Home

Trends in 2008 showed an increased link between transnational crime and terrorism, as well as increased popularity in terrorism aimed at free speech, according to a new study on recent terrorism activity.

“Terrorism in the West 2008,” authored by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies Center for Terrorism Research, also assessed terrorism trends in the West and new global safe havens for terrorist groups.

“In 2008, we saw the connections between transnational crime and terrorism deepen,” Gartenstein-Ross writes. “The linkage between the two is not a new phenomenon: the USSR had been a major sponsor of terrorist and insurgent groups during the Cold War, and after the Soviet Union’s collapse, these groups were forced to look elsewhere financially. Many turned to criminal activities, such as the drug trade.”

This trend has two major implications, he writes.

“First, it allows terrorists to gain financially while damaging the societies they target,” Gartenstein-Ross writes. “Second, law enforcement can derive some advantage from the crime-terrorism nexus by shutting down terrorists through targeting their criminal activities.”

The latter was the method used to nab famed mobster Al Capone, who was charged with tax evasion when the government couldn’t get enough evidence to convict him on his more serious criminal offenses. The connection is evident in places with thriving organized crime, Gartenstein-Ross notes, such as Bulgaria, where a parliamentary report last year concluded that money from Bulgaria’s drug trade was being funneled to Middle Eastern terrorist groups.

“In the U.S., one individual, Khan Mohammed, was convicted of narcotics distribution and narcoterrorism for his role in financing Taliban activities through the drug trade,” Gartenstein-Ross writes.

For an example of “undercharging,” or charging the suspect with lesser crimes with greater chance of conviction, Gartenstein-Ross offers the case against Care International, a self-described anti-poverty group.

“Similarly, prosecutors in the U.S. managed to win convictions against three former Care International officers for engaging in a scheme to conceal material facts from the U.S. and conspiring to defraud the government, despite the organization’s suspected involvement in jihadist activity,” he writes.

Gartenstein-Ross writes that, while Afghanistan was once a safe haven for terrorists, the U.S. war there sent al-Qaeda on the run. They have turned up in force in Pakistan -- where President Barack Obama has upgraded U.S. anti-terror efforts -- and Somalia.

“Consequently, terrorist activity with linkages to both countries could be glimpsed frequently in 2008 -- in Germany, Norway, Sweden, the U.S., and elsewhere,” Gartenstein-Ross writes. “Unless there are significant political and strategic changes, there will likely be a number of future plots with connections to Pakistan and Somalia. Moreover, plots with connections to one of these countries may be more ambitious in scale due to the advantages afforded by geographic safe havens.”

Gartenstein-Ross also tackles the question of how to balance security with civil liberties -- especially free speech. He writes that in 2008, there were several examples of arrests and convictions of individuals for illegal support for terrorism taking the form of propagandizing.

This is, Gartenstein-Ross notes, one actual aim of terrorist activity -- to force states to clamp down on free expression.

“This has been evident for years: the possibility of a terrorist attack against author Salman Rushdie was one of the concerns that drove him underground when Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa condemning him to death for the publication of his novel ‘The Satanic Verses’,” he writes. “Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was killed in a particularly vicious attack following the release of his controversial film ‘Submission’. And after Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published 12 cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad in 2005, there were violent protests in many corners of the world, and the cartoonists and the newspaper’s culture editor were threatened.”

In addition, American author Sherry Jones penned a novel based on the life of Muhammad’s wife, Aisha. Prior to its release, threats were made against the publisher and the book was dropped from publication.

“The threat of violence may put pressure on people’s ability to engage in free expression on certain issues in the future,” Gartenstein-Ross writes.

Another landmark event in 2008 was the first time a U.S. citizen died as a suicide bomber. That, along with the increased numbers of U.S. nationals leaving the country to plan and carry out the use of deadly force against American citizens and interests abroad, has led analysts to wonder whether violence is becoming a more acceptable form of protest in the West.

“The classical liberal principles upon which Western society was built favor debate, discussion, and mediation among competing interests as a means of settling disagreement,” Gartenstein-Ross writes. “What happens to public discourse and these key principles when taking a position or action unpopular with some group becomes dangerous? Is the resort to violence within Western societies as a means of advancing one’s preferred outcomes increasing? And if so, how can policymakers, public intellectuals, and others help to underscore that using violence in such circumstances is not acceptable for civilized people?”

The full report is available at DefendDemocracy.org, under Policy Research.