LAST Thursday, 14th July, in Nice, France, 31 year-old Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel drove a truck which he used as a weapon to ram into a celebratory crowd, killing at least 84 and injuring dozens. Bastille Day, or Freedom Day, is celebrated in that country on 14th July.The Islamic State (IS) has claimed the killer as one of its soldiers. To hit a country on a day it is celebrating its freedom can be interpreted as mocking its freedom or attempting to take that freedom away.

Similarly, on 11th September 2001, when the World Trade Center in New York, USA was bombed by terrorists, the significance of the number was not lost sight of. The Americans record their date as the month, day, and year; thus 11th September meant for them 9/11, which is the telephone number for “emergency”.
Additionally, because the Trade Center was seen as the centre for business in New York, it constituted an attack on that city’s economic nerve centre.
Wars in the past have seen countries fighting against countries; or a group within a country attacking the state, seeking to take control of the government. Those wars were somewhat confined to heavy military hardware.

In the current sphere, where terrorism has taken root and is being advanced, war has become very sophisticated. It is being fought by using highly intelligent mechanisms to hit countries and groups at strategic times and important places, disturbing national events.

The new form of global war by those waging it has two characteristics. One, it is perceived to be an act against what is considered Western imperialism. The other factor is that, within the Islamic religion, those waging the war are considered to have an extremist perspective of the faith and want to impose same on the entire Muslim world. The commonality driving both wars is intolerance of, or a narrow perspective on, issues such as the practice of the faith, sexual orientation, women’s and children’s rights.

Efforts by the formal economy to change the world and do business differently have seen the development of satellites which laid the foundation for the revolution of modern communication technologies and trade, unhindered by borders and brick walls. The information communications technology (ICT) breakthrough, while lauded by those who benefit from the formal system, has made the security of the ordinary tenuous.

There was a time when, wherever war was taking place — be it in Europe, Asia or Africa — the leaders would have assembled at a table in the same building at the same time, seeking to come up with resolutions to the problem(s) that may have caused the war. Today there is what is dubbed a global war against terrorism, but the actual faces of the persons involved in terrorism are not being seen; so it is difficult to find resolutions to the war between the terrorists and the non-terrorists.

In the absence of dialogue between the terrorists and the formal system, a resolution becomes complex. As formal universities speak about distance education through the use of the ICT, the terrorists have established their own brand of education and distance learning. This is not monetarily paid for or formally regulated as to who can have access; as such, it allows impressionable minds from all over the world to access same and be influenced. This form of education contributes to individuals establishing their own groups, or acting alone, in demonstrating against a system that they may perceive to be repugnant.

In the case of the killer from Orlando, Florida, the evidence revealed to date is that he acted alone but was influenced by IS. In this new environment, IS — which claims to be a state, though operating within a state — were world governments to engage with its leaders, IS has little or no control over splinter groups/individuals claiming association, operating on their behalf, or buying into its ideology. These realities pose another conundrum in the fight against global terrorism.

Man’s security is being challenged. The level of sophistication of those bent on terroristic acts requires vigilance by all. At the same time, no longer can persons depend on government to put a fool-proof system in place to protect them as citizens. As society evolves, values change and the one-size-fits-all is not delivering across the board.

Consequently, leaders, researchers and thinkers need to return to the drawing board, examine what may have gone wrong, and seek to put corrective action in place. Strong military hardware (bombings and shootings) have not delivered the peace and tranquility in and across countries and regions, as the terrorists seem to be a few steps ahead of the formal security system.