Military Review

Terrorism of the XXI century. About how unique this phenomenon

28
Terrorism of the XXI century. About how unique this phenomenon



“Terrorism” is the word that everyone, probably, heard in the 21st century.

Many will say that it is an ideology or a policy based on intimidation and intimidation. This is partly true, but this is only partly. In the past, wanting to change foreign or domestic policy, the historical course of events or achieving their goals, terrorists directed their attacks, first of all, against specific individuals, for example, kings ( история Russia is very rich in such examples) or groups of individuals, but today the situation has changed dramatically.

XNUMXst century terrorism is one of many ways (or tools) of warfare. It is no different from the "information war", "guerrilla warfare", "economic warfare" or "tank offensive" (there are many other ways to wage war). The task in any war is to win (regardless of whether it is “cold” or “hot”), and if an army operation (for example, tank offensive) provides for the seizure of new territories, then terrorism ensures the discrediting of power, fear and panic in the ranks of the enemy.

In order to clarify this, we will have to disengage from different types of terrorism - for example, religious, political, social, etc., from different terror organizers - ISIS, People’s Militia, Base and others, from social groups that organize and pretend it life and so on. We need to treat terrorism as a "historical phenomenon", which is characterized by certain features and which has its own historical development.

In any war there are two types of goals: strategic and tactical. Strategic - final goals, for example, victory in war, change of power, change of economic markets, etc. Tactical targets are local or intermediate targets, such as seizing a city, carrying out some kind of operation, or discrediting a government.

Terrorism, in its essence, pursues only tactical goals: to discredit power, to show its inaction, to sow fear and panic, etc.

For these purposes, respectively, the greatest damage may be caused by a terrorist act in the most crowded or “painful” place for any society (hospitals, schools, churches, kindergartens, subways, etc.).

If any terrorist attack succeeds in any society, a period of fear begins. During this period, people are afraid to leave their homes, use public transport, appear at public events, and so on. It is at such moments in society that the thought of the inaction of the authorities appears very slowly and smoothly, and perhaps even worse - of the involvement of the authorities in terrorist acts, and these are already very scary thoughts and ideas, but this is a different matter ...

It should be noted that the tactical and strategic results of terrorist acts may be unexpected for their organizers and perpetrators.

So, for example, after the September 11 2001 terrorist attack (Twin Towers), if we ignore emotions, we can see that the panic that arose as a public reaction developed into a public desire for revenge (partly due to the huge role of the American media, which professionally "The topic and" wound up "the nation, as if preparing it for the upcoming war), and the desire for revenge grew into public support for the war between the United States and Iraq. Regardless of what goals the terrorists were pursuing, the panic and desire of American society to avenge became the tactical outcome of this terrorist act, and the strategic outcome was the invasion of Iraq.

Or the 3 attack of April 2017 of the year in the St. Petersburg metro instantly not only naturally switched the informational agenda of those days from the current “problem of the transport system Plato” to “the problem of terrorism as the current enemy of the country”, but also actively discussed in society “the meaning of war in Syria ”due to the professional work of the competent media just fell away - his decision became obvious. There are a lot of similar examples in history.

But the main thing is that any terrorist attack is a tactical step towards accomplishing a strategic task.

Where do terrorist attacks occur most often? The answer to this question lies in the "dry" statistics.
For example, in 2014, terrorist attacks were the richest (or “fraught”) Iraq (15864 times), Pakistan (9708 times), Afghanistan (7641 times), India (6023 times), the Philippines and Thailand (respectively 2872 and 2848 times ). (For reference: according to official data, an 2014 terrorist attack took place in Russia in 1753).

There are several common elements that unite these countries. The most important is weak central authority. It is because of a weak central government that law enforcement forces are not able to effectively counter terrorist threats, simply because, like power, law enforcement forces are weak. In such regions, the population has lost all hope of any political and social change. Accordingly, "frozen" or missing completely social elevators. But the main thing is that in these countries (read the regions), various political structures, understanding the weakness of the center, begin to fight for power, prepare revolutions, set people off in civil clashes and wars, shaking the already fragile life of society, thereby creating the soil for terrorism (including the emergence of testing grounds for terrorist methods and practices, the selection of people). Terrorism is not only and not so much as a tool to achieve local tactical goals, but also as a method of waging strategic wars by larger players.

In connection with this, the “geo-referencing” of the attack is often determined today by “non-local” factors and causes.

For a particular terrorist, there is no difference in where the terrorist act is committed - in Baghdad or Paris. The attacks in Baghdad occur more often due to their simpler implementation, including due to the reasons mentioned above. But the world community will perceive the terrorist attack in Europe or in America (in the cultural, economic centers of the world) much more painfully.

More painful, not only because everyone is accustomed to the fact that terrorist attacks regularly occur in the Middle East or because there is a constant war in the “hot regions”, and the terrorist attack in Paris is a corresponding shock to the society accustomed to “peace.”

As mentioned above, the task of any terrorist act is to “sow” panic and fear, mistrust of the ability of the authorities to preserve the foundations of society, and panic and fear are best “sown” in the places most covered by the media. The situation is extremely simple: the goal of the attack is not in the number of victims, but in the subsequent reaction of the population, but in the 21st century the subsequent reaction is provided by the media.

And here it is enough to give just one comparative example, which simply shows the big picture:

At the beginning of 2015, there were many terrorist attacks in the world (including a considerable number of victims), but two of them are very revealing. The first occurred on January 7 in Paris, when they attacked the editorial board of “Charlie Hebdo” (I do not condone the editorial office at all, moreover, I believe that they themselves “played out”), that day 12 people died. The scale of the reaction of France and the world community (which is easiest to follow on avatars in social networks and media responses) was enormous. The second example occurred two months later - 18 March, then the Bardo Museum in Tunisia was undermined, more than 20 people died (including children), but the response was much, much less, the main reason for which is the geographical reference of the place (here you can , start a conversation about the European mentality and attitudes towards former colonies, but this is not about it now ...)

It should be understood that the terrorism of the XIX and XXI centuries is completely different phenomena. (Let us put down the twentieth century for “theoretical purity” - the century of world wars and their consequences; the century which, in the sense of the concept we are discussing, has split into three components: the continuation of the too long XIX century, the time of world wars and human lawlessness and too early beginning of the XXI century). In the 19th century, all the attacks were directed at certain people; they were directed towards society as a whole indirectly - by the desire to eliminate this or that person, to change the policy or the course of history. Today, with the same strategic goals, it is not to kill as many people or a specific person as possible, but to scare as much as possible.

The most important feature of terrorism of the 21st century is its inclusion in other political and economic problems. Rather, it is these multidimensional problems that give rise to terrorism. For example, in the Syrian problem of ISIS (forbidden in the Russian Federation), not being able to win the war against a stronger opponent and regular armies, is forced (not even to win, but to survive for ISIL) to resort to the “doctrine of terrorism” so that, sowing fear and creating a sense of danger, to introduce into society the thoughts of futility and the danger of war in Syria. Simply put - to force the countries participating in the anti-IGIL coalition (this is the author’s term, under which all countries somehow fighting ISIS) are united by the hands of their peoples to end the campaign in Syria.

By the way, for this, ISIL has a very “fertile ground”, because very few governments of any countries were able to intelligibly explain to their citizens, “why they climbed there”.

Also, precisely because of ISIS, international terrorism was finally Islamized in the minds of people. And objectively: the majority of terrorists 2014-17. - these are Muslims, for which there is a logical explanation - ISIS declares itself to be an Islamic state.

Another feature of terrorism is the overall scale. No matter how terrible it may sound, you can never feel completely safe from terrorist acts. The "geography of terrorism" is very extensive, ranging from "obvious countries" (Iraq, Libya, Israel) and ending with the "safest" - USA, United Kingdom

In addition, it is worth paying attention to the fact that terrorism has become a “professional” phenomenon in the 21st century. In the XIX century, no one trained terrorists on purpose, just there was no method for preparing them, both psychological and military (in terms of preparing equipment and developing combat skills of fighters). History knows a lot of examples of failed attacks precisely because of poor preparation. Today, terrorism has become the “lot” of professionals, there are already not just “manuals” for creating weapons, but also camps and fighter training centers. Today, any terrorist goes through not only ideological training, but also military training — almost every terrorist knows how to make explosive devices from improvised means.

There is a very simple explanation for this - it is much more difficult to smuggle a “professional” explosive device from a place of manufacture to a place of use, rather than “assemble” yours on the spot.

But as part of the "professionalization" there is another process - simplification. If we compare the 2014-2017 attacks with similar 2001-2004 events, we see that the attacks have become more primitive. That is, it is much more difficult to blow up a house on Dubrovka or “crash” two planes into two skyscrapers than to carry a homemade bomb in the subway.

Just think about how much time and effort, money “spent” on preparing for September 11: to recruit people, train them and prepare them psychologically, teach them to fly planes, think up plans, use weapons, etc. It’s all very, very difficult, it’s a multi-level job requiring many people.

Today, terrorist acts have become "more primitive." This is due to two reasons: firstly, today it is necessary to “make” as many terrorist acts as possible, and secondly, as the complexity increases, the danger of “interception” by special services increases. After all, it is much easier for special services to prevent a “complex” terrorist attack than a “simple” one.

Today, the world, in counteracting terrorism, reacts to what has happened and prevents what is being prepared, and does not deal with the problem together.

The main work being done today is the work of the special services to introduce agents, isolate the most radical elements, control the diasporas and ghettos, strengthen the “external security” (for example, the framework of the metro or tighten the security rules at airports) and so on. But all this only reduces the number of terrorist attacks, and does not reduce them to "no." Of course, this is a necessary work, but this struggle is not with the causes, but with the symptoms - to reduce casualties and damage.

Also, one more point must be added to this struggle, no matter how cynical it may sound - the reaction of the media. As has been said so many times, one of the main tasks of any terrorist act is panic and fear, and in the 21st century, panic and fear are created by the media. By the way, that is why terrorism of the past became terrorism in today's understanding - it appeared with the advent of today's media. Without media reactions, its global essence disappears.

Accordingly, it is necessary to reduce the "response" in the media about the terrorist attacks that have occurred, measuring the size of the terrorist attack with the magnitude of its informational consequences, for which the attack was carried out.

Such steps in order to achieve the most "sonorous" effect will force terrorists to prepare larger and "complex" operations, which will require huge resources and funds. We repeat once again that at the present stage of development of the special services, it is much easier to prevent complex terrorist acts, partly because the “probability of error” and failure in preparation are much higher.

Summarize. In the fight against the "roots" of terrorism, and not with the "germs" of these roots, it is necessary to understand the following:

First, terrorism is the brainchild of problems that have arisen in both the global world and in different regions, and not an independent global problem.

Secondly, terrorism is a means and a tool, not an ideology or a policy.

Thirdly, modern media, in the form in which they exist today and affect the public consciousness, are unconscious (always hopefully!) Accomplices of terrorism in the context of helping to solve its main tasks - fear, panic and paralysis of society.

Awareness of these very simple truths lying on the surface may push experts and those in power to change the strategy of combating terrorism as a phenomenon of modernity. Which, of course, does not reduce the acuteness of the tactical struggle with specific terrorists.
Author:
Photos used:
http://baytulhikma.huzur.ru/islam_v_mire/15-lucsih-rabot-mezdunarodnogo-konkursa-karikatur-na-igil/
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 11 November 2017 07: 34 New
    +2
    ... I would add a fourth point: terrorism has no and will never have a future ... and its final is logical - there is no right to exist ... angry
    1. stas
      stas 11 November 2017 13: 02 New
      +3
      You have not noticed that terrorism is flourishing in the Islamic world. The Qur'an recognizes death in the destruction of the infidels (who are not Muslims), the road to paradise.
      And debt we will talenichat.
      1. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 12 November 2017 02: 56 New
        +2
        Quote: stas
        You have not noticed that terrorism is flourishing in the Islamic world. The Qur'an recognizes death in the destruction of the infidels (who are not Muslims), the road to paradise.
        And debt we will talenichat.

        Death during jihad. Even if you had an accident while in a wagon train. About killing infidels - you can kill only if it is an adult man who has not laid down his arms.
        This is according to the Qur'an.
    2. ProkletyiPirat
      ProkletyiPirat 12 November 2017 01: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: aszzz888
      terrorism has no and will never have a future ... and its ending is logical - there is no right to exist ... angry

      It is foolish to think so, terrorism has been, is, and will be, always. It's just that most couchs think that the goal of terrorism is fear. But in reality this is not a goal, but a means! And the goals may be different. For example, everyone laughs over amers "fools, they spent a bunch of grandmas on the war, but did not get any benefits." And at the same time, these same people are surprised: “Everyone obeys the Amers, and they don’t blame anything against them! And the Americans are in all their cracks!”, “The shoes are licking to Amers!” And after all, it doesn’t reach these people that the USA are waging a terrorist war against many other states, and the main means are FEAR, FEAR at the top of the administrative structures, or they will simply attack the United Nations by showing white tubes "divan", or they will arrange a revolution, or they will make an order. or they’ll incite neighbors, but in the end they’ll throw out the dirt in the media, and if it’s not there, they will put pressure on the media and cry your reputation, and such options of bullying a wagon and a small cart ...
  2. Settlement Oparyshev
    Settlement Oparyshev 11 November 2017 07: 37 New
    0
    The purposeful vanity of our enemies yields results. New terror does not need money, they need an obsessive bestial idea. For its sake, terror does not value anyone’s life. And ordinary people still run unarmed through the streets.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 11 November 2017 07: 39 New
    +5
    Interestingly, when the "ghost of communism" stopped roaming the world .. terrorism grew and grew stronger, and any state that Uncle Sam and his comrades do not like can fall into this term ... An example is Libya, Syria ..
  4. aybolyt678
    aybolyt678 11 November 2017 08: 13 New
    +2
    21st century terrorism is an alternative to nuclear weapons. The author did not indicate how many attacks occurred on the territory of the main sponsor of terrorism, America. Certainly much less than for example in Russia, and until a response measure against terrorism is developed, this process will gain momentum.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 11 November 2017 12: 44 New
      +3
      Quote: aybolyt678
      and until a counter-terrorism response is developed, this process will gain momentum.

      I remember reading it in one book, well, I really liked it:
      In general, everything was simple: firstly, all hostages, from infants to the elderly, were immediately considered drafted into military service, which immediately removed many legal problems. And secondly, they simplified legislation as much as possible. So, if the terrorists who seized the hostages surrendered at the first request, they would definitely have a life sentence. Two years, rarely three, in uranium mines, where the conditions were such that those who got there envied the dead. Then - death, not the most pleasant, but from completely natural causes.
         If you had to storm - then death, even a trial was not required. And while dying, the terrorists envied those who ended up in the mines. If at the same time the hostages or one of the participants in the special operation died - well, then not only the performers, but their entire organization died. Without exception, even if it required a lot of time and money. And finally, if it turned out that, for example, torture was applied to the hostages, the members of the terrorist families were dying. Cruel Fearfully. Effectively.
      (c) "Exiles", M. Mikheev
  5. Cat Marquis
    Cat Marquis 11 November 2017 08: 26 New
    +9
    The author bashfully "silenced" the main reason for organized terrorism: "the monstrous stratification of society into rich and poor, the stratification of society into" castes ", the growing exploitation of the" power castes "of the rest of the people, the decline in the income of the majority of the population, the imposition of laws and regulations lobbied by the" rich ", and the absence or the termination of the work of “social elevators” for ordinary people, etc. All this can be called one sentence: the formed oligarchic-caste regimes in the main developed states generally ceased to listen to ordinary people, began to regard them as a stupid “electorate” without caring about them desires, aspirations, hopes, etc. Unfortunately, terrorist communities are not just “gangs” of renegades, as you might think from the author’s article, they are organizations built like “brotherhoods,” where everyone is obliged to take care of everyone and “brotherhood” takes care of It’s this “friendly” side of terrorist organizations that shows “concern” for individual members of the organization and in contrast to the complete neglect of civil society by its members, and is the most attractive in terrorism. People in terrorist organizations seek, first of all, communication with like-minded people, secondly, participation in their destiny, and thirdly, a lever of influence on society in order for this society to be reckoned with. Everything is not at all so simple with terrorism, but in order to really fight it, we must honestly point out its real reasons, but this is precisely what no one is going to do.
    1. Baydak
      11 November 2017 10: 09 New
      +1
      Quote: Marquis Cat
      essence: class inequality = the main cause of terrorism.

      I completely disagree. Class inequality (as the founding fathers of the great idea said) generates social tension, and soc. "brings" to the surface people and organizations that practice terrorism, as one of the instruments of their struggle.
      So this is only an indirect reason ...
    2. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 11 November 2017 10: 55 New
      0
      Quote: Cat Marquis

      1
      Cat Marquis Today, 08:26
      The author bashfully "shut up" the main reason for organized terrorism: "the monstrous stratification of society into rich and poor, the stratification of society into" castes ", the growing exploitation of the" power castes "of the rest of the people, the decline in incomes of the majority of the population, nasa

      The main reason is the overpopulation of the Earth. But we must remember that it is not the strongest that survives, but capable of adaptation
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 11 November 2017 12: 23 New
        +1
        The main reason is the overpopulation of the Earth.

        have the Narodnaya Volya killed Tsar Alexander 2 due to the overpopulation of the Earth?
        1. aybolyt678
          aybolyt678 11 November 2017 12: 32 New
          +1
          Quote: glory1974
          have the Narodnaya Volya killed Tsar Alexander 2 due to the overpopulation of the Earth?

          Maybe due to the inability to social adaptation?
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 11 November 2017 12: 56 New
            +1
            Maybe due to the inability to social adaptation?

            Well, you can bring anything under it.
            1. aybolyt678
              aybolyt678 12 November 2017 21: 49 New
              0
              Quote: glory1974
              Well, you can bring anything under it.

              in general, the question is incorrect ... the murder of the king is a political act. This is not terrorism where innocent and ignorant people are killed. Surely the king was guarded, armed. And terrorism kills mostly unarmed people. Let's start with this.
              1. Glory1974
                Glory1974 13 November 2017 11: 33 New
                +1
                the murder of the king is a political act. This is not terrorism where innocent and ignorant people are killed.

                The most terrorist one. There are many definitions of terrorism, but we can definitely say that murder with the aim of changing power is a terrorist act
                And terrorism kills mostly unarmed people. Let's start with this.

                terrorism kills any people. If an explosion of a car bomb occurred near a military unit, and it was directed against military personnel, it will not cease to be a terrorist act.
                1. aybolyt678
                  aybolyt678 13 November 2017 20: 00 New
                  0
                  on the other hand, the tsar knows that they can commit an attempt on him, or for example poison him, and this is always necessary for someone, but to blow up the school ??? somewhere there should be a line I can not formulate.
      2. Antianglosax
        Antianglosax 13 November 2017 20: 07 New
        +1
        Quote: aybolyt678
        The main reason is the overpopulation of the Earth. But we must remember that it is not the strongest that survives, but capable of adaptation

        If you use the brains as intended and have minimal knowledge of mathematics, it becomes obvious that the problem of overpopulation is sucked out of ... nothing.
        The main reason is the globalists and their tool is omerzikosia. How many citizens have mattresses decapitated protesters? If there was a will, several large countries, united, in a couple of weeks would have erased all the barmales in ruin. But the mattress is against it, it needs chaos around the world and a quiet backwater in the USG itself for the world's dough. Although it is already crystal clear that the Anglo-Zionists and American animals will not succeed, and it will become worse and worse. It is a pity our bosses do not want to push the Americans a little to the abyss, although they could have done it.
    3. Ajevgenij
      Ajevgenij 11 November 2017 19: 49 New
      +1
      Totally agree
    4. Arkady Gaidar
      Arkady Gaidar 13 November 2017 13: 32 New
      0
      Such a "monstrous stratification of society" has always been. And terrorism in its modern form has arisen only now. Although, judging by the logic you expressed, the biggest terrorism should have arisen in a slave society. Or maybe terrorism is one of the forms of the struggle for supremacy in society? And then it is clear why he is so tightly attached to ideology.
      The rights of citizens, rulers always neglected! Today, in view of the powerful development of the media and communication, the rights of people are neglected less. And terrorism has arisen right now, in the most powerful form. Maybe this is beneficial to someone? And why do such levers of influence on power and society arise?))
  6. Glory1974
    Glory1974 11 November 2017 12: 27 New
    +2
    It must be understood that terrorism of the 19th and 21st centuries is completely different phenomena.

    The only thesis I agree with. If in the 19 century terrorist acts were carried out against officials, in 21 it was exclusively against ordinary people. Which does not solve anything, but under this brand you can carry out any indecency.
    It seems that the leaders agreed not to touch each other.
  7. Earnest
    Earnest 11 November 2017 12: 56 New
    +1
    ... For reference: in Russia in 2014, according to official data, the 1753 terrorist attack took place ...

    After this phrase, professionals who frown, who with a smile, but close the graphomaniac delirium of an amateur. Afftir (well, I couldn’t distort this word more strongly regarding the inventor of this crap!) !! There is such a National Anti-Terrorism Committee, so on its website there is a tab "Anti-Terrorism for Children" http://nac.gov.ru/antiterrorizm-detyam.html. To you there, and immediately! After 10 years of study, you can write your article again, it will be instead of an exam.
  8. Earnest
    Earnest 11 November 2017 13: 11 New
    +1
    ... For reference: in Russia in 2014, according to official data, the 1753 terrorist attack took place ...

    for 2014 in Russia there were no terrorist attacks at all, there were 70 crimes of a terrorist nature, of which 4 in the form of an attack (according to 2 in Dagestan and Chechnya). 74 counter-terrorism operations were carried out, during which 462 offender was detained or destroyed. Killed military personnel, law enforcement officials and civilians - 57 people .. Moreover, according to the results of 2014, the decree of the President of Russia from 2004 of the year on the creation of operational management groups in the southern regions, which were created in order to prevent large stocks! Choose sources of information more carefully and do not hesitate to look for consultants among those who are not "former", this site is not a problem soldier
    1. Baydak
      11 November 2017 14: 36 New
      +1
      there is a typo not "in 2014 ....", but "on 2014 ....".
      s - care
      https://ria.ru/infografika/20160122/1363384811.ht
      ml

      PS. At first I wanted to answer in detail, and then re-read the comment, thought and decided that it was not worth it ...
  9. Xscorpion
    Xscorpion 11 November 2017 13: 44 New
    +4
    Terrorism, as one of the means of warfare is correctly noted, differs from sabotage in that the country may not officially conduct hostilities. And terrorists are essentially the same saboteurs who have undergone similar training, the difference is that they can officially be in the service of the government, disguised as the local population, but they can also be recruited by special services in the ranks of the local opposition. A terrorist, a saboteur, partisans, there is no difference what to call them. Our partisans in the Second World War were the same terrorists in the eyes of the Germans. So all the ideologies of terrorism are just a cover for the actions of the special services, but everything is simple, either loot or power. In any country in the world where there are oppositions that disagree with the government’s course, there is a basis for terrorism, and there will be people abroad, who want to use it to their advantage.
    1. Arkady Gaidar
      Arkady Gaidar 12 November 2017 22: 39 New
      0
      In all countries there are those who disagree with the government. That’s why “human rights” grants, various oppositions, “freedoms” and “echoes of Moscow” are paid. The principle is simple: "The worse they have, the more profits we have!" People argue among themselves, for some reason forgetting to think about puppeteers))
    2. Glory1974
      Glory1974 13 November 2017 11: 39 New
      0
      Terrorist, saboteur, partisan, there is no particular difference in what they are called.

      Huge difference. And the Geneva Conventions say who is called.
      Our partisans in the Second World War in the eyes of the Germans were the same terrorists.

      According to the rules of warfare, which the Fritz did not observe, the Wehrmacht soldiers themselves were the terrorists, who killed civilians - non-combatants, in order to intimidate the civilian population.
      In any country in the world where there are oppositions that do not agree with the government’s course, there is a basis for terrorism, and there will be people abroad who want to use it in their interests.

      Here I agree.
  10. Arkady Gaidar
    Arkady Gaidar 12 November 2017 19: 13 New
    +2
    The author forgot to indicate that any terrorist attack is a means to an end. The first of which is intimidation of the population, with the aim of inducing people to obediently obey.
    It will not work to make the media talk less about terrorist attacks. For this is one of the ways to manipulate the consciousness of the inhabitants. The author himself points out that after the explosion in St. Petersburg, society immediately forgot about both Plato and reflections on the need for war in Syria. Among the politicians manipulating the masses of people, there are no fools. Everything is calculated there with a distant eye and often several birds with one stone are killed at once)))
    And the most important thing is forgotten, war is the engine of the modern economy. And above all, military orders. Who will buy weapons if nothing is threatening ?! In addition, if in 19 and until the middle of the 20-th century, industrialized countries did not have a great need to search for markets, because their equipment was in demand and the competition was low. From the middle of the 20 and in the 21 centuries, many countries themselves can produce most of the goods and services known in the modern world. And producing at home is often cheaper. As a result, a developed cap. countries face a long crisis, falling living standards, job cuts, and most importantly, as a result, loss of leadership and a leading civilizational role. And as a result, a strong decline in income. But this, the leading capitalists cannot allow it! Recalling Marx’s “Capital”: “There is no crime that the capitalists will not commit for the sake of profit in 300%!” (it seems he took the thesis from some economist, as an example).
    Conclusion: This is how capitalism works! He needs something and somewhere to constantly collapse. There was instability in many regions. To offer your loans and products. And terrorism is only a means to an end. One of many. The casket just opens))