The
nature of terrorism in the contemporary world has attachments to cultures,
faiths and people groups. It is important to recognize that not
all members of these communities associate, and at times, distance themselves
from such ideologies. It is vital for nations to be able to build
bridges with its various diaspora communities. Doing so will ensure
these communities are not painted with the same brush as terrorists
and lessen the chance of radicalization. Therefore, building bridges
of understanding will only aid in the development of national security
for all.
Community Relations
Governments
have been seen in a negative light by its diaspora communities.
An example would be the recent attitudes of Muslims in various western
nations – such as the UK1 after the July 2005 attack.
Such incidents only bring more separation and distrust.
Minimizing
the gap between government and diaspora will surface issues such as
religious understanding, ethnic identity and cultural customs.
Instances where governments interact with community leaders are times
when customs and rituals become important; in order to stress respect
and common ground. Lacking this, diaspora communities may view
such interactions as insincere or just political formalities, rather
than genuine meetings which foster change. Granted, diaspora communities
should attempt to dissolve negative perceptions from within their communities
– which will naturally provide greater trust from the host nation.
As
many nations have multicultural communities, the gap between host country
and its diaspora should be minimized by developing positive relations;
which will naturally foster national security.
Reducing Radicalization
Having
positive dialogue with the diaspora will enable reduction in radicalization.
Hate and propaganda delivered by many terrorist organizations deliberately
focus on building animosity against host governments.
It
must be noted that homegrown terrorism is on the rise and that radicalization
will continue as a tool for recruitment by terrorist organizations.
Part of this is using perceived injustices2, the lack of
success and poverty of diaspora as a tool to incite frustration against
a host nation. For example, the French Riots last year3
serve to show the French government of both unfair domestic policy concerning
immigrants as well as opportunity for Al-Qaeda (and its related organizations)
to use such circumstances to fuel its agenda. Therefore, better
relationships between the French government and its immigrant communities
could have prevented this from occurring.
Having
positive relationships with diaspora communities provides for the reduction
of radical influence. In addition, diaspora communities must also
attempt positive relations with its host nation, in order to proactively
contribute to trust building. Such positive engagement will enable
specific policies and actions to be created which will ensure everyone’s
interest are taken into consideration.
Conclusion
Building
constructive relationships with the nations diaspora community provides
for balance between governments and the people. It enables government
and immigrant communities to build trust in each other4.
This trust will lead to better community relations, a reduction in radicalization
and provides for an overall national security for both the host nation
and its people. Initiatives that break down misunderstandings provide
for a better perspective of multicultural communities as well as ensuring
a safe and equitable manner of acquiring information to build better
government policies; which will ensure security and safety of all in
a time where cultural understanding is of great importance.
Footnotes:
1. Matt Harwood, “Fighting Terrorism in the U.K.,” Security Management, Jan 2008, 48.
2. Omar Nasiri, Inside the Jihad: My Life with Al Qaeda – A Spy’s Story (New York, Basic Books, 2006), 24.
3. CBC News, “In Depth,” France Riots: Understanding the Violence, 28 Nov. 2007, <http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/paris_riots/> (20 April, 2008).
4. Matt Harwood, “Fighting Terrorism in the U.K.,” Security Management, Jan 2008, 50.