Seven Lessons from the Nice Attack

Danielle Pletka said very well what I was thinking in the wake of last evening’s horrendous attack in Nice, France. A few additional thoughts, however, that must be part of the policy conversation in its aftermath:

Immigration has long fueled American revitalization, but immigration absent shared values is a recipe for destruction, as so many in Europe have begun to understand.

• Citizenship matters. Once upon a time, national identity signaled acceptance of a set of values. To be an American meant to embrace the ideas enshrined in the constitution, and notions of freedom, individual liberty, and tolerance the Founding Fathers set forth in reaction to the laws of the lands from which so many Americans had fled. Today, however, we are caught in a muddle of cultural equivalence and ghettoization. Teachers deconstruct the canon, and leave it fragmented in the name of multiculturalism. What once was celebrated as a melting pot is now condemned as cultural appropriation. Immigration has long fueled American revitalization, but immigration absent shared values is a recipe for destruction, as so many in Europe have begun to understand.

The French flag AT half-mast at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, July 15, 2016. REUTERS/Philippe Wojazer.

• Is terrorism ever permissible? The answer to this, of course, should be no. But, the international community continues to stumble over the question, hence its inability to even define terror. Diplomats and journalists might be shocked that a madman would mow down upwards of 80 people with a truck, but terror by vehicle is something which Palestinian terrorists have employed against Israelis for more than a year. Many in Europe (and in our own State Department) turned a blind eye to such attacks and some even seemed to justify them in the political grievances which Palestinians hold. But if there is any lesson which the West should take, it is that when terror tactics—car bombings, kidnappings, beheadings, stabbings—are justified in one place be it in Israel or Iraq, they will eventually spread.

• “It’s the ideology, stupid.” Diplomats often view terror through the lens of grievance. That can be comforting, because it means that a diplomatic formula of concessions and compromises can resolve the problem. University of Chicago academic Robert Pape gave this idea sustenance when he argued that occupation, not Islamism, drove suicide bombings. He may have massaged his numbers though to achieve his desired conclusion and, like all good political scientists, he also sought to identify a single variable to explain the world.

The fact of the matter is that ideology tends to be the motivating factor for Islamist terrorists. Don’t trust me? Just look at the writings of Osama bin Laden, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Hassan Nasrallah, Khalid Meshaal, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and others. They might cite grievances, but voiced grievances are seldom consistent; rather, they are used to sell the ideology behind their violence.

• Who defines religion? “The Islamic State is neither Islamic nor a state,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her successor John Kerry have both argued. Both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have bent over backwards to describe Islam as a religion of peace. At their core, however, religions are open to interpretation. There are peaceful interpretations, and there are interpretations that permit or encourage violence.

From a policy practitioner standpoint, religion is simply what its adherents believe it to be.

Ultimately, US policymakers should avoid the distraction of advocacy organizations who want to whitewash reality or care more about salvaging reputations. From a policy practitioner standpoint, religion is simply what its adherents believe it to be. If an Islamist seeks to kill innocents in the name of God, it’s a waste of time to argue about whether or not they understand their faith.

Regardless, it’s not the job of the secretary of state or president to determine what true Islam is or is not (or, for that matter, what Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, or Hinduism are). There is an irony that in the Middle East, people talk openly about the terror problem within Islam; they recognize it as a battle of interpretation. To waste time on political correctness is to cost lives.

• Don’t simply defend against the last attack. Successful counterterrorism requires the ability to pivot on a dime. Our bureaucracy can’t even pivot on a mountain, let alone a boulder. The Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the intelligence community too often seek to defend against the last terrorist attack rather than the next one. The bureaucracy resists if not suffocates outside-the-box thinking. Unfortunately, the Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL, Daesh) and other groups celebrate it.

• There are no “lone wolves” any longer. Once upon a time, it was useful to talk about lone wolves, individuals who would attack without any institutional support. Those people no longer exist, thanks to the internet and online radicalization. Al Qaeda had “Inspire Magazine,” and ISIS has “Dabiq.” Both are how-to guides for carnage. Every lone wolf now has a pack behind them.

• We are a nation of soft targets. Russia had the siege of the school in Beslan, and France has had a truck mowing down men, women, and children at Bastille Day celebrations. Israel has had its buses and shopping malls attacked. It can happen here, but so long as we are reactive instead of being proactive, we are guaranteeing carnage.