Harper's Argument Against Jihadist Terrorism

ight weeks ago, it was Ottawa. At the beginning of this week, it was Sydney. Two days ago, it was Peshawar. If anybody questioned the global and diffuse nature of the challenge that religious fundamentalism poses, the last few weeks have provided a clear demonstration of the problem.

Indeed, one of the greatest threats facing the world today is jihadist terrorism. The jihadists are a self-appointed collection of Muslim fanatics who have launched a holy war, a jihad, against the U.S., Europe and anyone else who opposes a world governed by their vision of Islamic law.

Ironically, the foremost target of the jihadists has been the Muslim world itself. Most Muslims reject the jihadists’ rigid interpretations of Islam, and few relish the austerity
To an extent, this is the posture taken by the Harper administration, which immediately announced its intention to table laws that would strengthen Canada’s security state. Never mind the studies that emphasize that religion alone cannot be responsible for radicalization. Politics, poverty, alienation and mental illness all tend to play some role at some point.

Nonetheless, the efficacy of surveillance has been called into question in recent years. Leaks by former National Security Agency analyst Edward Snowden prompted various studies by groups such as the New America Foundation to examine the impact of surveillance. The foundation concluded that of 225 indictments, kills or convictions for terrorism, only four were influenced by surveillance activities.

The Canadian Bar Association, several prominent judges and numerous government watchdogs across Canada have also questioned the Harper government’s approach. Some have stated that Canada’s present laws are more than enough to do the job. Unfortunately, for our Prime Minister it’s high time to exploit a moment of fear in order to up the Tories’ poll
The government’s rhetoric shows that it will pursue more policing and spying on Muslims. This will further alienate the Muslim community. It also gives radical preachers even more power to vend the idea that Canada and the West are at war with Muslims and Islam. Put differently, Harper’s security-heavy approach actually makes Canadians less safe.

Moreover, wars fuel terrorism. And denying this feeds Islamophobia.

Consider the reason cited for the killing of soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, England, last year – the role of British troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq. In spite of this, Prime Minister David Cameron insisted the killing was “an attack on the British way of life.” London Mayor Boris Johnson declared there could be “no question” of blaming British foreign policy.

Denial of the role of interventions and occupations in the Muslim world in fueling terror attacks helps politicians domestically. It also plays into the hands of those denouncing multiculturalism and immigration, feeding racism and Islamophobia in the process. This further divides