Terrorism appears to be shifting from centralised groups like al-Qaeda & ISIL towards the lone wolf stochastic variant. Long story short: stochastic terror acts are "inspired by" hate propaganda from political strongmen, rather than directly "taking orders from" them.
Further to this, NZ has joined Canada in proscribing the Proud Boys as a terrorist entity alongside the usual ISIL suspects, with Canada also blacklisting The Base & quite possibly Atomwaffen.
Timothy McVeigh's bombing of a govt building in Oklahoma City in 1995 is perhaps an exception to that theory, but I'm sure there's an academic study in it!
I'm genuinely amazed how society's views have been "reflexively controlled" here to blame Israel in those acts which it did in response to the invasion and clear targettes and merciless murder (targeting the ethnic group is one of the legal conditions of the genocide) of Jews by Hamas. We can argue about the scale and specific individual events in Israel's response, but in general that's a reasonable and expected response from the state attacked. Israel hardly targets Palestians as ethnic group.
At the same time, nobody discusses the biggest state-terrorist of our times - Z-russian Federation, which is conducting a genocidal carnage against Ukrainians in Ukriane, not in response to any attacks, but just out of hatred to Ukrainians and Ukrainian state. Why students are not protesting against this? Why there is no discussion of designating the russian state and army as a terrorist organisation?
Both wars cannot be farther from New Zealand, and some ignorance and indifference is understandable.
Still, societal attention and emotions are so much spinned around the topic of Gaza, but not Ukraine. What does it tells us? Two words - "Reflexive control".
I recommend for reading "The war came to us" by Christopher Miller (2023), the first-person account from Ukraine from the Westerner as good as any of New Zealanders. From my review of thus book:
"As a foreign war correspondent, Christopher has been to the most ravaged places and seen the utmost suffering and fortitude at the frontline and behind at their darkest hours in 2022; in 2014-15 – reporting from both sides of the front in eastern Ukraine, from Crimea during its annexation by Moscow, and from the heart of the Revolution of Dignity in Kyiv. But before that, he got to know Ukrainians as an English teacher in peaceful Ukraine."
That's an important point you make, thanks Cyril, asking why there's so little protest against the illegal invasion of Ukraine. The 2014/15 operation in Donbass was styled by Kyiv as an 'anti-terrorist operation'. Do you have thoughts about that?
Ukraine has been fighting Russian soldiers sin energy 2014, Grant. These were special forces of RF which started the war in Donbas, these were regular russian army which encircled Ukrainians in Debaltseve and Illovaisk, it was russian military ewuipment, russians in all leadership roles of sham republics, russians who murdered new zealanders along 200+ other passengers of the Malaysia flight, it were Russian regular military who took over Crimea. Without insignia of course to enable deniability. Radical openness of liberal democracies are as easy pray for disinformation, Reflexive control and post-truth as toddlers.
Ukraine's problem back then was weakened army by corrupted back by Putin government. Ukraine was robbed in money, Intelligence and army to go in open war with invading Russia. Economy would collapse had it declared war back then, and much of investment would not come.
The book I suggested also mentions it through the person absolutely unconnected to Ukraine, who came to Donbas in 2009 and writes about life and people there, and then reports about the war from both sides.
With the appalling number of domestic violence murders in Australia lately, there have been calls to use the term “domestic terrorist” for men who commit DV. Much as I feel ashamed, as a man, of male violence towards and coercive control over our female partners, and much as I support the work to reduce DV and ensure safety for women, I think this would distort the term “terrorist” even further. We need some other term that will sufficiently describe this abhorrent violence.
I agree, Kai. The criminal law already has sufficient means to make DV a serious crime. Calling it terrorism wouldn't really aid the victims, and it further obscures the political intention of the word.
Unfortunately, criminal law sanctions aren’t preventing the epidemic of men murdering their partners, and occasionally murdering women who shelter them. And there’s a good deal of evidence that overstretched police forces try to avoid taking action against men who are the subject of DV complaints. Some of the police themselves are violent to their partners. So I think it’s reasonable that women’s advocates are calling for some term to signal society’s abhorrence of this behaviour. “Domestic violence” is too generic and bland a term for what is happening.
I can agree that a new term may be needed, given the horrors you describe. Turning around the failures in prevention and enforcement requires a significant public administrative and fiscal response, would you agree?
Interesting. You describe Israel's response as 'disproportionate', yet also exclude "...actions that occur in a situation of armed conflict in accordance with the applicable rules of international law." I'd class rocket bombardment of Israel over many years as a warlike action, and Israel's response to those attacks - and the October massacre as very justifiable.
Hi Mike. If viewed as armed conflict, and not as terrorism, the IDF's actions at the moment are probably now in breach of international law of armed conflict, even though a military reaction may have been initially justifiable. Blocking humanitarian aid and using starvation as a weapon are particular concerns. I recommend this podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/nz/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000655897690
The important bit is 'in accordance with the applicable rules of international law'. It is very clear that the Israeli Defence Force and the Israeli government do not comply with the applicable rules of international law, including the international law applying to occupying forces.
Perhaps. But the war - and its continuation - can be laid squarely at the feet of Hamas, their brutality, sadism, hostage taking and their refusal to release hostages.
Nah. Israel has conducted a programme of ethnic cleansing since it established itself in 1948. It is Israel that is running an apartheid regime. It is Israel that has been maintaining Gaza as an outdoor prison on starvation rations. It is Israel that continues to allow illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory.
What are Palestinians supposed to do in the face of all this?
No Nakba? No refusal to let refugees return post 1948? No ethnic cleansing statements from members of the current Israeli government. Suppose we are at the agree to differ stage?
For anyone interested in the thin grounds for this government classifying the civil government arm of Hamas as a terrorist organisation here are the briefing documents that have been released by this government under the Official Information Act https://fyi.org.nz/request/25935/response/99534/attach/3/Designation%20Release%20documents%204871863.2%20003.pdf
Excellent informative article with some opinions which will be debated as opinions usually are. I like learning. Thank you .
Thanks, Alasdair. I walked into a bit of a minefield today, but it's stimulated some comment!
Terrorism appears to be shifting from centralised groups like al-Qaeda & ISIL towards the lone wolf stochastic variant. Long story short: stochastic terror acts are "inspired by" hate propaganda from political strongmen, rather than directly "taking orders from" them.
Further to this, NZ has joined Canada in proscribing the Proud Boys as a terrorist entity alongside the usual ISIL suspects, with Canada also blacklisting The Base & quite possibly Atomwaffen.
Timothy McVeigh's bombing of a govt building in Oklahoma City in 1995 is perhaps an exception to that theory, but I'm sure there's an academic study in it!
Then again, the infamous paranoid supremacist novel that inspired him probably counts.
I admit I to google that. But I see your point!
I'm genuinely amazed how society's views have been "reflexively controlled" here to blame Israel in those acts which it did in response to the invasion and clear targettes and merciless murder (targeting the ethnic group is one of the legal conditions of the genocide) of Jews by Hamas. We can argue about the scale and specific individual events in Israel's response, but in general that's a reasonable and expected response from the state attacked. Israel hardly targets Palestians as ethnic group.
At the same time, nobody discusses the biggest state-terrorist of our times - Z-russian Federation, which is conducting a genocidal carnage against Ukrainians in Ukriane, not in response to any attacks, but just out of hatred to Ukrainians and Ukrainian state. Why students are not protesting against this? Why there is no discussion of designating the russian state and army as a terrorist organisation?
Both wars cannot be farther from New Zealand, and some ignorance and indifference is understandable.
Still, societal attention and emotions are so much spinned around the topic of Gaza, but not Ukraine. What does it tells us? Two words - "Reflexive control".
I recommend for reading "The war came to us" by Christopher Miller (2023), the first-person account from Ukraine from the Westerner as good as any of New Zealanders. From my review of thus book:
"As a foreign war correspondent, Christopher has been to the most ravaged places and seen the utmost suffering and fortitude at the frontline and behind at their darkest hours in 2022; in 2014-15 – reporting from both sides of the front in eastern Ukraine, from Crimea during its annexation by Moscow, and from the heart of the Revolution of Dignity in Kyiv. But before that, he got to know Ukrainians as an English teacher in peaceful Ukraine."
That's an important point you make, thanks Cyril, asking why there's so little protest against the illegal invasion of Ukraine. The 2014/15 operation in Donbass was styled by Kyiv as an 'anti-terrorist operation'. Do you have thoughts about that?
Ukraine has been fighting Russian soldiers sin energy 2014, Grant. These were special forces of RF which started the war in Donbas, these were regular russian army which encircled Ukrainians in Debaltseve and Illovaisk, it was russian military ewuipment, russians in all leadership roles of sham republics, russians who murdered new zealanders along 200+ other passengers of the Malaysia flight, it were Russian regular military who took over Crimea. Without insignia of course to enable deniability. Radical openness of liberal democracies are as easy pray for disinformation, Reflexive control and post-truth as toddlers.
Ukraine's problem back then was weakened army by corrupted back by Putin government. Ukraine was robbed in money, Intelligence and army to go in open war with invading Russia. Economy would collapse had it declared war back then, and much of investment would not come.
The book I suggested also mentions it through the person absolutely unconnected to Ukraine, who came to Donbas in 2009 and writes about life and people there, and then reports about the war from both sides.
With the appalling number of domestic violence murders in Australia lately, there have been calls to use the term “domestic terrorist” for men who commit DV. Much as I feel ashamed, as a man, of male violence towards and coercive control over our female partners, and much as I support the work to reduce DV and ensure safety for women, I think this would distort the term “terrorist” even further. We need some other term that will sufficiently describe this abhorrent violence.
I agree, Kai. The criminal law already has sufficient means to make DV a serious crime. Calling it terrorism wouldn't really aid the victims, and it further obscures the political intention of the word.
Unfortunately, criminal law sanctions aren’t preventing the epidemic of men murdering their partners, and occasionally murdering women who shelter them. And there’s a good deal of evidence that overstretched police forces try to avoid taking action against men who are the subject of DV complaints. Some of the police themselves are violent to their partners. So I think it’s reasonable that women’s advocates are calling for some term to signal society’s abhorrence of this behaviour. “Domestic violence” is too generic and bland a term for what is happening.
I can agree that a new term may be needed, given the horrors you describe. Turning around the failures in prevention and enforcement requires a significant public administrative and fiscal response, would you agree?
Definitely. A new term by itself won't make much difference.
Interesting. You describe Israel's response as 'disproportionate', yet also exclude "...actions that occur in a situation of armed conflict in accordance with the applicable rules of international law." I'd class rocket bombardment of Israel over many years as a warlike action, and Israel's response to those attacks - and the October massacre as very justifiable.
Hi Mike. If viewed as armed conflict, and not as terrorism, the IDF's actions at the moment are probably now in breach of international law of armed conflict, even though a military reaction may have been initially justifiable. Blocking humanitarian aid and using starvation as a weapon are particular concerns. I recommend this podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/nz/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000655897690
especially from 29 minutes.
The important bit is 'in accordance with the applicable rules of international law'. It is very clear that the Israeli Defence Force and the Israeli government do not comply with the applicable rules of international law, including the international law applying to occupying forces.
Perhaps. But the war - and its continuation - can be laid squarely at the feet of Hamas, their brutality, sadism, hostage taking and their refusal to release hostages.
Nah. Israel has conducted a programme of ethnic cleansing since it established itself in 1948. It is Israel that is running an apartheid regime. It is Israel that has been maintaining Gaza as an outdoor prison on starvation rations. It is Israel that continues to allow illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territory.
What are Palestinians supposed to do in the face of all this?
Shouldn't you say re-established itself in 1948? Ethnic cleansing'? Please elaborate, and you might like to consider this... https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/allegation-israel-committing-ethnic-cleansing
No Nakba? No refusal to let refugees return post 1948? No ethnic cleansing statements from members of the current Israeli government. Suppose we are at the agree to differ stage?