Social conflict theory and public policy responses to terrorism

SOCIAL CONFLICT THEORY: PUBLIC POLICY TOWARDS TERRORISM & TERRORIST ACTS

In order for the present status quo to change from the perspective of social conflict theory there must be a conflict between two classes occur which has directly resulted because of the dominant administration in Washington. This domination, most specifically in the Middle East has resulted in terrorist activity as the al Qaeda seeks a venue to validate itself and its grievances which it feels have been ignored and unaddressed by the U.S. government or its citizens.

The United States has undergone many legal transformations since the occurrence of September 11, 2001, such as no-fly lists, and a general trampling of basic Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens. This compliance or passivity relating to many injustices of the U.S. government is much of what has driven terrorism in the United States in that the masses of U.S. citizens have ignored many acts of the U.S. government and military operations in the Middle East. Therefore, according to the social conflict theory the terrorist attacks in the United States were a way of reflecting negative attention on the U.S. Government for its actions in the Middle East by the terrorists committing the attacks. Social Conflict theory has as its basis the belief that the fundamental causes of crime are social and economic forces that operate within society. In this view, crimes of the street receive extreme and severe punishment while crimes, which are large scale financial, and business type crimes receive a greater amount of leniency in their treatment. Presently there is a movement in the United States, which threatens to rise up in indignation against the present ruling class. Within the framework of social conflict theory, the key to making these systems workable is the acceptance of authority and the legitimate use of power. Furthermore, the strength of the group in power determines their ability to make and enforce laws. Groups, which pose a threat to the ruling group, are the groups most likely to be controlled and generally are the weaker and poorer groups in society.

I. SINCE 9/11

The media has extensively covered terrorism since 9/11 with focuses on the 'how's' and 'why's' of the attack on New York City and yet it has barely been mentioned that terrorism has been in existence for a very long time. Terrorism is used as a weapon of those who are willing to use violence because they understand that a real power struggle cannot be won by them due to their weakness in power and authority. The work of Karen a. Feste entitled: "Intervention and Terrorism Conflict: Theory, Strategy and Resolution" (2004) writes that several theories exist which "explain the intervention-terrorism conflict link and account for its persistence. Some emphasize ideology, culture and values. The clash of civilizations implies the conflict is eternal and intractable. Goals of Arab fascism vs. goals of democratic liberalism point to distinct, non-complementary social order approaches as the two collide." (2004) in addition, Feste relates "Security designs of American policy in the post Cold War period have created serious challenge in a complex intense relationship between intervention and terrorism in the Middle East." (2004) the most notable events of anti-American terrorism have been inflicted by Middle East Muslims including the 2001 attack in New York City, the 1993 attack on the New York World Trade Center and destruction of the U.S.S. Cole at a Yemen port as well as deadly bombings in Saudi Arabia on U.S. military installation, and many car bombs in Iraq during the present war. The primary goal of the terrorist organization known as al Qaeda is "to provoke conflict by increasing the destabilization of every country they have penetrated." (Feste, 2004)

The work of Crenshaw (1981) makes the suggestion that the occurrence of terrorism is most likely where the masses are passive and:

elite dissatisfaction coincides; when discontent is not generalized or serious enough to provoke the majority of the population to act against the regime, but a small minority without access to the bases of power that would permit overthrow of the government seeks radical change." (Crenshaw, 1981; in Feste, 2004 p. 46)

Generally, an event precipitates the act of terrorism that "snaps the terrorists' patience with the regime" rendering the actions of the government as being an injustice which cannot be tolerated making the terrorist act a decision that becomes acceptable on a moral level. (Crenshaw, 1981; p. 384)

II. CONFLICT RESOLUTION NOT POSSIBLE WITH AL QAEDA

Because al Qaeda is in the process of "building a movement to carry on an ideological struggle"... (Feste, 2004; p.47) it is impossible to direct practices with any type of conflict resolution as neither "neutrality nor objectivity can be located." (Feste, 2004; p.47) Furthermore, there exists between the parties "a great status differential" in that the United States is the only superpower in the world and al Qaeda is a "small, non-entity state" therefore the possibility of any type of negotiation is simply not present. The work of Mayer (2004) informs that what is needed and desired between those caught in such a conflict is: "...voice, vindication and validation: to air opinions and demands, rather than engage in collaborative dialogue with their enemy; and respect for their point-of-view, a kind of righteous recognition that justifies their prior action." (p. 12-13; cited in Feste, 2004; p. 47)