, but the peace was short-lived. After the British departed, Indians and Pakistanis battled over religion for half of a cen- tury. Religion has become part of terrorist violence in the region. Essentially, there are four religious conflicts on the subcontinent. The most obvious is the Hindu-Muslim conflict as exemplified by India and Pakistan. The second involves disputed territory between the two countries, the area known as Kashmir.

Not only have India and Pakistan fought over the region, but international terrorist groups have joined the fray on one side or the other. The third area of conflict involves struggles with the Sikhs. Militant Sikh ter- rorists have targeted Indians for the past few decades and have been responsi- ble for the assassinations of several people, including a prime minister. Sikhs tend to side with Pakistan in the struggle over Kashmir. The final area of con- flict is more ethnic than religious.

It involves a struggle between the dominant Singhalese population with a minority group of Tamils on the Buddhist island nation of Sri Lanka. Ireland The main religious issue in Ireland is the struggle between ethnic Protestants and Catholics, but if you talk to mainstream Christian theologians and call Ireland a religious conflict, you will probably get a strong reaction. Christians, especially Irish Christians, are quick to point out that the conflict in Ireland has little to do with religion.

They will most likely tell you that terrorism is the result of people misusing religion. You will probably hear that both Protestant and Catholic extremists are not religious at all. They simply use religion to identify people with politics. These arguments are essentially correct. Yet, they are at the base of religious conflict. When religion is used to justify terrorist violence, the transcendent nature of theological expression must be replaced by an ethnocentric focus. God is replaced by some form of patriotism or ethnic identity.

This process is called ethnocentric transformation. This is exactly what has happened in Ireland. It is not a fight about the nature of religion, it is a conflict about subordinating God to a political cause. Bruce (1993, pp. 50-67) provides a description of ethnocentric transfor- mation in Ireland. Bruce believes ethnicity takes precedence over religion in Ireland. This means it is more important to be identified with a particular group than it is to be a member of a church.

Bruce says religious labels in Ireland are used to place people in distinct ethnic and political groups. If a per- son is Catholic, it does not necessarily mean that the person has committed to a life of faith. Terrorists use the Catholic label to describe nationalistic revolu- tionaries who want no part of Britain. Terrorist "Catholics" will kill British and Irish Catholics who disagree with their irreconcilable position. 58 PART THE CRIMINOLOGY OF TERRORISM Protestantism has the same connotation among violent extremists.

Protestant terrorists do not embrace Presbyterianism or the Anglican church as an expression of religious zeal. Violent Protestant extremists use their religious label to defme those who will use terrorism to keep Northern Ireland associ- ated with the United Kingdom. Bruce concludes that religious labels in Ireland are synonymous with ethnic identification. If a theologian argues that the conflict in Ireland is not religious, the argu- ment is correct in the sense that both Catholics and Protestants have been seeking to end terrorism for quite some time.

Many priests and pastors hold joint worship services and attempt to provide relief to anyone regardless of reli- gious or ethnic identification. They do not commit terrorist acts over disputes concerning dogma. However, Catholic and Protestant terrorists make religious dogma subordinate to a political agenda. The Middle East There are three main sources of religious strife in the Middle East: militant Jewish fundamentalists who wish to expand Israel, Muslim militants wanting to eliminate Israel and restore Palestine, and Islamic fundamentalists who wish to purify their own states.

Both sets of Islamic militants want to eliminate Israel. The sources of these views are presented in detail in Chapter 7. The- ological positions are outlined as follows. Hoffman (1995) says one of the Middle Eastern threats comes from Jewish extremists who have endorsed the use of mass terrorism to ensure the existence of Israel. Lal, lrence Hanauer (1995) says these Jewish fundamentalists have endorsed violence as a means to establish "Eretz Israel:' or the Greater Israel of biblical times.

Three groups, Kach, Kahane Chai, and Gush Emunim, have identified Israel's traditional covenant with God as a mandate to reclaim the land of ancient Israel and make it exclusively Jewish. They are willing to use force against all non-Jews and Jews who "betray" the all-Jewish Israel. Their motivation is primarily religious. They wish to restore ancient Israel in prepa- ration for the coming of a messiah. Militant Islamic fundamentalists not only oppose the Jewish terrorists of Kach and Kahane Chai, but they also reverse the argument about the Palestinian homeland.

Militant Muslims believe that Palestine is theirs. Clarence Bouchat (1996) cautions the West and the United States in particu- lar not to view this radicalized position as the political goal of an Islamic bloc. Militant Muslims who want to eliminate all Jews from Palestine are extremists and no different from the militant Jews of the Greater Israel movement who seek to eliminate Muslims from the same area. Militant Islam is not limited to questions about Israel.

Fundamentalists in several Islamic countries are threatening to overturn established governments in the name of religion. David Kibble (1996) explains why. Kibble says every- one in the West needs to understand that there is no separation between church and state in Islamic countries. Governments claim to rule through the Qur'ran, the holy book of Islam. Terrorists who violently attack the establishment do so CHAPTER 4 RELIGION AND TERROR 59 under the guise of theology. Therefore, unlike Ireland, much of the struggle in the Middle East is about theological dogma.

The United States Douglas Bodrero (1999) identifies American theological extremism in four particular areas: apocalyptic cults, Black Hebrew Israelism, the Christian Identity movement, and other forms of white supremacy religions. According to Bodrero, apocalyptic cults believe that the world is coming to an end and that members of the cult will play some role in the eschatological event. An authoritarian leader gathers members in a cult and isolates them from the mainstream. Bodrero says this does not constitute a problem, unless the group becomes violent.

When a leader uses rhetoric and violence to silence internal opposition, Bodrero believes the group may be on the path to violent extrem- ist behavior. Doomsday cults emerge from such dynamics and believe they must take offensive action to bring about the end of the world. Black Hebrew Israelism is a form of black supremacy. Its origins trace back to the Civil War and were relatively peaceful.

Recently, Ben Ami Ben Israel, also known as Ben Carter, had a vision in Chicago telling him that African- Americans were the true Jews of old and the people who call themselves Jews are impostures. Whites are evil incarnate, descended from the devil. Bodrero (1999) says the most violent aspect of this movement formed in the Miami- based Nation of Yahweh. My own research (White, 2001) summarizes white supremacy theology. Christian Identity is a theology that grew from a nineteenth century concept known as Anglo-Israelism.

Its basic tenant is that the ancient tribes of Israel were Caucasians who migrated to Europe shortly after the death of Jesus. Whites are actually the descendants of the chosen tribes of Israel, and whites are asked to identify with the Israelites of old. Christian Identity is strongly anti-Semitic, claiming that humans originated from two seed lines. Whites are directly descended from God, while Jews originated from an illicit sexual union between the devil and the first white woman. Nonwhite races evolved from animals and are categorized as subhumans.

Identity Christians believe that biblical covenants apply only to the white race and that Jesus of Nazareth was not a Jew, but the white Israelite son of God. Christian Identity views are championed by Aryan Nations, a variety of prominent Christian Identity ! pas- tors, Posse Comitatus, and the American Institute of Theology. Nordic Christianity or Odinism is a hybrid form of Christianity and old Norse religions. It exists in two forms. Nordic Christianity combines a pan- theon of Nordic gods under the triune deity of Christianity.

Odin, Thor, and other Nordic gods serve Christ by militantly protecting the white Norse.