The absence of Islamist terror attacks in the West, post 9/11, is puzzling. True, we had the transit bombings in London and Madrid, but the body count has been lower than many expected, considering the countless number of "soft" targets available in North America and Europe.One theory is that al-Qaeda and its affiliates are biding their time, waiting to score a spectacular mass-casualty attack rather than hitting lesser targets on a more frequent basis. A competing theory is that counterterrorism agents are in top form and thus have been able to avert many attacks. A third theory is that the radicals are tied up in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.
The arrest last week in Germany of one Fritz Gelowicz, a 28-year-old convert to Islam, suggests another explanation: It could just be that would-be Islamists operating in the West are too socially and intellectually unstable to accomplish their violent goals.
As terrorist cells are broken up in London, Toronto, Miami, Germany and other places, a pattern emerges. Many of the men in these groups are maladjusted and eccentric, especially those who have converted to Islam. Richard Reid, the failed shoe bomber, is the prototype of the dysfunctional young man who stumbles his way into militant Islam.
Mr. Gelowicz, the German, knew for years that the police were watching him. As far back as 2004 the police picked him up and confiscated CDs praising Osama Bin Laden. Yet all the while he and his associates reportedly continued to plan jihad, in full view of authorities -- until finally they were arrested for what could be the last time.
It's true that even incompetent people can get lucky. But it's also reassuring to know that not every al-Qaeda wannabe is an evil genius.
| I'm not sure I buy all of this, reassuring as it is to read it. Yes, you need to be stable enough and intelligent enough to plan a major mission. Morever, a terrorist cell is only as strong as its weakest member. So you could argue that al-Qaeda can't mount a mission because they've run out of people like Mohammed Atta. But: you don't have to be an evil mastermind to pull off a 9/11. You need an ability to blend into society, work quietly, be persistent, and have exquisite attention to detail. You need enough social adjustment to keep your eye on the ball. Having a target that's asleep and pre-occupied, as we surely were 9/10, helps a great deal. But 9/11 wasn't a masterpiece of high-technology or the product of a great power bulling ahead, it was a low-tech masterpiece (as it were) that was designed to take advantage of our snoozing culture. But you also need cultural awareness, and I suspect that's the bigger reason why we haven't had another 9/11 in the Western hemisphere. The types of people who might be recruitable just can't blend into Western culture very well. Too many visits to the mosque, too many problems getting along, too many cultural maladjustments, and all that leads to exposure and attention. The 7/7, 3/11 and the like in Europe came about in a snoozing continent that even after 9/11 refused to believe that it had an element within itself that could do the same, given the Euros superior culture and political tilt. Now at last they know (even the Brits), and potential boomers and plotters have problems similar to what they have in North America. Said another way: while I consider myself reasonably smart, eminently trainable and emotionally stable, there's little, if any, chance I could travel to Peshawar, blend into the local society, and carry out a terrorist strike against the largest mosque in town. I could take a couple years to plan and train, learn tradecraft, explosives, martial arts, weapons, and the language, and I'd still have little if any chance. So intelligence and emotional stability are pre-requisites. But cultural awareness and an ability to blend in are just as important, as is a target that is asleep. |