An overarching theme that started to resonate during the tenure of my International Journalism class was the idea of peace journalism and a human, and journalistic responsibility to use your message to do or make good. I couldn't help but think that this was slightly idealistic, especially considering the way international groups are using new media today. While it may be our responsibility, the actuality is that the Internet as a medium has proliferated both positive and negative journalism and propaganda. This all ties into faith because a common misconception exists: terrorism is supported by Islam. As you'll read, I got into detail about the differences between the current connotation of 'jihad' and it's actual meaning within religious contexts. Terrorism in the name of Islam is actually only practiced by extremist groups, just like with any other religion.
I wanted to know why the Internet is so much more powerful than any traditional medium, and how terrorist groups have made use of it. Furthermore, what seemed a little overreaching at the time, I wanted to know how their use of the Internet has shaped The War on Terror. I asked several terrorism experts on campus, as well as sought many academic and media sources. I actually found many terrorist groups' videos posted online, as Dr. Clark mentions, specifically Al Sahab's website, but all were removed shortly thereafter (the CIA does its best to remove these types of things within 24 hours of posting -- yet another conflict with freedom of expression, in my opinion). Here's what I found.
Wars have been fought since the beginning of time. Each and every conflict is unique, which make each and every following war unique. Entities or nations involved actively choose the ways in which they engage in warfare, whether physical combat or psychological brainwashing, or anything in between.
The War on Terror has set an incredible precedent. Never has a war between so few nations reached so many ends of the Earth. This spread is a consequence of the use of the newest phenomenon of the new millennium – the Internet.
The Internet, which now reaches 1.97 billion users (“World Internet Users and Population Stats”), has reshaped and redefined every communication and media medium and outlet, as well as people’s everyday lives. Information, in the forms of audio, video, pictures, text, you name it, once put on the Internet, in instantaneously available for insemination, interpretation, and manipulation to billions of eyes worldwide. As a form of media, the Internet has given a voice to the most minute of minorities, and provided direct access to the most massive of masses.
The Internet has also escaped what many people and media outlets strive to evade – governmental boundaries. The Internet has caused policy makers serious issues concerning censorship and privacy as a new international territory. Current legislation remains content-based, that is, restricting certain sites based on highly-specific content or functions, rather than all-encompassing censorship worldwide.
Terrorism, like the Internet and as it is known today, has a relatively new understanding. An inclusive, global definition for terrorism was not reached until 2004 by the United Nations Secretary General; terrorism is defined as “any act intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act" (“UN Reform”). Terrorism can be practiced in the name of religion, political beliefs, or oppression of certain groups. Terrorism can be state-supported or organized by private factions. For my purposes, as The Center for Defense Information asserts, terrorism will be associated with the connotations created during the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. This type of ‘terrorism’ fits a much more “egocentric” definition, but is more fitting to my interests (“A Brief History of Terrorism”).
Now, imagine a culmination of these two elements – the Internet and this new form of Terrorism. The outcome is frightening. Terrorists, by definition extremists who hold beliefs that make up minority factions, who seek the most impact for the smallest cost, who exploit any possible outlets for inciting fear and intimidation in an enemy, and who thrive on anonymity and lack of government constraint, now have access, like every other individual (theoretically), to the World Wide Web.
The outcome is what we have become all too familiar with -- video messages from Osama bin Laden threatening jihad to be taken out on America; training videos for terrorist organizations worldwide; written propaganda for organizations’ recruiting purposes.
Just as law regulating the Internet is difficult to create, so is measuring terror on the Internet’s effect on The War on Terror as a whole. However, this is what I hope to accomplish.
I became interested in the topic after reading one of our class articles, “One More Weapon: The Use of the Web in the Middle East Conflict” (Roversi 97). I realized that not only has war been taken to an entire new level as a result of terrorist groups’ use of the Internet, but so has the Internet itself. I thought war could not get much dirtier, and that the Internet could not get much more blunt. Obviously, I was wrong. The War on Terror has revealed a shift in modern warfare – from purely physical measures, like zero sum games of numbers of troops and body counts, to something nearly entirely psychological – Americans waiting on the edge of our seats for something to be posted online from our mysterious, elusive enemy. This profound feeling of fear, as instilled on 9/11, is what led me to choose this topic.
After preliminary research, I have gained yet another reason to continue with the topic. I noticed an eternal contradiction, one that I have yet to get past. In the past few years, I have become to understand The War on Terror as more of a war of East versus West, and all that the two entities stand for. If it were truly a ‘war on terror,’ American troops would be grounded in many other areas of the world. Terrorists, and some Middle Easterners, feel attacked by what they perceive as the Western way of life. This includes all of the freedoms, particularly the one of expression, that we enjoy. However, terrorists themselves have made use of the Internet, which, to me, stands entirely for Western ideals. Why would extremists that feel so strongly about Western culture and norms being forced onto them even entertain the thought of participating in something like the Internet?
The overarching question that I hope to answer is:
1) How has terrorist groups’ use of the Internet shaped The War on Terror?
Furthermore, as subquestions to guide my research, I hope to answer the following:
2) What are the major groups that utilize the Internet for terror? In what ways to they utilize the resource?
3) How much more powerful is the Internet than mediums used in previous wars? How has the power of the Internet made The War on Terror different?
Research Methods and Tools
Because this study revolves around the impact of the Internet, it is appropriate that most of my research and findings result from the resource.
Although the topic is somewhat broad, my research will focus in on smaller examples of the conflict, relying on these cases to better represent the situation as a whole. I will highlight the terrorist groups of Al-Qaeda (the one commonly known, to which Osama bin Laden belonged), and The Islamic Army in Iraq. Both of these groups frequently use the Internet for purposes of terror, which I will later discuss specifically.
I will draw my conclusions from what information is available. Meaning quite literally, because terrorist sites disappear and reappear every minute of the day, causing a strain on the research process. I will rely predominantly on videos and content found on the groups’ sites themselves. I will also look to several recently published books on the topic matter.
Perhaps one of my most important resources is my Arabic teacher. I will speak to him in regards of the languages in which material is posted on the terrorist websites. This will give me better understanding of the targeted audience of the groups.
I expect to find some government documentation and publicity on the topic as well. Because there is no shortage on recent events revolving around the matter, political and media discourse is sure to be loaded with information.
As for exactly how I plan to find answers, I will use the culmination of resources to come up with broad definitions, purposes, goals, and dynamics of terrorist groups’ actions on the web. Secondly, I plan to gauge the reaction of the mainstream media and citizens themselves to understand the perceived threat, and what reactions have taken place. This is essentially the ‘shaping’ of The War on Terror.’
Unfortunately, I was not able to find any quantitative data on trends of terrorists’ use of the Internet. There are a few statistics, but none that reveal much of anything other than the prevalence of terrorist websites.
Sources Review
Two sources cited previously, “World Internet Users and Population Stats” and “UN Reform” were used for the purpose of critical background information. It is crucial to understand just how many people worldwide terrorist groups’ content is available to, as well as what terrorism is in the first place. These sources were very helpful in accomplishing just that.
A book I came across, Terror on the Internet, and the related article “www.terror.net How Terror Uses the Internet” were instrumental in understanding why terrorists use the Internet and in what ways they have. Also, Weimann, the author of both the book and article, states something devastating to my research: “Surprisingly little is known about the threat posed by terrorists’ use of the Internet” (“www.terror.net”). However, this article was written in 2004 and the book in 2006, so I will be wary to assume that all things asserted still stand true now in 2011, such as that stark statement.
Probably the most influential source, in terms of information, that I have utilized is the article we were assigned in class, “One More Weapon.” It was essential that I read it first because of its explanation of the dynamics of the sites. Roversi does an excellent job writing what is basically ‘Islam for Dummies,’ which is exactly what I needed to better understand terrorist groups and the meaning of the term ‘jihad’. I believe every American should read this article.
I found multiple articles in reliable newspapers, blogs, and magazines that are relative to the topic and fairly recent, especially comparing to sources from Weimann. The articles quote both citizens and government officials. They give significant insight into what is the mainstream understanding of the Internet’s impact on The War on Terror. People’s voices are imperative in comprehending the real threat of the problem, considering it is not just the governments’ and militaries’ war any longer; much of the terrorists’ ammunition is available to laypeople.
Lastly, the most compelling sources are the websites of the groups themselves. Al Qaeda uses multiple sources to post videos and audio, while The Islamic Army of Iraq offers their own website in Arabic, English, Spanish and French. Given tools for analyzation and interpretation from the classifications of Weimann, as well as my Arabic teacher’s advice, I feel equipped to best use these sources to answer my questions.
To begin, terrorism has distinct characteristics that separate actions from regular warfare. Terrorism is premeditated in the sense that acts of terror are not random outbursts of rage, rather well-planned executions. Terror is political rather than criminal; it is intended to incite political change. Lastly, terrorism is directed at civilians, not government or military personnel. However, the terrorism practiced by groups like Al Qaeda, which is what many people know today, may feature even more extreme characteristics, like deterritorialization, lack of state-sponsorship, a hybrid political or religious figure, ability to mutate rapidly according to circumstances, a pragmatic approach, and enormous killing power (Weimann 22).
According to Weimann, terrorist websites exist for several distinct purposes. First and foremost, for the spread of terrorism; more specific purposes include inciting irrational fear in an enemy or opponent, creating a source of legitimacy for a terrorist group, which is most likely lacking in legitimacy, sustaining intimidation and bragging rights, data mining and research on the enemy, and fundraising and recruitment for the group (Weimann 24).
Weimann also recognizes in his article that psychological purposes of terrorism on the Internet exist. In some cases, terrorist groups’ web activity may emphasize lack of freedom of expression, identifying terroristic actions as the only way to be heard; demonize or deligitimize the enemy; or, expose the plight of its members (“www.terror.net”).
So this is what terrorism has come to, and its purposes are to cause both physical, political realizations and irrational psychological fear. But why has terrorism now shifted to the Internet? As Roversi states, “They [terrorists] use a medium through which it is possible to literally conduct a war without limits” (“One More Weapon”). Furthermore, the Internet is nearly a terrorist’s best friend. The medium provides for easy access with essentially little or no government control. Audiences can be reached throughout every end of the Earth, and information is fast flowing. Terrorists can post a plethora of multimedia, including text, audio, video, and still pictures, which second to actual attacks, is extremely effective in communicating fear. These posts can remain anonymous, never revealing terrorists’ identities or locations to government officials. Most importantly, because terrorists typically have few financial resources, the Internet is an extremely cost-effective method of inciting fear. Terrorists reach everyone and everywhere for very little if any cost to them, making the benefits enormous and their decisions to post extremely rational. What is not as obvious, but can be traced, is the Internet’s shaping of media culture. Posts shape news coverage, because journalists more and more look to the Internet for story ideas (Weimann 30).
I also found, with my Arabic teacher as a resource, that the target audience of terrorist groups is not what is to be expected. Before researching, I would assume that target audiences would be highly specific – government officials, media outlets, members of the groups worldwide, and in some rare cases, civilians. “In my opinion, these sites have two audiences of reference. The first is constituted by Islamic populations living in Western countries. They speak, that is to say to the Islamic diaspora, the Islamic populations which were scattered in various epochs, in Europe and in the United States . . . [the second audience to which these sites are addressed] is constituted by other armed groups . . . permitting them to keep informed about each others’ activities and state of health” (Roversi 105-108). This is not true, however. The target audience includes but is not limited to these parties. This can be told through the sites and languages in which the content is published. For example, the Islamic Army in Iraq’s site is available in Arabic, English, Spanish and French. There is not a single continent in which at least one of these languages isnot spoken, making the target audience worldwide. Also, As-Sahab, Al Qaeda’s official video channel, frequently posts videos through YouTube users (http://www.youtube.com/user/omarhmima). YouTube is available in most countries. In fact, most of the countries where YouTube is banned are Middle Eastern ones, proving that target audiences are truly worldwide (http://mashable.com/2007/05/30/youtube-bans/). As-Sahab videos are mainly in Arabic, as I found, can be searched in English, and many translated versions are available.
Other evidence of target audience is directly related to content on the sites. The Islamic Army of Iraq features a picture of President Obama next to red Arabic words which are seemingly angry and active, with exclamation points and blinking highlighted words. This makes the target audiences of Americans pretty obvious. Furthermore, press releases and training videos are aimed at other terrorist groups, claiming superiority and creating an intimidation factor ( HYPERLINK "http://www.iaisite-eng.org/" http://www.iaisite-eng.org/).
My first-hand findings with the terrorist groups’ sites somewhat matches up with what Weimann found in his book and article. The purposes are quite clear. However, I found that the psychological aspect of the sites is highly under-emphasized. Most videos or audio content reveals a pattern playing on Islam. Typically, the media opens with the statement “Allah huwa Akbar,” or “God is Greatest,” followed by prayers for peace, justice and guidance. As Roversi discusses, this including of prayers plays on Muslims’ psyche, suggesting that it is God’s will for violent jihad, and to be obedient to God is to carry out these things. Brainwash is definitely a strategy used. Additionally, videos, the most realistic medium available, is used whenever available. This leaves no space for viewers’ imaginations, painting a picture both visually and auditively, making the content seem more legitimate, credible, and believable. For example, As-Sahab’s use of video increased exponentially in five years (See Graph 1).
The number of videos produced by as-Sahab — al-Qaeda's propaganda arm — has soared in the past two years, according to IntelCenter, a terrorism research firm in Alexandria, Va. In 2007, as-Sahab released a new video every 3½ days on average — compared with one every two months in 2002.
Lastly, I found that actual threat is only perceived, which is the purpose of terrorist groups anyway. From 2003 to 2005, there were over 4,300 websites serving terrorists and their supporters (“www.terror.net”). Threat is perpetuated by sites jumping daily, making proof or their existence difficult to track. Many news outlets have reported on the threat of terrorism on the Internet, but little is done to address the reality of the threat. The Washington Post said , “The war against terrorism has evolved into a war of ideas and propaganda, a struggle for hearts and minds fought on television and the Internet. On those fronts, al-Qaeda's voice has grown much more powerful in recent years. Taking advantage of new technology and mistakes by its adversaries, al-Qaeda's core leadership has built an increasingly prolific propaganda operation, enabling it to communicate constantly, securely and in numerous languages with loyalists and potential recruits worldwide” (“Al Qaeda’s Growing Online Offensive”). The New York Times said, “Al Qaeda now views the Internet not only as an essential recruitment tool and means of communication with volunteers, but as a virtual training camp. No more need for Afghanistan: would-be terrorists can download manuals and videotapes that show them how to make explosive vests, car bombs, chemical weapons and poisons, and a library of tips on how to use them all effectively” (Worth). Defensetech wrote, “With cyber weaponry only requiring widely availableknowledge and skills and the only equipment required a computer that can be purchased anywhere, cyber weapons proliferation cannot be controlled” (“al Qaeda’sTop Cyber Terrorist”). These are undoubtedly threats. What is debatable is whether or not anything can be done about them.
Discussion and Conclusion
In my Sources Review, I stated that I should not assume that things asserted
in 2004 and 2006 still ring true today. This remains applicable, but the statement to
which I was referring, as I have found, is correct – “Surprisingly little is known about
the threat posed by terrorists’ use of the Internet”
I feel that governments and institutions have done an adequate job of
realizing the purposes of terrorism on the Internet. Awareness is always the first
step.
However, I was ultimately disappointed in my findings because it turns out,
very few have tread far on this ground, including the United States government.
While officials may address the topic here or there, the last available report on
terror from the Department of State in 2003 does not even mention the use of the
Internet. It is difficult to accurately measure the threat when all of the data is
completely qualitative.
Also, because terroristic content is frequently removed by servers, I had less
luck than anticipated in tracking actual terrorist groups’ sites. For example, the user
that I found on YouTube that regularly published As-Sahab videos, and had been for
some time, was gone from the site the day after I checked it. The videos are
definitely available, but do take some digging, due to this issue.
Also, the threat, as I stated, is only as strong as its perception. Because loads
of content are uploaded to the Internet each day, possibly all containing terroristic
threats, most must be taken lightly. So, maybe the real threat here is the lack of
physical threat in itself, and the psychological power that terrorists still have
through the World Wide Web.
To answer my questions, terrorists’ use of the Internet has shaped The War
on Terror in many ways. The war has gone from what could have been a revengeful
beating to a continuance of terrorists’ play on our fears, like a situation of hide and
not-so-easily seek. Terrorists have used uncharted electronic territory to their
every advantage, furthering the work that begun with 9/11. The enemy has shifted
from something attainable and catchable to something nearly unknown and
untouchable, as it disseminates across the globe with its message of fear. They
shape through the Western media, which often reluctantly expresses, and
consequently spreads, these fears in order to maintain audiences. Terrorists post to
the Internet so that media will pick up their statements and demands, however
legitimate and preposterous. Groups like Al Qaeda and The Islamic Army of Iraq are the most predominate
faces of terror on the Internet, and use mediums nearly as powerful and effective as
attacking itself to get their message across. The mediums used have turned the war
into a battle of hearts and minds, rather than soldiers and guns.
Ultimately, terrorists’ use of the Internet has shaped The War on Terror to
the point where it has become unwinnable.
(Weimann).
