Peace and War

In fighting terrorism, the rule of law model is stronger than any army - Opinion

The terrorist attacks in Mumbai seven weeks ago sent shockwaves around the world. Now all eyes are fixed on the Middle East where Israel's response to Hamas's rockets, a ferocious military campaign, has already left 1000 Gazans dead.

Seven years on from September 11, 2001, it is clear that we need to take a fundamental look at our efforts to prevent extremism and its terrible offspring, terrorist violence. Since the events of that September, the notion of a war on terrorism has defined the terrain. The phrase had some merit: it captured the gravity of the threats, the need for solidarity, and the need to respond urgently - where necessary, with force.

But ultimately, the notion is misleading and mistaken. The issue is not whether we need to attack the use of terrorism at its roots, with all the tools available. We must. The question is how.

The idea of a war on terrorism gave the impression of a unified, transnational enemy, embodied in the figure of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. The reality is that the motivations and identities of terrorist groups are disparate.

Lashkar-e-Taiba has its roots in Pakistan and wants Kashmir to become an Islamist state. Hezbollah says it stands for resistance to the occupation of the Golan Heights.