Responding to Terror
2nd April 2024
In 2001, the United States embarked on the War on Terror, rallying the world not just to fight terrorists but to replace autocratic and tribal societies with liberal democratic regimes, despite the lack of local interest. That approach now looks hopelessly wrongheaded.
Though Islamist terror groups still threaten the civilized world, geopolitical power players continue to use terrorist puppet regimes for strategic advantage, despite occasional “blowback.” Russia has been fighting ISIS in Syria since 2015 and, in 2017, prior to the recent ISIS-K raid on the Crocus Music Hall on the outskirts of Moscow, withstood a deadly attack by that group on the St. Petersburg Metro. Yet it’s been friendly with Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists and received a Hamas delegation following the October 7 attack on Israel. Its leadership appears to view NATO, not political Islam, as an existential threat.
Russia’s double standards when it comes to their proxies might be hypocritical, but they are also pragmatic and amoral. We can’t rationally expect that the people in charge can be shamed with accusations of hypocrisy into amending their ways. No one holds Russia to a high standard. If Russia is accused of damaging a church here or a hospital there, it rarely trends on social media or is covered in the news. Russian security forces must step up their game to make anyone pay attention.