Asymmetric warfare is war between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly. We also know this tactic by the names "guerrilla warfare", "insurgency", "terrorism", "counterinsurgency", and "counterterrorism."
While a jihadi terror group, Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, claimed responsibility for the attacks as a response to Norwegian forces’ presence in Afghanistan, some people including
Glenn Greenwald are pointing to the war in Libya as being instructive as to why Norway became a target for guerrilla warfare today:
The NATO force of which Norway is a part has explicitly declared Libyan leader Moammar Gadaffi to be a "legitimate target" and has repeatedly attempted to kill him; one attempt on Gadaffi's life -- a bombing attack on his son's residence -- resulted in the death of the dictator's son and three grandchildren. In response, Gadaffi "vowed to attack 'homes, offices and families' in Europe in revenge for NATO airstrikes," adding that "your homes, your offices and your families, which will become military targets just as you have transformed our offices, headquarters, houses and children into what you regards as legitimate military targets." The semantic games of the Obama administration notwithstanding, that is not a "peaceful" situation; those are nations at war.
Traditionally, one of the more persuasive reasons to avoid war is that countries fear violent reprisals. I think the reason Gadaffi mentions Europe specifically is that tactically,
asymmetric warfare in small, quiet European NATO countries will, for a while, have a greater impact (or element of surprise) than an attack on larger players such as the US. Also, these attacks on smaller European counties might actually change that country's direction with regard to whether they want to continue to support these wars. Whereas larger countries like the US are too invested, and the ship of state is too large to change course in the immediate future. It's asymmetric warefare 101.
Continuing in the vein that reprisals targeting innocent civilians are historically a reason to avoid war, Greenwald points out that these attacks are "inherently unjustifiable" but they should not be surprising:
The point is that it's completely unsurprising that a nation at war -- whether Norway or the U.S. -- is going to be targeted with violent attacks. That's what "being at war" means, and it's usually what it provokes. And the way this fact is suppressed ("a coordinated assault on the ordinarily peaceful Scandinavian nation" = the post-9/11 why do they hate us?) highlights how we view violence as something only those Others commit, but not we.
The fact of global (in)security in the postmodern age is that exploded homes, mangled/starving children, innocent dead and assassinated leaders are realities in "other places," and these faraway realities are largely ignored here. They are not the reality of postmodern Western Europe, and certainly not in sleepy, socialist Oslo, Norway.
And this is precisely Why Norway was targeted.
More on the tactics of asymmetric warfare:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfareHere's the NYTs coverage of the Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or the Helpers of the Global Jihad claim of responsibility.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/world/europe/23oslo.html?_r=2A terror group, Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or the Helpers of the Global Jihad, issued a statement claiming responsibility for the attack, according to Will McCants, a terrorism analyst at C.N.A., a research institute that studies terrorism. The message said the attack was a response to Norwegian forces’ presence in Afghanistan and to unspecified insults to the Prophet Muhammad. “We have warned since the Stockholm raid of more operations,” the group said, according to Mr. McCants’ translation, apparently referring to a bombing in Sweden in December 2010. “What you see is only the beginning, and there is more to come.” The claim could not be confirmed. It is not uncommon for terrorist groups to advance claims of responsibility for high-profile attacks, only to have the claims prove to be spurious.
Norway is a member of the NATO alliance and has a small fighting contingent in Afghanistan. It was one of several countries named by Ayman al-Zawahri, the leader of Al Qaeda, as potential targets for attack. In 2006, Norwegian newspapers reprinted Danish cartoons that angered Muslims by lampooning Muhammad. Norway has also historically been a frequent participant in peacekeeping missions and a host for diplomatic talks, including the 1993 Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestinians. The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a committee of the Norwegian Parliament.
Muslim leaders in Norway swiftly condemned the attacks. “This is our homeland, this is my homeland; I condemn these attacks and the Islamic Council of Norway condemns these attacks, whoever is behind them,” said Mehtab Afsar, secretary general of the Islamic Council of Norway.
Witnesses on the island told Norwegian television that the man identified himself as a police officer when he entered the camp. “He said it was a routine check in connection with the terror attack in Oslo,” one witness told VG Nett, the Web site of a national newspaper.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
