New Compass Daily spoke with Amer Al Sabaileh, strategic analyst and expert on terrorism in Amman (Jordan). "These are organizations that already have a plan ready for some time - he explains - was shot in a newspaper that had published the cartoons of Mohammed three years ago. The killer acted with a clear plan, after collecting their intelligence. They knew by name all the journalists who were to kill and knew the time of day when they would be found gathered in the newsroom. From the pictures we can see how they acted, firing with cold blood. Just look at the ease with which one of the two brothers Kouachi shot to the head of a French policeman (who happened to be a Muslim, named Ahmed Merabet). This is skilled people: are not improvised, could not simply be trained, they also have an experience of real war behind".

So far, the fear of France was for the action of "lone wolves", but these do not seem to view their organization. What kind of threat we are facing?

The brothers Kouachi could very well be the lone wolves organized. The problem is that the Isis gave a turn to terrorism. When he proclaimed the caliphate in Syria and Iraq, in fact opened the door to all the followers of Islamic radicalism, even groups that until recently were affiliated with Al Qaeda. The Caliphate is a flag, a landmark, but it allows individuals and groups of act independently. The declaration of war of the Caliphate is an invitation to all of these groups to begin to act. The attack in Paris could also be the decisive action and planned autonomously by a terrorist cell, composed of a limited number (and still unknown) people. The signature style of action is Isis, a synchronized attack reduced and less to others. Here we are not talking about Al Qaeda, with its planned attacks from a single operations center: the danger, for Europe, is that all these groups and individuals are free to decide where, how and when to work independently. At this point, the risk will always be high, that the attack on Charlie Hebdo is by no means the last, of these attacks we will have many more, in many cities of Europe. The Isis said a sort of final war.

At this point, such a threat could evolve so unpredictable?

You can also disrupt many attacks, but when one is made it becomes a serious problem to security. This is the real problem: all European countries can invest heavily in security, but a single error, like the one that was committed in France, is fatal. Well I know that the French have a strong anti-terrorism apparatus, following suspected terrorists, they know where to look. However, both France and other European countries, have underestimated the danger of cells "auto-immune", which are activated by the sun and move independently, formed by citizens of France and the French territory. One of the two brothers Kouachi, Cherif, had already been convicted of recruiting people to send to Iraq. It was, therefore, of people already known, intercepted and monitored. Despite this they managed to make a killing. This means that it has been organized so too "simple" to leap in the eyes of a sophisticated intelligence: no communications to be intercepted, no strange movements to follow. The risk, therefore, continue to be very high. Not only for France, but also Spain, England, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway. And even Italy. You are not at all immune from danger. But where is the fundamental error that is being committed? That you know you have terrorists, who declare their intention to conduct terrorist acts and despite everything still enjoy all the civil and social rights guaranteed by the state. I think, for example, to those fighters Danes in Syria that they continue to receive aid from the government. And this is just the beginning. Because, as the case of France, the terrorists who acted were not "new" were precisely known, followed, intercepted. In the near future will begin, however, the terrorism of the new generation. It will be a different type of terrorism, made up of people who do not attend the radical mosques, women, the Isis is training even children. This is the scenario that awaits us.

How could it be possible defense of our countries, Italy in particular?

Italy should, first of all, to stop turning a blind eye on some movements already on Italian soil, that while wearing the mask of the moderates, are affiliated to vast networks of groups that, in the end, bring grist to the mill of the terrorists. The Italian authorities should be more inflexible in dealing with these organizations. You should apply the law, you already have, so much stronger, because every time I travel to Italy I see, in your city, situations of blatant illegality tolerated. But also many tourists in Rome it can see and tell: there is an illegality in the air that you breathe. The state does not project an image of strength of himself, nor of certainty in law enforcement, which is very different from the guarantee of the rights of freedom of the person. Terrorist organizations wallow in such a situation, they move on the territory without problems. Yet you should think that you are also potential targets. Giving new meaning to the state, it makes the attack more difficult. This is what must be done right now. But we must not forget that this is not a local war, but global. These days it fell to France, tomorrow it could even touch you, or anyone else in Europe. And is a threat especially for the Arab countries, as well as those in Europe. The response, therefore, should be international. Avoiding exploitation of all kinds (such as the exclusion of Russia, or Iran or other countries that have a common interest in the fight against this terrorism), admitting that this is a common threat to all, the intelligence of various countries exposed to same risk must cooperate.

The right-wing parties, in France as well as in Italy, they point on immigration. Makes sense?

Terrorism is not necessarily tied to immigration, because it can also be conducted dall'autoctono, the immigrant or third or fourth generation. The problem is clear: we have people in the house, which is a threat to humanity. Do not for one country in particular, but for humanity. Why is it people who refuse to integrate, who sees the future through an imaginary past, living in the culture of hatred. If immigration is not necessarily a phenomenon linked to terrorism, it must be said, however, that Italy has a problem of immigration. Why does not like Canada, or Australia, countries that select immigrants based on their value added, but infinitely complicates life legal immigrants, while closing our eyes to illegal ones. This is the real problem: the low quality of immigration, the absence of control. That is a fundamental mistake, because here we are talking about groups that move a lot from one country to another, without too many limits of boundaries.

There is nothing to talk about the distinction between moderate Islam and radical Islam. She lives in Jordan, which is considered as the symbol of moderate Islam. What do you think of this distinction: is there or is it just our invention?

I can not understand, to date, what is moderate Islam. I do not think talking about it is a serious way to address the issue of terrorism. Think of beating the terrorists supporting and enriching only moderate Islam is a mistake. Today, to address these movements should rather promote pluralism in Muslim societies. The Islamic radicals, in fact, tend to impose their culture at all. Jordan has changed a lot, in a radical sense, in the last forty years. Today it is almost unrecognizable from that of the 60s and 70s. The problem must be addressed, therefore, giving space and strength to secular movements. You must get out of the narrow confines of religion and think in terms of humanity, respect for others, human rights: all of this comes from a culture that accepts pluralism, freedom of all religions, not from a religious view "moderate" a mono-confessional society. Because even the moderate Muslim is convinced of his superiority over the other, he knows to be true and the other is not, knows to go to heaven while the other does not go there. To escape this logic must, therefore, go beyond religion, finding a political solution, accepting real pluralism. Because so far the Muslim Arab societies have failed their human development, religion makes up this failure, the official policy, even the laity, has exploited these movements (for various reasons, from the Cold War to date) and today have become a cancer with metastases everywhere.

Read the full article at La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana

© All rights reserved