Conversations through the media concerning terrorism at this Olympic Games have covered virtually every possible scenario by which an attack could be carried out: from orchestrated and sophisticated dirty bombs to barbaric lone wolves, discussions on preparedness, prevention, threat assessments, social media chatter, and rumors have all been published.
- The crux of this article is confronting the inevitability of a terrorist attack at a venue such as the Olympic Games, and the importance of a establishing a united ideological response to terrorism; rather than simply waiting for the next attack to take place... so let’s have an honest conversation about it.
The issue of terrorism at the Olympic Games in Brazil, is especially sensitive given a political history of authoritarianism that crushed peaceful opposition groups it labeled as terrorists. The scarcity of resources, lack of trained personnel, and security infrastructure problems also have added to concerns across the media of terror attacks taking place in Rio. The globalizing trend of Islam across Brazil through conversion and immigration has also been an easy target for those wanting to boil everything about Islam down to the single issue of terrorism to do so. Talking about terrorism at the Olympic Games in Rio is easy; it is readily made for the click-bait world we live in…a story on sports, terrorism, Islam, and failed national economics all rolled into one is too tempting not to write on in the prisoner’s dilemma world facing modern media. So potential terror attacks are written about, and too often miss the larger conversation we should be having.
- First, let us not pretend that the particular type of terrorism we are speaking of is not linked to Islam…it most certainly is, specifically in Wahhabism and Salafism…both attempting, through differing means, to put in place puritanical Islamic rule and disrupt the globalizing forces of the West. Why? Well, for lots of reasons: perceived (and perhaps real) moral ambiguities of the West, Western domination and influence of former Islamic territories and cultures, the fear that Islam will become Westernized and lose its religious purity through secularization, and the belief that straying from fundamentalism led to the downfall of the Islamic empire to begin with…just to name a few.
- Second, while there have been articles getting to this point in the media, this is not just about “radical” Islam or, as some have claimed, Islam as a whole. It is about secularism and globalization versus puritanical theocracy. Presenting all Muslims under one, blanket, umbrella is counter-productive. Not all people who are Muslim reject modernity. Our enemy are those against modernity... whatever their creed may be.
- Third, the global system is at war with those that seek our destruction…or, if you like, there are fundamentalists at war with the Western modernity that seek our destruction.
The goal of these theocratic puritanicals (Islamic extremists, jihadists, use whatever term you wish so long as you understand the enemy are those against modernity) is system annihilation; yet they lack the military capabilities to engage forces in a traditional capacity…and therefore they attack our system by infiltration and terrorism. It is war, and in war there are going to be attacks; The Olympic Games in Rio, the NFL Super Bowl, the World Cup, and an exhaustive list of events where people congregate are all targets. The thing that needs more clarity in its address is our response when these attacks happen. Social media profile picture changes and the latest batch of “I am [fill in the blank]” hashtags and pictures are not enough, and there are seemingly only two realistic options for our leaders to take:
- One option is that our leaders recognize the war exist, that it must be fought, and unite. A united global system can fight with more than just weapons; it can fight with ideas. Countering radical narratives with demonstrated inclusiveness, with education, and with system integration that shows all of the accomplishments of modernity and its tolerance of diversity.
- A second option is that our leaders recognize the war exist, that it must be fought, but see the global community as unable, or unwilling, to unite. In this option, likeminded nations that are willing to address this war unite with one another and fight…this option is problematic and opens itself to unspeakable escalations of conflict across the globe, between nations that were former allies. This option is zero-sum minded and taking this course means one must choose alliances carefully.
The issue for citizens traveling to the Olympic Games in Rio, and other future events that celebrate modernity, and the reason for so many stories in the news about the when’s and if’s of terrorism, is that our leaders have seemingly taken an odd third option: absorption of violence. The strategy of the West has been to absorb these attacks and attempt to move forward as though each one were a fresh horror, a new surprise. Ignoring the need for collaborative responses, and instead paying politically expedient lip-service to the most recent attack. It is frustrating for citizens…all citizens in the West who ascribe to the ideals of secularism and tolerance… who themselves now feel as though they would be potential sacrifices on an altar of failed globalized politics. It scares us. Every time we are in a stadium, every time we travel, every time we watch a large sporting event....it is a fear on our minds.
The fear is not about a terrorist attack at the Olympic Games, or a terrorist attack in general (wherever the next one will take place). It is not a fear of terrorism itself. The fear is that it will be another attack where Western powers fail to respond in ways that unify us. The fear is that we will again fail to find ways that fight an aggressive ideology with an effective ideology of our own. We need to spend less time discussing when or where the next attack will come, understanding that attacks will come during a war, and spend more time in discussions on how we come together to effectively defeat our enemies.
I do think it is important to say that the biggest threat to those traveling to Rio for the Olympic Games is most likely crime-related. Rio is a city that has some very real dangers to foreigners that should be taken into account when traveling there: a sizable portion of the population are hostile to the Olympic Games due to economic and political hardships, poverty stricken areas have violence that already threatens the security of residents, and the police force has been underfunded and stretched to its maximum before the Olympic Games ever began. The city itself is going through a financial collapse that no amount of tourist currency for a month-long event is going to fix, and government resources are extremely scarce. So crime is probably the singularly most pressing threat to personal security for those at the Olympic Games; especially when at venues outside of the Olympic Park locations. However, terrorism is the concern that dominates headlines and conversations...thus this article