Context:
Providing military support increases a country’s chance of retaliatory terror attacks.
In the News:
“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Sir Isaac Newton called it his Third Law of Motion. The CIA calls it “blowback.”
[blockquote author=”Mehdi Hasan” style=”1″]You cannot bomb, kill, invade, occupy, and torture, and then expect no pushback, no retaliation, no blowback. Nor can you cynically arm or fund extremist groups to fight your “official enemy” and then assume those extremist groups won’t one day turn on you or your allies.[/blockquote]
In a new series by The Intercept, Mehdi Hasan examines key examples of blowback in greater detail — beginning with the issue of CIA drone strikes — to explore how foreign policy decisions by the U.S. and its allies often produce terrorist blowback and so-called unintended consequences.
Peace Science Insights
- Deployment of troops to another country increases the chance of attacks from terror organizations from that country.
- Weapons exports to another country increase the chance of attacks from terror organizations from that country.
- 95% of all suicide terrorist attacks are conducted to encourage foreign occupiers to leave the terrorist’s home country.
Considering the increased vulnerability of both deployed troops and citizens at home, governments should take this research into account when deciding whether to provide military support. Moreover, this research has the potential to shift narratives and action away from a militaristic response to terrorism, toward the proven nonviolent alternatives of non-military intervention.
References:
Peace Science Digest Vol. 1, Issue 6: “Military Support and an Increased Vulnerability to Terrorist Attacks”.
BLOWBACK: HOW U.S. DRONES, COUPS, AND INVASIONS JUST CREATE MORE VIOLENCE. By Mehdi Hasan for The Intercept. 22 Jan. 2018. f
