Islamist Attacks on Western Freedom – What Can Be Done?

Last week’s killings in Paris were termed terror attacks.  Yet apparently they were also something else – primarily revenge murders.

The Charlie Hebdo magazine was singled out as a target because it had been very blatant in its defamation – from a Muslim perspective – of the Prophet Mohammed.  One of the attackers was heard to say, after the slayings, “we revenged the honor of the Prophet Mohammed”. 

Noteworthy in the attribution was that there was not also a warning that the same fate would await others also being disrespectful to the Prophet. 

Yet whatever the motivation for the murders, they’ve certainly been viewed by most as acts of terrorism designed to intimidate those inclined to exercise free speech at the expense of Muslim sensibilities.  And judging by the reluctance of some in the media (the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post excepted) to reproduce the “offending” cartoons, they’ve been successful.

But there has been a strong showing of defiance, as well, with many around the world demonstrating their solidarity with the French.  The French government claims that the nation will not be intimidated.  And the surviving staff of the previously small circulation satiric magazine promises that its next issue will have a one million press run.

However, few suggest that anything can be done to thwart other attacks other than better intelligence and intensified anti-terrorist strikes.

There is an implicit assumption in these approaches which, I think, is false.  And that is that the enemy can’t be dissuaded from resorting to the killings and terrorist activities.  But they can be.

Take the Islamists at their word.  They do, indeed, hate the West and the U.S. in particular (the “great satan”) and are especially incensed and motivated by any ridiculing of Mohammed.

However, they might be dissuaded by the reactions to their revenge killings if the result is an increase, not a decrease, in the mockery of the Prophet.

Consider the recent parallel of North Korea cyber attacks and threats against the movie The Interview.  The result was a much larger audience.  I realize an increase of what will likely be perceived as an antagonism to Muslim beliefs will also offend non-terrorist followers of the Prophet.  But that consequence may be unavoidable if assaults on practitioners of freedom are to be discouraged.

It’s simple to say, as Ralph Peters did on Fox News recently, that we need to kill more terrorists.  Of course, that is an appropriate objective.  But the risk of dying is not a disincentive for many terrorists – the allure of martyrdom is, in fact, a magnet for the followers of radical Islam.

Our policies and practices must make clear to such enemies that their killings in defense of Mohammed are counter-productive.  They’ll only lead to more “slander” of the Prophet.  Maybe then such revenge terrorism will stop.