Hacks and Attacks in Context: A Long View of Civilization, its Enemies and the Future

The time has come to put events like the attack on Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris and North Korea’s cyber-assault on Sony into a broad historical context and to look ahead to what this means for the future. Can we understand our own time and – more importantly – prepare for what comes next?

The ideas in the essay that follow have been germinating a long time and are based both on prior scholarship and my own personal experiences as a reporter and editor specializing in defense, homeland security and counterterrorism.

In this roughly 3,500-word essay, I propose an overarching historical context for the world in which we find ourselves. The first section is historical, the second analyzes current events and finally I look ahead.

I have always believed in going, as I like to put it, from “the macro to the micro;” to look at situations in their broadest context and then narrow that down to very specific circumstances. I will be following that methodology here.

One world civilization

Today there is a clash between a single world civilization and those who oppose it.

This is not as obvious a statement as it might seem on its face. Ever since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, there has been a search, at least in America, for an overarching conception into which to fit events. In 1989 Francis Fukuyama asked if the collapse of Communism constituted “The End of History?” – i.e., a triumph of liberal democracy so complete that all ideological political struggle had come to an end. Mr. Fukuyama has since elaborated and revised the theory but it nonetheless remained a debated concept in political science circles.

In 1993 we had Samuel Huntington put forward a post-Cold War theory of clashing civilizations in a Foreign Affairs article, “The Clash of Civilizations?” In it, he argued that future clashes would be cultural rather than national or ideological and he posited that the future would consist of nine civilizations in conflict, with some states like Russia and India swinging between different civilizations. At the time he was writing, 1993 (and he elaborated his thesis in the years that followed), America and the West was truly triumphant and overwhelmingly dominant.

But Huntington was only partially right and where he was wrong was in positing nine different civilizations. In fact, after the end of the Cold War and the First Iraq War, there was in fact only a single civilization and it was led by the United States and adhered to American principles.

A personal note: I was very lucky to see this up close. Between 1987 and 1993 I was a reporter for the newspaper Defense News and my beat was the international defense trade. I subsequently did some similar reporting as Editor at Large for the magazine Armed Forces Journal International between 1993 and 1997. In these positions I had the opportunity to travel the world covering nascent defense industries, mostly in developing countries, and speak to top officials about their military plans, requirements, intentions and analyses. My travels took me to India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Thailand and Turkey as well as European and North American countries like Britain, France, Germany and Canada.

The bulk of these travels took place after the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union. But more impressive to my interlocutors than the end of the Cold War was the overwhelming victory over Iraq. There is nothing that gets the attention of defense and policymaking officials like the ability to nearly totally destroy the world’s fourth largest army with conventional weapons in 100 hours at a cost of fewer than 300 casualties.

On an abstract level, Americans may have realized that they were the predominant power on earth but it was only when one traveled that one realized just how pre-eminent the United States was at that juncture.

Everywhere I went countries were re-evaluating their military models, which in some cases were based on Soviet concepts of large conscripted armies armed with simple weapons. Instead, they were trying to find ways to transition to smaller, more agile, more high-tech forces and they were looking to the American model. They were also re-evaluating their industrial capacities and economies.

But America’s dominance went well beyond the military. Suddenly the American model in management, finance, manufacturing, design and technology was the one to emulate. In the 1980s, Japan provided the model for management and manufacturing concepts and American industrial prowess seemed a thing of the past; now the United States led the way. America’s military dominance inspired respect – and fear – but there was also genuine admiration for American ways.

The dominance was also cultural. From my vantage point I could see countries Americanizing, opening up to American mores, freedom, culture and, most important, democracy – in short, civilization.

Russia and China similarly underwent a process of globalization, with Russia becoming more democratic and integrated into western economies and China, after initially crushing political democratization, altering itself economically and otherwise integrating into the global system. The most potent symbol of their integration was their hosting of the Olympic Games, the ultimate international event, in China in 2008 and in Russia in 2014.

Given American and Western predominance, there emerged after 1991 a global civilization of which nearly every country was a part. The United States was the leader politically economically, militarily and culturally. This civilization built on previous western predominance, especially by the English and European colonial empires. But whatever the differences of the past, a person could travel around the world, conduct his or her affairs in the common language of English, follow commonly accepted business and management practices, rely on roughly similar laws and protections and operate on generally equivalent cultural assumptions. It was a single global civilization and the capstone of the American century.

There were, however, some notable exceptions. In terms of states, these were Iraq, Iran and North Korea, which would not accept global means and mores. There was the failed state of Somalia, which had no government at all. And then there were what were called “non-state actors.” Since they expressed themselves through violence and tried to impose their will through terror, they were labeled “terrorists” and the chief one among them was Al Qaeda.

The rest against the West

Centuries are handy markers for history but eras often overlap arbitrary calendar dates. What could be called the “European century” lasted from 1814 or 1815 (the Battle of Waterloo or the Congress of Vienna) until 1914 (the outbreak of World War I). During that period Europe was largely at peace, its political order dominated the world and it spread its direct domination through colonization across Africa and Asia.

Following the cataclysm of World War I three ideologies contested for domination of the world: Communism, Fascism and Democracy. Fascism was defeated in 1945 and Communism ceased to be a global force with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, or seen alternatively, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.

The year 1991 was one of history’s most significant. The United States and its allies proved their overwhelming military predominance over virtually all other armed forces by their crushing victory in Iraq. The collapse of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact marked the end of Communism as an aggressive, universalist ideology. With these victories, 1991 ushered in a golden age – a true golden age in historical terms, equivalent to Athens’ or Rome’s – for both liberal Democracy and the United States as its foremost proponent. It effectively imposed a global civilization on the world.

That unchallenged supremacy lasted 10 years until Sept. 11, 2001, another pivotal day in world history.

With hindsight, we can now see that 9/11 was significant on a number of levels well beyond the shock and carnage of the attacks themselves.

• 9/11 proved – as it was intended to do – that the West was not invulnerable and could be attacked in its very heart.
• It proved that small groups of determined people had the means and the technology existed to inflict catastrophic damage on vastly larger and more powerful foes.
• 9/11 announced that Jihadism had arrived as a major force in opposition to global civilization.

Jihadism vs. Islam: It helps to differentiate between the violent extremism of forces like Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and similar groups and the more conventional states and Muslims who operate peacefully within the parameters of global civilization.

If there is any one iconic moment that symbolizes the difference between Jihadism and Islam, it was the instant during the attack on Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris on Jan.7, 2015 when one of the gunmen ran up on the sidewalk where French policeman Ahmed Merabet lay wounded and shot him in the head. Merabet was a Muslim working within existing structures, upholding secular law, order and civilization; the gunman was a Jihadist determined to bring it all down.

I will henceforth be using these terms, Jihadism and Islam, to differentiate between what I see as two different ideologies – indeed, between proponents and supporters of civilization and their enemies.

9/11 emboldened the parties outside the global civilization to begin a process of attacking it after realizing that their efforts could have an impact. Where they could not strike at its nerve centers they began a process of nibbling away at its edges.

The jihadists, mainly consisting of Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, Lashkar e Taiba and on a regional basis, the Taliban, are the most prominent of these enemies and have launched the most spectacular terrorist operations.

As a result of this, around the world countries have experienced their own 9/11s – horrific attacks that awaken and unite a population in horror. Some of the most notable, in addition to the first 9/11 attack, include:

• Indonesia, Oct. 12, 2002: Coordinated attacks on the island of Bali, Indonesia kill 202 people, many of them Australians, and galvanize opinion against Jihadism.
• Spain, March 11, 2004: Coordinated bombings on the Madrid subway serve to bring down the government and induce Spain to withdraw its contribution to the international forces in Afghanistan.
• Russia, Sept. 1 to 3, 2004: Chechen jihadists seize over 1,100 hostages in a school in Beslan, Russia and rig it with explosives. In the subsequent assault, the jihadists are killed, as are at least 385 others including students, teachers and assaulting forces. A massive rally against terrorism is held in Moscow and Russia takes legal and legislative actions to increase government ability to fight terrorism.
• Britain, July 7, 2005: Coordinated suicide attacks by British jihadists on transportation systems in London kill 52 people and injure over 700, sending a shock wave through the United Kingdom.
• Jordan, Nov. 9, 2005: Suicide bombings at three hotels in the Jordanian capital of Amman kill at least 60 people and wound many more. One target is a wedding party at the Radisson hotel. The attacks outrage Jordanians and the king and mass protests denounce Abu Musab al Zarqawi.
• India, Nov. 26-28, 2008: Elaborate bombings and shootings coordinated from Pakistan kill at least 164 people in hotels, a train station, a community house and a cinema, among other targets. It takes three days for Indian forces to kill all the jihadists; one is captured and subsequently executed.
• Canada, Oct. 22, 2014: A lone gunman inspired by the Islamic State kills a guard at Canada’s war memorial, then enters the Parliament building where he is killed by the sergeant at arms.
• France, Jan. 7, 2015: Two jihadists with a possible third accomplice attack the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris, France, killing 10 members of the editorial staff including the editor. The next day an accomplice seizes hostages at a kosher grocery in an effort to support two jihadist brothers, who are holed up in a printing plant. Police storm and kill the brothers and the gunman at the grocery. The following Sunday world leaders join in a march attended by an estimated 4 million people to express solidarity and oppose terrorism.

But in addition to spectacular terrorist attacks, global civilization is being attacked by its other outliers, who lack the means to assault it directly.

North Korea used cyber means to attack Sony Pictures Entertainment in opposition to the release of the movie “The Interview.” Clearly, cyberspace provided North Korea the means to reach right into the heart of corporate America and take action against a perceived enemy.

North Korea had employed kinetic terrorism in the past, most notably in Rangoon, Burma in 1983 when North Korean operatives attempted to assassinate South Korea’s president by bombing the site of a presidential wreath-laying. Three bombs killed South Korea’s deputy prime minister, foreign minister, economic planning minister and commerce and industry minister along with 14 South Korean government advisors, journalists and security officials. Only a traffic delay saved the South Korean president. However, since then, no similar terrorist acts had been publicly attributable to North Korea until the 2014 Sony hacking.

Iran and its regional proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, have engaged in kinetic terrorism against Israel and Iran’s other perceived enemies in the Middle East. To date, so far as is publicly known, Iran and its proxies have not attempted spectacular attacks in the heart of the United States or Europe.

Civilization is not without resources, resilience or determination to defend itself. In the wake of 9/11 the United States retaliated against the Afghan Taliban and overthrew their government, then invaded Iraq and conquered it, deposing Saddam Hussein, who was subsequently hanged. It attempted to bring democracy to both Afghanistan and Iraq, an effort that is as yet unresolved. Its efforts aided the overthrow of Libya’s Muammar Qadafi and made possible the institution of a still-fragile democracy there. Osama Bin Laden was hunted down and killed.

Whatever the vicissitudes of its geopolitics or its lapses from its better values, the global civilization’s higher principles remain attractive at the grassroots: The Arab Spring of 2010 to 2012 was an upheaval throughout the Middle East aimed at forcing repressive regimes to join the global civilization as secular democracies. Iran’s deeply contested election of 2009, also dubbed “the Persian awakening” was an expression of this longing for democracy amidst a theocracy.

When it comes to physical security in the face of terrorist threats, around the world security services have been beefed up, intensified protective measures adopted and security operations intensified. The threat to basic freedoms has resulted in public re-commitment to the core principles of the global civilization and a recognition of the nature of the threat.

As of this writing, despite the shock of the latest attack, civilization has pulled together, its breadth and globalism symbolized by the 40 heads of state who marched in the streets of Paris along with 4 million other people to show their revulsion and rejection of Jihadist terror and their commitment to the rule of law.

The Future of Civilization and the Four Freedoms

On Jan. 6, 1941, when Democracy was under assault from Fascism but the United States had not yet entered the war, President Franklin Roosevelt gave a remarkable State of the Union address to the United States Congress.

In it he rejected isolationism and called on the United States to prepare for conflict and ramp up defense production. He rejected both appeasement and surrender and warned of the consequences of a Fascist victory.

But he also put forward what the United States was fighting for. As he said at the time:

“In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.

“The first is freedom of speech and expression—everywhere in the world.

“The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way—everywhere in the world.

“The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants—everywhere in the world.

“The fourth is freedom from fear—which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor—anywhere in the world.”

To a striking degree and with remarkable consistency, the United States has pursued and advanced these Four Freedoms in the years since they were first put forward.

With the triumph of the United States against Fascism and Communism, these Four Freedoms became the central pillars of the global civilization that America led. They are as vital and relevant today as they were in 1941 – and they are again under assault as they were in 1941; only the enemies have changed.

So the balance of forces at the moment is this: While the global civilization resting on the Four Freedoms still remains supreme at the moment, its enemies are attempting to weaken or erode it.

There is a threat from state-based outliers, chiefly Iran and North Korea. Iran has its own universalist vision but this seems largely confined to Shiite populations in the Middle East. If it achieves a nuclear arsenal, implementing that vision could become dangerous to its regional neighbors. North Korea’s ideology is hermetic and unique to that country with virtually no appeal beyond it. Its chief danger lies in its threats to its neighbors, its nuclear arsenal and its past seemingly irrational violent acts.

Another threat is from Russian or Chinese territorial ambitions; however, both these states currently operate within the world political and economic order and can be counted as part of the global civilization – even given Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014.

But the chief, broad-based threat to all of civilization is Jihadism, which is putting forth its own universalist vision and is aggressively seeking global domination. In the Islamic State it has a self-proclaimed Caliph and a territorial core it is attempting to expand. It has affiliates outside its heartland, in places like Nigeria, Yemen, Afghanistan and Pakistan that actively advance its agenda. It is seeking to inspire a global movement that will express itself in terrorist acts aimed at weakening the global civilization’s structures and foundations, launched either by individuals or small, conspiratorial groups.

The Jihadist threat and its terrorism is likely to wax and wane over time. If the territorial Islamic State is destroyed there will still be remnants and individuals that will take up the cause.

How long could this conflict between Jihadism and civilization continue? History is a bit of a guide: Islam can be counted as beginning with the hijra in the year 622 of the Common Era. Its initial phase can be said to have ended with the official abolition of the caliphate in 1924 – 1,302 years. During that time, the realm of Islam clashed with its neighbors at different times and places, involving different powers, kingdoms and realms.

So it is not unrealistic to foresee at least another thousand years of conflict as Jihadism attempts to impose its will on the world and the secular global civilization resists.

Aside from its outside threats, the chief danger to the global civilization is that it will dissolve in what is in effect a civil war, much as World War I was an internal conflict among European powers that began the end of European world domination. Alternatively, it could break apart peacefully in numerous pieces so different from each other that they are no longer sufficiently common to constitute a single civilization.

Still another factor could be the rise of a completely new faith or ideology, currently unknown and unforeseeable, which upends all current calculations. This is not far-fetched: both Christianity and Islam were such upstart faiths. More recently, the nineteenth century saw the rise of the Mormon and Taiping faiths and the formulation of Communism. Fascism appeared in the twentieth century.

However, the global civilization currently seems strong and set to endure, with more centripetal forces than centrifugal. What is more, its higher principles, as best expressed as the Four Freedoms, remain attractive, inspiring and worthy of defending. As can be seen in France today, when these freedoms are threatened, civilized people gain new understanding of their value and come together to reaffirm them.

Ultimately, what has to be remembered is that people are the basis of all empires, movements, ideologies and religions. What inspires people and animates them also inspires and animates all that they create, whether these are ideas, faiths, dreams, physical monuments or civilizations.

For much of the past two centuries, belief in democracy and after 1941 the Four Freedoms were enough to inspire people to persevere through wars and conflicts, to risk their lives while advancing an agenda and spreading a message they believed would bring a better, freer future to themselves, their posterity and the world.

The alternatives have offered nothing but blood, tyranny and oppression. That remains the case today.

As long as people are inspired by the principles of this global civilization, as long as they see it being of value, as long as it presents the best alternative for providing for their lives and happiness and as long as people are willing to fight and sacrifice to preserve it, it should endure even in the face of what looks to be a very long, trying and difficult time ahead.