Paris is another tragedy in a long line of them, stretching back to 9/11 say some, still further back say others.
In a complex web of cause(s) and effect(s), 2 broad sets of factors have led to Paris and the comparable, almost daily, but somewhat unnoticed tragedies in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere (it's hard to know where to stop the list of countries).
I: Outsider induced environment
The Crusades started it all if you believe the Jihadists (I dislike the term "Islamist", linguistically it falls short). The true origin is a little more recent.
Colonial lines in the sand
(Source: BBC)
Most of the borders in the Middle East were literally drawn with a ruler and pencil in 1916 by British and French government representatives Mark Sykes and Francois Georges-Picot (their signatures above). Not taking proper account of local wishes or realities on the ground, it has set the geopolitical framework and the resentful tone for subsequent events leading up to today (for a full history of the Middle East's borders, see www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-25299553). War on "terror"
Aside from the term being an affront to grammar, and leaving aside the decade lead-up to September 11, 2001, the result of the actions of mainly the US, but others too, can be seen clearly in 2015 and the rise of ISIS.
(Source: NBC)
It is obvious when outlined briefly:
Iraq, nothing to do with 9/11, invaded.
With little thought given to the problems created by the artificial borders, they quickly resurface when "liberators" seen as an occupying power.
Protests/ rebellion in many Arab nations, turns sour in Syria when not supported in same way as those in Libya.
ISIS rises inside the cross-border vacuum created in Iraq and Syria.
Bombs not boots
How does knowing the consequences of the Iraq and Syria decisions, and wishing something different had been done help us now? Not much in the immediate future.
The various militaries involved are painted into a corner: the non-ISIS side somewhat relies on their aerial support to make gains, having been overrun before this help arrived.
It would however be a toxic error to send in ground forces. The locals must be helped to win, not have all their fighting done for them and very recent history repeat itself. We'd all be back where we started.
One lesser known aim of ISIS is to draw "crusaders" into a kind of Armageddon-style showdown. While the macho instinct might be to give them exactly that with our superior technology, recent history should have taught us that solving one problem in the Middle East creates a bigger, unforeseen one. Unforeseen by those making the key decisions.
II: Problems at the source
The second set of aspects concerns those that outsiders are not responsible for, from lack of economic opportunity to the doctrine of Jihadism/ extreme literalism itself.
Filling the void
Another existing vacuum is a lack of economic opportunity for a lot of restless young men. It is far easier to suspend critical judgement when feeling desperate. Along comes an individual or group talking in determined, strident tones (other than that of whichever dictator or perhaps toothless leader), and it has a Munich beer hall effect.
Alienated 2nd generation
There's probably nothing that can be done by Europeans and others about the disaffected youth in the Middle East itself. However, there is an opportunity to have a rethink within those western countries themselves. A significant source of recruits for ISIS, this supply needs cutting off. Physically stopping them is just treating the symptoms.
People far smarter than this writer need to be listened to by those in authority about what to do to end the marginalization of Europe and North America's second generation of youth of Middle Eastern background (and others).
Weaponized Love
The sadistic cruelty on display, in a sense mesmerizing, and reactions to it, hides some of the true aims of ISIS.
In creating its caliphate and bringing about the above mentioned showdown, the intention is to create an "us and them" feeling among younger Muslims of the west. Furthermore, the same feeling among others towards them is desired, to enable the pushing younger Muslims into the arms of ISIS (the Syrian passport found on the body of one of the Paris attackers seeming suspicious to many, for example).
The fact that many are running away from Syria to "mix with Christians, Liberals and Atheists" is also deeply upsetting to ISIS.
It follows then that continuing to work at integration and being humanitarian to those seeking refuge is what defeat looks like to it. While it might ordinarily sound naive and even soppy, it could just be that love is the most potent weapon against them.
The Right is Wrong
There is a problem with perception on both the right and left. There's been a tendency on the right towards prejudice expressed through a willingness to believe misinformation, driving fear or assumptions that almost all Muslims are bad people. This plays into the hands of ISIS and its us-and-them narrative.
The oft-heard demands phrased as questions such as, "where are the condemnations from moderate Muslims?", imply a guilt by association of those who do not speak up against any kind of violence perpetrated by "their religion".
Ostrich Liberals
The at times bigoted paranoia of some on the right is perhaps to be expected. The attitude of many (maybe most?) on the left is perhaps worse.
Everything, every single set of ideas, be it an ideology or a religion, is and should be open to question, debate, and free inquiry. A number of Liberals seem however to be in denial, misleading themselves with lines of thinking such as "this has nothing to do with religion".
The dreadful term "islamophobia" has come into being. It seems to be a catch-all label that lumps criticism of some of Islam's ideas in with bigotry and racism (Need it be said that Islam is not a race?)
Along with a certain measure of outright fear, it has lead to the suspension of the critical faculties of some on the left when it comes to tackling certain bad ideas.
It is self-defeating and also anti-progress, leading to what counter-extremist activist Maajid Nawaz terms a "racism of low expectations". (See his video on the "regressive left" for a more in depth look at this: http://bigthink.com/videos/maajid-nawaz-on-islamic-reform)
The trouble with Islamic Literalism
What of the perpetrators themselves, not just those in Paris? So we come then to the proverbial elephant in the room.
For all the above factors which have provided the framework for recent, and less recent events, there is still a set of ideas motivating ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and others. There are several individuals who made a conscious choice to plant bombs, start massacres and film beheadings.
So let's talk about what this is really about. ISIS is Islamic in a certain sense. It is pure folly to claim it has "nothing to do with religion." There are theological grounds for them to take their actions. While some of the less palatable parts of the bible are no longer taken literally, there is still a significant minority of adherents of Islam who take the "sword verses" extremely literally.
While easy to cherry pick the violence inciting parts, this is exactly what the worst among them have been doing. It provides a select few with full devine justification for violence above and beyond that of self-defence:
Qur'an 3:56: "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."
Qur'an 8:12: "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them."
Not only is it justified, it shall be rewarded:
Qur'an 44:54 "Even so (it will be). And We shall wed them unto fair ones with wide, lovely eyes." This is part of the "72 virgins" concept that many have heard of. Many scholars will disagree that this is promised in the Qur'an or the Hadith (sayings of Mohammed), but this is the entire point. The strongest desire is to create a Caliphate (roughly, a theocratic kingdom) along 7th century lines, a time when there was surely a greater proportion of literalists to be found.
Such a time pre-dates what is referred to as the Islamic Golden Age of the 8th to 13th centuries. In the early 21st century, groups are trying to take us all back to pre-enlightenment times. Furthermore, it seems that an equivalent of the Reformation is yet to firmly take root. Such backwardness needs to be exposed and challenged - intellectually - for what it is.
Nuanced background, nuanced solutions
There are numerous causes, which all should be dealt with and openly discussed.
Blundering into the affairs of the Middle East has failed for over a century. Ways need to be found to back away from military interventions that have brought with them bigger problems than those attempting to be solved.
Compassion towards those fleeing conflict is needed, while labelling them as being the same as the killers they are trying to flee has got to stop.
On moral grounds it runs counter to humanitarian principles that are supposed to make western liberal democracies superior.
In practical terms, it would also have the long term effect of undermining one of the most central tenets of ISIS.
Finally, ISIS and its pre-medieval thinking needs regular and continual debunking from both outside and from within (the latter especially).
Islam itself, as with any and all religions, should be subject to scrutiny and free enquiry. Misplaced sensitivities need to be abandoned so as to stop conflating the criticism of ideas with racism.
All need to stand up for higher principals and condemn societies that don't value human rights.
