Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Must-read at CNN Money/Fortune: The poverty/terror myth
In fact, there is now robust evidence that there is no such link. That does not mean, however, that economics is irrelevant.
First, to the question of poverty. Of the 50 poorest countries in the world (see list at right) only Afghanistan (and perhaps Bangladesh and Yemen) has much experience in terrorism, global or domestic.
But surely that is the wrong way to look at things. Aren't the people who commit terrorist acts poor, even if they are from countries that are not? No. Remember, most of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were middle-class sons of Saudi Arabia and many were well-educated. And Osama bin Laden himself is from one of the richest families in the Middle East.
But it goes deeper than that. In a 2003 study in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, Alan Krueger and Jitka Maleckova reported the results of a post-9/11 survey of Palestinians. Asked whether there were "any circumstances under which you would justify the use of terrorism to achieve political goals," the higher-status respondents (merchant, farmer or professional) were more likely to agree (43.3 percent) than those lower down the ladder (laborer, craftsman or employee) (34.6 percent). The higher-status respondents were also more likely to support armed attacks against Israeli targets (86.7 percent to 80.8 percent). The same dynamic existed when education was taken into account.
In another study, 129 Hezbollah militants who died in action (not all of them in activities that could be considered terrorism) were compared to the general Lebanese population. The Hezbollah members were slightly less likely to be poor, and significantly more likely to have finished high school.
Outside Palestine, there is general agreement that suicide attacks on civilians is a form of terrorism. [That is unintentionally funny and true.] So where do suicide bombers fit in? A study looked at the biographies of 285 suicide bombers as published in local journals, from 1987-2002. And this found that those who carried out suicide attacks were, on the whole, richer (fewer than 15 percent under the poverty line, compared to almost 35 percent for the population as a whole) and more educated (95 percent with high school or higher) than the rest of the population (almost half of whom went no further than middle school). A similar survey of terrorists in the Jewish Underground, which killed 29 Palestinians in the early 1970s, found the same pattern...
Anyone know what that last sentence refers to?
There's more interesting stuff in the rest of the article.
The article says, in part:
"Older and more educated suicide bombers are assigned to higher-profile targets, kill more people, and are less likely to fail or be caught. In short, there is a match between human capital, in this grossly distorted sense, and the desired goal.
"And the bombers have made, what is for them, a rational choice: There is enough moral, psychological and sometimes financial payoff from the act of killing many people to offset the economic loss of their death.
"Therefore, the terrorist manager assigns the most deadly tasks to the highest-caliber people."
In a sense, this shows that there IS a link between poverty and terrorism. Not the poverty of individuals or families, but the poverty of societies. If these societies provided more economic opportunities to these relatively well-educated people, then the psychological and financial payoff of terrorism would NOT off-set the economic loss of their own deaths.
The feeling of being oppressed, living in a cage, with no freedom and no prospects, will encourage radicalization. Especially among the better-off and better-educated, who are the most likely to feel frustrated by the loss of what might've been better prospects. Hence, the fact that terrorists are taken from their ranks is no mystery.
The loss of their lives is not a great economic loss because they'd have little chance to realize their potential, anyway.
Ideas matter; the ideologies which form the basis and provide the primary impetus for social, political and cultural conceptions all matter, and they matter in a primary, a pivotal sense.
Joanne says:
Hogwash! A truly admirable job of interpreting data perversely, twisting things around to claim the data shows the opposite of the clear and simple reading. The lengths people will go to to avoid having to confront uncomfortable ideas. What an amazingly convoluted attempt to rescue a failed belief. Cognitive dissonance triggered denial and self-deception are powerful indeed.
Here are some plain facts, or, if you like, some inconvenient truths:
Palestinian children are raised in a culture of hate that glorifies its martyrs in numerous ways. The shahid posters, naming soccer pitches after suicide bombers and the like are less for the sake of honoring the hero than they are for recruiting more volunteers. This appeals more to those who are better off or more educated than it does to those who are more preoccupied with eking out a living.
"Hogwash! A truly admirable job of interpreting data perversely, twisting things around to claim the data shows the opposite of the clear and simple reading...What an amazingly convoluted attempt to rescue a failed belief."
Duh, I guess she didn't like my comment. :-)
Anyway, I wasn't claiming that ideology plays no role, or that indoctrination or an upbringing in a violent political culture play no role. Not at all.
But the frustrations that the Palestinians experience--whether economic or political--will make them more amenable to radical ideas, especially among the better educated. After all, the better educated are more likely to be familiar with left-wing or nationalist political philosophies.
Israel is partly to blame for the situation, but the Palestinian leadership and other Arab governments also share a good deal of the responsibility. Some analysts say that Palestinians are purposely kept poor and isolated to keep them as cannon fodder against Israel. There may be some truth to that.
In any case, all I was saying was that when you have an educated cohort living in an environment with no good jobs, you're asking for unrest. That's not just true among the Palestinians, that's true everywhere. Certainly that was the threat that Nasser tried to stave off in Egypt, and it was this condition that in part led to the French student rebellion in 1968.
So, it follows naturally that the dire economic conditions in the Territories contribute to the receptivity of educated Palestinians to radicalization.
It is true that the Palestinians have a noxious political culture that's intolerant, racist, homophobic, mysogonist, and a lot of other bad things. But I think that it's too tempting to use this valid point as an excuse for ignoring the very real hardships caused by the occupation. Those hardships may be exagerated by Palestinian propaganda, and many particular accounts may indeed be lies. Also, many Israeli actions are done because the Palestinians cynically leave the Israelis no choice. But let's be honest: The occupation is there and it isn't pretty. The ugliness of Palestinian politics does not erase that fact. It may qualify it, but it doesn't erase it altogether.
Now, really, is that hogwash? Or just plain common sense?
I assume that the last sentence refers to the Machteret, though they operated in the 80's and didn't kill 29 people. They might have tried to kill more but didn't. (The 29 murders may have been confused with Baruch Goldstein.)
Soccer Dad,
If your referring to the last sentence in my second comment, then I'm not sure what you mean. The ugliness of the occupation isn't limited to the actions of one madman (Goldstein) and one fringe movement (Kach).
He was referring to the last sentence in the excerpt in the post itself. Solomon asked: "Anyone know what that last sentence refers to?" The sentence was "A similar survey of terrorists in the Jewish Underground, which killed 29 Palestinians in the early 1970s, found the same pattern..."
#4 Joanne said:
"But the frustrations that the Palestinians experience--whether economic or political--will make them more amenable to radical ideas, ..."
Mostly coercion is behind many of the SBs. Peer pressure in the teenagers and among the twenty something.
Then among the female version this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25382
"The unfortunate female victims in this vicious death orchestra are coerced into blowing themselves up as the only way to spare their family’s, and their own, “honorâ€. The terror group Fatah, for instance, runs an operation in which male terrorists seduce or rape young women and then confront them with the deadly choice: shameful death in an “honor†killing at the hands of the family or the washing away of the family’s shame by "martyrdom."
Hamas engages in the same crime, as the heart-wrenching case of Reem Al-Reyashi illustrates. The mother of two young children, she blew herself up in January 2004 at the Erez crossing in Israel, killing herself and four Israelis. It was discovered after the suicide-killing that she had been seduced by a Hamas terrorist -- who afterwards offered her a choice between an “honor†killing or suicide by means of explosives detonated amidst as many Jews as possible. Her terrorist lover armed her with the necessary explosives and instructions, and her husband drove her to the location of her crime and death."
Many of the attemptswere carried out by beings high on drugs which in one instance saved a bus driver and his passengers near the Israeli town of Bet Shean.
The ideology was more for those conducting the operational side planning and getting recruits etc.
Please don't forget that the economic situation of Palestinians was far better in 93 when Arafat rode into town and the suicide bombing started big time with a car bomb in Afula in 94!
In terms of the misery index, the immiseration experienced in Gaza and the West Bank, some recent historical information is relevant (and in general, to presumably state the obvious, there is a complex of relevant factors, hence the following is but one of those factors within the overall socio-cultural, historical, political and geographic complex of factors):
Since 2002 the U.N. has produced an annual report titled "Arab Human Develpment," each year the report has had a different emphasis, reflected in the subtitle of the report. For example the 2005 report is subtitled "Towards the Rise of Women in the Arab World," the 2004 report is subtitled "Towards Freedom in the Arab World" and the 2002 report, the first in the series, is subtitled "Creating Opportunities for Future Generations." As Michael Walzer writes in Dissent, referring to the 2002 report:
"... [the report] included statistics on health and life expectancy in Occupied Palestine, dating from 2000 or the years immediately before. In its many tables and charts, Palestine consistently ranked high among Arab states, up with oil-rich Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. ... in Palestine, where health standards were relatively high—and this after thirty-three years of occupation.
"There has certainly been “disruption†since then, and impoverishment, and immiseration. But they are not the result of the occupation; they are the result of the Intifada and its terrorism ... and of the harsh Israeli reaction. And however much one criticizes the harshness, one has to admit that it is reactive. What Slater calls the continuing occupation of Gaza after the on-the-ground withdrawal is a response to the sad failure of the Palestinians to make the most of the withdrawal. The sea blockade, the frequent closure of the border crossings, and the military attacks—all these would end immediately if there were no rockets flying into Israel from the Gaza Strip and no terrorist organizations operating openly in its cities."
h/t Normblog
Ynet has a report from MEMRI about the children of Rim Al-Riyashi:
'How many Jews did mama kill?'
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3376649,00.html
"After being prompted to begin a recitation, the girl said: "In the name of Allah the Merciful the Compassionate. When comes the help of Allah, and victory, and you see people entering the religion of Allah in troops, then celebrate the praise of your Lord, and ask his forgiveness, for he is ever ready to show mercy."
At the end of the broadcast, the interviewer turned to the girl and said: "Do you want to go to mama?"
"Yes," she replied.
Memri's video and transcript
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1398
Again, I understand that the Palestinian political culture is corrupt and authoritarian. That is beyond dispute. In fact, I don't think many pro-Palestinian sympathizers would argue otherwise. Coercion, peer pressure, indoctrination, and the threat of ostracism are all powerful factors underlying Palestinian radicalism. But they're not the only factors. Whatever the evils of Palestinian authoritarianism, they exist side-by-side with the evils of the occupation.
In all fairness, it is difficult to see how the occupation could cease in the near future. That's where the Palestinians strategically have the Israelis over a barrel: If the Israelis don't clamp down, they leave themselves open to bloody attacks by the Palestinians; but if they do clamp down, they can't avoid hurting Palestinian civilians. The PA and Hamas force the Israelis to resort to repression, thereby earning the latter the condemnation of the world.
In a sense, the Israelis are oppressing their would-be oppressors. The Palestinians speak the language of "rights," and are indeed seeing their civil rights abused. But they are using their fight for freedom--which the world supports--to leverage themselves into the conquest of "all of Palestine." If called on that point, their "moderate" spokesmen will deny these intentions. Their more radical spokesmen will say that, since Israel is illegitimate, the conquest of all of Palestine is their right.
But still the suffering caused by the occupation goes on. There are many anecdotes about the abuses by the Palestinians of their own people, like the ones recounted above; and many of them are true. We pro-Zionists like to read these stories because they make Israel seem somehow less guilty and the Palestinians less deserving. But the anti-Zionists also have their litany of anecdotes of Israeli misdeeds, many of which may also be true. And these instances of suffering caused by the occupation feed Palestinian anger: whether honestly or cynically.
One more point: That the Palestinian economy was doing relatively better in 1994 is not very relevant. It was not doing well; it was never doing very well, to my knowledge. In any case, the second Intifada was not started because of bread riots, it was a calculated step by Arafat. I never said that the frustration of educated Palestinians was the only cause of Palestinian radicalism. I feel that it's a contributory factor, one that may explain why many suicide bombers come from middle-class backgrounds. That ideology contributes, too, is also true. But ideology, too, will deeply influence educated Palestinians. After all, they're the ones who read. Read what? Well, that's just the point.
Whatever the evils of Palestinian authoritarianism, they exist side-by-side with the evils of the occupation.
The occupation after Egyptian and Jordanian rule brought them clean, piped water, electricity, schools, clinics, universities and one of the highest standards of living in the Arab world.
The Israelis pulled out of Gaza and what was the result?
Like in South Africa apartheid is the excuse for the current situation of bad administration, collapsing infrastructure, crime and health issues
so in the Palestinian areas "occupation" is the excuse for their misery.
An article worth reading
"Close to 20,000 jobs have been created in the Gaza Strip over the last four months ..."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173700686973&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
The article Cynic links to speaks of 20,000 new jobs created in Gaza during the past few months, with the cooperation of the IDF. You’ll note that one key sentence in the article:
"The increase [in jobs] was spurred by an IDF decision to allow Palestinians to work fields in the northern Strip, particularly in the Beit Lahiya area, that had been off limits since they are used to fire Kassam rockets."
The IDF cooperated with agricultural unions to make these jobs possible during the past few months (i.e., after Israel had left Gaza) by simply letting the Palestinians work the fields. Not that this was a small concession, given the danger posed by the Kassam rockets. But this is not a demonstration of how the Israeli occupation was benign.
As for Egyptian or Jordanian rule not being good for the Palestinians, I’m sure that was largely true. The Territories did not have a first-world economy when Israel conquered them in 1967, not even a strong third-world economy. But that was 40 years ago. Egypt and Jordan have not controlled the Territories since then.
As far as who is to blame for the Palestinians' poor economy, I don’t know. I imagine the blame must be shared, not the least by the PA itself, which has squandered or stolen hundreds of billions of dollars in development aid. Also, Israel cannot do too much for a people that it’s at war with. But to say that the occupation has had no effect or a negligible effect is unconvincing.
Regarding South Africa, of course part of the problem is the legacy of Apartheid! The ignorance, poverty, and inequalities left behind was bound to be a challenge even for the most competent government. The fact that South Africa’s government is incompetent adds to the country’s burden.
All this is beside the point, however. The original question was why so many suicide bombers were relatively well-educated (i.e., high school diplomas) and relatively well off. This was seen as a contradiction. One view holds that this is proof that poverty and misery could not be the answer, so it must be ideology. I agreed that ideology plays a key role, but not the only role.
My point was that, if you have any number of educated people who have no economic opportunities and live under restrictions imposed by an occupation, they will be more open to radicalization, even if they are not themselves poor. The examples given in comments above show that the hardships were not caused by Israel alone. OK, but I didn’t say they were. Quite the opposite, in fact. But it is true that the occupation contributes to these hardships. Nothing that anyone has said above demonstrates otherwise.
Again, again…it is a combination of Israel’s harsh policies AND the Palestinians’ harsh policies that contribute to the radicalization of middle-class Palestinians. I don’t see why this is so hard to understand. Are you all saying that Israel’s occupation is blameless?!
The only thing I'm going to take issue with is the idea that the "ugliness of the occupation" is responsible for anything. The "occupation" is an inevitability when the neighboring population refuses to be at peace. Occupation is necessary and legal and carries responsibilities -- like maintaining law and order and infrastructure. Witness the damned if you do, damned if you don't situation Israel faced in the Gaza withdrawal -- they pulled out and yet were still blamed for the problems because in a technical sense, they were still "occupiers" and responsible for those things.
Blaming the Israelis for occupying territories they had to take in a defensive war, then had to RE occupy after they left most of the West Bank only to find it continuing to be used as a base for attack is to accept the rhetoric of Israel's enemies. There were no horrors of the occupation originally (and still aren't -- not "horrors"), but to the extent that it has gotten more intrusive is only to the extent that Palestinian Arabs won't stop trying to murder their Jewish neighbors. It ALL traces back to Arab non-acceptance of Israel.
Not saying that Israel is not a factor in the region's problem, but the problem existed from long before it officially existed. Jerusalem had a majority of Jews in the late 18th Century and there were constant attacks against Jews.
My point was that, if you have any number of educated people who have no economic opportunities and live under restrictions imposed by an occupation, they will be more open to radicalization,
How does that jibe with the suicide bombers in London? In Bali?
As for Palestinians' harsh policies that is a misnomer for what the different clans and terrorist groups subjected the local population to. The different groups played the West for suckers with taqiyya.
Before the bombings of 2000, even with all that had gone before, Israelis and Palestinians were intermingling with, for example, Israelis spending Saturday in Jenin shopping and lunching and Palestinians roaming Israel. The Israelis had pulled back under the Oslo agreement only to be bombed and shot up and were forced to occupy to protect themselves.
There is a greater context that is ignored for the simplistic "occupation".
Please read more about South Africa where for example President Thabo Mbeki's brother is banned from the South African Broadcasting System because his papers on economics and social issues are at odds with the President's views.
The ignorance, poverty, and inequalities left behind was bound to be a challenge even for the most competent government.
Such as this?
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2081674,00.html
There are 50 murders and 43 child rapes each day and since 1994 more than a quarter of a million murders, more than the country's violent deaths for the 20th century. With some 2000+ white farmers murdered the rest are all black.
When people look for excuses to cover their failures instead of knuckling down and making something of their lives the result is apparent.
Here are a few responses to some points made above:
1. Cynic: “How does that jibe with the suicide bombers in London? In Bali?â€
Palestinian opposition to Israel was there long before Islamist bombings in other parts of the world. It is true that the Palestinians are now tapping into a broader fundamentalist Muslim movement. With the failure of pan-Arab nationalism and Third World non-aligned socialism, this is no great surprise. Part of the reason, too, was that fundamentalist Muslim movements—like Hamas and also the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt—took advantage of the corruption and incompetence of Arab governments by providing social programs to the masses that these governments didn’t provide. They won many adherents that way.
But, I’m sorry, this doesn’t gainsay my point that while ideology plays a big role in all this, so does the fact that Palestinians are living under an occupation. I understand that there is a need for the checkpoints and the barrier, but they hurt just the same. I don’t see the need for land grabs by right-wing settlers, and the expense to Israel of protecting them.
2. Cynic: “Please read more about South Africa where for example President Thabo Mbeki's brother is banned from the South African Broadcasting System because his papers on economics and social issues are at odds with the President's viewsâ€
I am aware of the sins of the South African government, especially when it comes to freedom of speech (I’ve read of similar instances to the one Cynic mentions), the out-of-sight crime rate, and Mbeki’s ludicrous views on HIV/AIDS. But to say that NONE of South Africa’s problems have roots in Apartheid doesn’t sound right to me. Old patterns of inequality in wealth and education are not going to disappear overnight. Here’s what a recent State Dept. “background note†says:
“South Africa’s post-apartheid governments have made remarkable progress in consolidating the nation's peaceful transition to democracy. Programs to improve the delivery of essential social services to the majority of the population are underway. Access to better opportunities in education and business is becoming more widespread. Nevertheless, transforming South Africa's society to remove the legacy of apartheid will be a long-term process requiring the sustained commitment of the leaders and people of the nation's disparate groups…
“Although South Africa's economy is in many areas highly developed, the exclusionary nature of apartheid and distortions caused in part by the country's international isolation until the 1990s have left major weaknesses. The economy is now in a process of transition as the government seeks to address the inequities of apartheid, stimulate growth, and create jobs. Business, meanwhile, is becoming more integrated into the international system, and foreign investment has increased dramatically over the past several years. Still, the economic disparities between population groups are expected to persist for many years, remaining an area of priority attention for the government.â€
http://www.infoplease.com/country/profiles/south-africa.html
3: Solomon: “There were no horrors of the occupation originally (and still aren't -- not "horrors"), but to the extent that it has gotten more intrusive is only to the extent that Palestinian Arabs won't stop trying to murder their Jewish neighbors. It ALL traces back to Arab non-acceptance of Israel.â€
Again, from the Dept. of State, this time from the country report on Israel regarding human rights: “Laws, judicial decisions, and administrative regulations prohibit torture and abuse; however, during the year reputable nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) filed numerous credible complaints with the government alleging that security forces tortured and abused Palestinian detainees.â€
The State Dept. report lists instances of attacks by Palestinian terrorists, along with a couple by right-wing Israelis. It also notes that the security barrier has sharply reduced Israeli civilian casualties. In the section to do specifically with the occupied territories, the report is much more damning in its assessment of the PA, but mentions charges against the Israeli forces, as well. Here is the report’s list, verbatim:
• Damage to civilians in the conduct of military operations,
• Numerous, serious abuses of civilians and detainees
• Failure to take disciplinary action in cases of abuse
• Improper application of security internment procedures
• Use of temporary detention facilities that were austere and overcrowded
• Limited cooperation with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61690.htm
I agree with Solomon that, in the face of a constant onslaught of terrorism, Israeli use of force is unavoidable. Moreover, I’m forgiving of abuses by soldiers. These abuses are going to happen even with the best of intentions, especially when we keep in mind that the occupation soldiers are little more than teenagers, themselves. And I also understand that the occupation itself is not illegal under international law.
But, again, all I was saying was that the conditions under which Palestinians live, for which the occupation is indeed partly to blame, will radicalize even the relatively well-educated, especially the relatively well-educated.
Sorry for this overlong posting. Let’s just end it here and agree to disagree, ok?