Suicide attack

A suicide attack is an attack in which the attacker (attacker being either an individual or a group) intends to kill others and intends to die in the process of doing so (see suicide). In a suicide attack in the strict sense the attacker dies by the attack itself, for example in an explosion or crash caused by the attacker. The term is sometimes loosely applied to an incident in which the intention of the attacker is not clear though he is almost sure to die by the defense or retaliation of the attacked party.

In modern times, such attacks are often carried out with the help of vehicles or explosive materials such as a bomb (a suicide bombing), or both (i.e. a vehicle loaded with explosives). If everything goes according to plan, the attacker is killed upon impact or detonation. In recent decades there are newer schools of thought that teaches how and why to attack crowded civilian areas within one's own nation or closely neighbouring nations.^{[citation needed]} This is an alarming and brutally violent goal for various extreme political and religious groups and individuals. The main difference today is that targets of crowded markets and areas with children, the elderly, and mothers are becoming more common.^{[citation needed]} In the book, Dead for Good: Martyrdom and the Rise of the Suicide Bomber (Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2007), Hugh Barlow describes these suicide attacks as a new development in the long history of martyrdom. He calls them predatory martyrdom. Past conflicts more often focused on military and political targets, and rarely were there so many radical groups teaching how to and willing to blow up civilians.^{[citation needed]} Some individuals who now act alone have inspiration from emails, radical books, the internet, various new electronic media, and a general public tolerance of extreme teachers and leaders with terrorist agendas.

Suicide attacks are a kind of tactic, planned and organized by extremely committed military or paramilitary groups. According to Robert Pape, director of the Chicago Project on suicide terrorism and expert on suicide bombers, ninety-five percent of such attacks in recent times have the same specific strategic goal: to cause an occupying state to withdraw forces from a disputed territory. Pape notes that in recent decades suicide attacks as a political tactic are used against democratic countries in which public opinion plays a role in determining policy.

As a military tactic aimed at causing material damage in war, suicide attacks became widely known during the Second World War in the Pacific as Allied ships were attacked by Japanese kamikaze pilots who caused maximum damage by flying their explosive-laden aircraft into military targets, not focused on civilian targets. Since the 1980s, the apparent low cost and high lethality of the tactic perhaps explains its increased use by resistance movements, including guerrilla and insurgent groups -- termed "terrorist groups" against the targeted governments. Most notably, the tactic has been used in the Middle East and Sri Lanka. The Tamil Tigers, who have been waging an insurgent campaign against the Sri Lankan government, were, as of 2000. Suicide bombings by Islamist militants, mostly in the Al-Aqsa Intifada and the Iraqi insurgency, have been the most frequent and cumulatively destructive.^{[citation needed]} The September 11, 2001 attacks used hijacked airplanes to become the largest and most destructive individual suicide attacks on one day.^{[citation needed]}

Overview

Suicide attacks throughout history have taken various forms and have been encouraged by the lionization of those who laid down their lives for causes they deemed righteous. There are numerous examples, from Samson's suicidal destruction of a Philistine temple (as recounted in the Book of Judges) to the legendary Swiss hero Arnold von Winkelried to the Japanese kamikaze pilots of World War II. The first modern suicide bombing—involving explosives deliberately carried to the target either on the person or in a civilian vehicle and delivered by surprise—was in 1981; perfected by the factions of the Lebanese Civil War and especially by the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, the tactic had spread to dozens of countries by 2005. Those hardest-hit were Lebanon during its civil war, Sri Lanka during its prolonged ethnic conflict, Israel and the Palestinian Territories since 1994, and Iraq since the US-led invasion in 2003.

Overview of suicide bombing and criticsm

Military historians classify suicide bombing as a form of armed violence, belonging to the tactics of asymmetric warfare—suicide bombings are only common when one side in a violent conflict lacks the means for effective, conventional attacks. The cost-benefit analysis, expressed here by al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, is simple: "The method of martyrdom operation [is] the most successful way of inflicting damage against the opponent and the least costly to the mujahidin in terms of casualties".^[1] The strategic rationale may be military, political, or both; the target may be military, in which case the bombing is usually classified as an act of war, or civilian, in which case it is usually considered terrorism. Civilians are the favored targets, being easier to attack than fortified installations, armored vehicles, or armed and wary soldiers. The political message of the suicide bomber's action is potent, and the difficulty of deterring an attacker who is willing to die sparks greater fear than other forms of terrorism. The fact that the attacker dies in the attack eliminates the need for the attacker to have a plan to escape and avoid capture after he has completed the attack. The regular targeting of civilians, however, often calls into question the moral legitimacy, and often erodes the broader credibility, of the bomber's cause (although in some of the perpetrating group's base population, it may be thought to enhance those qualities).

The bombers themselves are predominantly male. Female bombers make up a minority of such attackers, and are more common among the Tamil Tigers, Chechen rebels, Palestinian militants and the Kurdistan Workers Party. But even among these groups, suicide operatives are still overwhelmingly male ^[2]. They are often from middle-class backgrounds in countries with little political freedom. They are usually well-educated and hold strong political or religious beliefs; they are generally not poverty-stricken or mentally ill, though some may have had difficult childhoods.^{[citation needed]} The ritualistic communion of the extremist groups to which they belong ("lone wolf" suicide bombers are rare), in addition to their strongly-held beliefs, helps motivate their decision to commit suicide; for the religious, e.g. Hamas, the rewards of an afterlife may provide additional impetus.

Responses and reactions to suicide bombings are mixed, so that a full assessment of the action's impact—especially whether it helped or hindered the cause in whose name it was carried out—is difficult. The public response of politicians is usually one of determination and condemnation. Military and law enforcement are mobilized to disrupt or destroy the organization which planned the attack. The root cause of the violence is often obfuscated by the occupying power in order to avoid discussion of the military occupation that evokes the violent countermeasures. Often the bomber is portrayed as irrational and motivated by blind hatred. Those who support the bomber's cause will often hold him up as a hero; for example, the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, publish celebratory books containing the photos of those they regard as heroic freedom fighters; militant Islamist groups like Al Qaeda, for example, make use of religious language to lionize suicide bombers, calling the bomber Shahid, or 'martyr'.

The term dates back to the 1940s, when it was used in reference to certain German and Japanese battle tactics, but did not gain its present meaning until 1981. Various alternate terms have been used to frame the act differently: the Islamist use of shahid for the bomber or martyrdom operation for the bombing emphasizes the self-sacrificial aspects, while the term "homicide bombing" emphasizes the fact that the bomber kills others.

Some of Muslim like Egyptian cleric,Sayed Tantawi view this tactic as 'illegal' action.In Islamic states like Indonesia,Pakistan, and Malaysia,some parties view the suicide attack as the extremism action.

Tactics

In the case of using explosives, a suicide attack does not require remote or delayed detonation. In the case of causing a crash, it allows human guidance of the weapon (carrying it, driving a car or boat, flying a plane, etc.) without the need for remote or automatic control as in a guided missile. Also, obviously, the attack plan does not require a plan on escaping to safety from the enemy after the attack.

Examples:

• Suicide attack on foot: explosive belt
• Attempted suicide attack with a plane as target: Richard Reid on American Airlines Flight 63
• Suicide car bomb: 1983 Beirut barracks bombing, Central Bank bombing, numerous incidents in Iraq since 2003
• Suicide attack by a boat with explosives: USS Cole bombing, attacks by the LTTE Sea Tigers.
• Suicide attack by a submarine with explosives (human-steered torpedo): Kaiten, used by Japan in World War II
• Suicide attack by a plane with explosives: kamikaze
• Suicide attack by a hijacked plane with fuel: September 11, 2001 attacks, possibly Air France Flight 8969 and attempted by Samuel Byck
• Suicide attack by diverting a bus to an abyss: Tel Aviv Jerusalem bus 405 massacre
• Suicide attack with guns: Kashmiri insurgents on the Indian Parliament in December 2001 killing 15 people.

In some cases a nuclear attack on a nuclear power may be considered a suicide attack in the wider sense, with the attacking country being sure or almost sure of going to suffer many fatalities in a retaliation. See also mutually assured destruction.

See also suicide weapon.

Suicide attacks usually (but not always) target poorly-guarded, non-military facilities and personnel. It can be either a military tactic, a political one, or a mixture of the two. It may qualify as terrorism when the intention is to kill, maim or terrorise a predominantly civilian target population, or fall within the definition of an act of war when it is committed against a military target under war conditions.

As a political tactic, suicide attacks send a message of impassioned opposition to enemy forces (that the attacker is willing to die for his or her cause) and a message of desperate recklessness to third parties (that the attacker feels the justice of the cause so strongly that he would rather die than submit and that he is giving little thought to the danger).^{[citation needed]} However, it may backfire, as suicide attacks ignite rage and hatred and undermine the belief in the humanity of those who perpetrate them.^{[citation needed]}

When used against civilian targets, suicide attacks usually cause fear in the target population greater than that caused by other forms of terrorism, as the fact that the attacker intends to die makes deterrents ineffective.^{[citation needed]} However, use against civilian targets has differing effects on their goals (see reaction below). Some economists suggest that this tactic goes beyond symbolism and is actually a response to commodified, controlled, or devalued lives, as the suicide attackers apparently consider family prestige and financial compensation from the community as compensation for their own lives.^{[citation needed]} Whether such motivation is significant as compared to political or religious feeling remains unclear.

The doctrine of asymmetric warfare views suicide attacks as a result of an imbalance of power, in which groups with little significant power resort to suicide bombing as a convenient tactic (see advantages noted above) to demoralize the targeted civilians or government leadership of their enemies. Suicide bombing may also take place as a perceived response to actions or policies of a group with greater power.^{[citation needed]} Groups which have significant power have no need to resort to suicide bombing to achieve their aims; consequently, suicide bombing is overwhelmingly used by guerrilla, and other irregular fighting forces. Among many such groups, there are religious overtones to martyrdom: attackers and their supporters may believe that their sacrifice will be rewarded in an afterlife. Suicide attackers often believe that their actions are in accordance with moral or social standards because they are aimed at fighting forces and conditions that they perceive as unjust.

Profile of a bomber

A common reaction to a suicide bomber is to assume that he or she was motivated by despair, and probably came from a poor, neglected segment of society. Both President George W. Bush and the Dalai Lama have made this claim. However, anthropologist Scott Atran found in a 2003 study that this is not a justifiable conclusion. A recently published paper by Harvard University Professor of Public Policy Alberto Abadie "cast[s] doubt on the widely held belief that terrorism stems from poverty, finding instead that terrorist violence is related to a nation's level of political freedom."^[3] More specifically this is due to the transition of countries towards democratic freedoms. "Intermediate levels of political freedom are often experienced during times of political transitions, when governments are weak, political instability is elevated, so conditions are favorable for the appearance of terrorism".^[4][3]

From 2003 to 2004, women were more frequently involved in suicide attacks in the Middle East and elsewhere. In Messengers of Death: Female Suicide Bombers, Clara Beyler writes that women have channeled the frustration stemming from their role in society into ruthless behavior.^[5] This can demonstrate strength and power in societies where women have a submissive role. That women have become more involved in suicide bombings makes it more difficult to profile a suicide bomber.

Some suicide bombers are educated, with college or university experience, and come from middle class homes. Most suicide bombers do not show signs of psychopathology. Indeed, leaders of the groups who perpetrate these attacks search for individuals who can be trusted to carry out the mission; those with mental illnesses are not ideal candidates.

Rationality

Much of the discourse that frames or responds to suicide bombing addresses or attempts to uncover the rationality of the action itself. Generally, the suicide bomber is understood as irrational —driven beyond the boundaries of rational thought by environmental, religious, political, and/or social factors —ergo capable of setting aside the "common sense" of self-preservation. The Pentagon released a study tasked with pinpointing motivation:

"His actions provide a win-win scenario for himself, his family, his faith and his God," The document explains. "The bomber secures salvation and the pleasures of Paradise. He earns a degree of financial security and a place for his family in Paradise. He defends his faith and takes his place in a long line of martyrs to be memorialized as a valorous fighter. And finally, because of the manner of his death, he is assured that he will find favor with Allah," the briefing adds. "Against these considerations, the selfless sacrifice by the individual Muslim to destroy Islam's enemies becomes a suitable, feasible and acceptable course of action."

Recent published research on the rationale of suicide bombing as an effective technique to kill enemies has highlighted the importance of motivation as a driving force.^[6][7][8]While some scholars uncover the interplay of such conduct with political and socio-economic factors^[9][10],others agree that religion is a driving force to encourage suicide bombers.This mainstream puts forward that religion provides the framework for suicide bombing precisely because acting in the name of Islam is regarded as a form of martyrdom.Since "martyrdom"is widely seen as a step towards Heaven, those who commit suicide whilst discarding their community from a common enemy believe that they will reach an ultimate salvation after they die^[11].

The briefing – produced by a little-known Pentagon intelligence unit called the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA – cites a number of passages from the Quran dealing with jihad, or "holy" warfare, martyrdom and Paradise, where "beautiful mansions" and "maidens" await martyr heroes. In preparation for attacks, suicide terrorists typically recited passages from the Quran.

Various scholars and analysts, however, dispute the claim that Muslim suicide bombers are driven by religion.

Professor Robert A. Pape of the University of Chicago writes:

"Beneath the religious rhetoric with which [such terror] is perpetrated, it occurs largely in the service of secular aims. Suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism."

This fails to account for the distinct lack of Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers, however.

His research suggests that foreign occupation is the principal factor motivating suicide attackers.

"Though it speaks of Americans as infidels, al-Qaida is less concerned with converting us to Islam than removing us from Arab and Muslim lands," Pape says.

This stems from the nature of Islamic teaching to actively pursue the submission of all nations to Allah. Islam has been categorized as an "expastionist, revolutionary ideology" where land, and peoples are to be conquered and made to submit to Allah. Scholar and Christian Educator, George Grant has noted that every Islamic country which exists today was conquered through military might, violence, and coercian. To tranversley state the former, no Islamic country that exists today became Islamic willingly.

The language of "occupation" used by Islamists is often connected to conquered lands by Islamic armies where people other than islamic people now live. These proponants for Jihad use tactics very similar to communistic doctrine, and it has been noted that many marxists in the Middle East, noteably in Iran and Egypt, have joined Islamists quest for sharia law as the goal, and jihad as the means to aquiring that goal.

History

Background

Often acts of terrorism, such as the suicide bombing of civilians, are compared to the self-sacrifice of soldiers in wartime. The principal difference is that the soldier is implementing the policy of a nation and is thus held responsible, whereas a civilian may or may not support their nation's policies and may or may not consider the terrorist's nation (or peoples) an enemy.

The concept of self-sacrifice has long been a part of war. However, many instances of suicide bombing today has intended civilian targets, not military targets alone. So there are some principle differences between the ideas of the past and the present. From the earliest days of honouring fallen soldiers as heroes, those who sacrifice themselves to further a political, moral, or cultural ideology have been and are still highly regarded figures in their respective societies. Soldiers who lay down their lives to protect their comrades are commonly awarded the highest recognition for courage in battle, while those who survive combat are honoured for their physical and psychological sacrifice. An example of such self-sacrifice in warfare in medieval legend is Arnold von Winkelried. The earliest reference of a suicide attack outside a context of warfare has been suggested to be the Biblical story of the Amorites attacking the Jews:

The Amorite who dwell on that mountain went out against you and pursued you as the bees would do; they struck you in Seir until Hormah. (Deuteronomy 1:44)

The French 11th century rabbi Rashi suggested this to mean that the Amorites attacked like bees do, i.e. stinging and then dying, not that they attacked in swarms. Modern Bible scholarship has however abandoned his interpretation, as seen for instance in the Swedish translation of 2000.

A more obvious example is the story of Samson who died together with his victims as he collapsed a Philistine temple:

"Samson said, 'Let me die with the Philistines!' Down came the temple on the rulers and all the people in it. Thus he killed many more as he died than while he lived." (Judges 16:30).

A modern example of suicide bombing occurred during the Belgian Revolution, when the Dutch Lieutenant Jan van Speijk detonated his own ship in the harbour of Antwerp to prevent being captured by the Belgians.

Another example was the Prussian soldier Karl Klinke on 18 April 1864 at the Battle of Dybbøl, when he blew a hole in a Danish fortification.

The act of deliberately destroying oneself to inflict harm on an enemy, especially civilians, is more restricted to modern times and the era of explosives. The line between the two is considered by some a matter of subjectivity, as in the argument that many WWII soldiers killed were "martyrs" (in the sense that they were to suffer for the sake of a principle, rather than dying as the penalty for refusing to renounce a belief) because their life expectancy in combat was very low—often averaging only two or three months.

Modern suicide bombing as a political tool can be traced back to the assassination of Czar Alexander II of Russia in 1881. Alexander fell victim to a Nihilist plot. While driving on one of the central streets of Saint Petersburg, near the Winter Palace, he was mortally wounded by the explosion of hand-made grenades and died a few hours afterwards. The Tzar was killed by the Pole Ignacy Hryniewiecki, who died while intentionally exploding the bomb during the attack.

The ritual act of self-sacrifice during combat appeared in a large scale at the end of World War II with the Japanese kamikaze bombers. In these attacks, airplanes were used as flying bombs. Later in the war, as Japan became more desperate, this act became formalized and ritualized, as planes were outfitted with explosives specific to the task of a suicide mission. Kamikaze strikes were a weapon of symmetric war used by the Empire of Japan chiefly against United States Navy aircraft carriers.

The Japanese Navy also used both one and two man piloted torpedoes called kaiten on suicide missions. Although sometimes called midget submarines, these were modified versions of the unmanned torpedoes of the time and are distinct from the torpedo-firing midget submarines used earlier in the war, which were designed to infiltrate shore defences and return to a mother ship after firing their torpedoes. Though extremely hazardous, these midget submarine attacks were not technically suicide missions; while the early kaiten were equipped with escape hatches, there is no evidence that they were ever used or that the pilots had any intention of using them. Later kaitens, by contrast, provided no means of escape.

After aiming a two-person kaiten at their target, the two crew members traditionally embraced and shot each other in the head. Social support for such choices was strong, due in part to Japanese cultural history, in which seppuku, honourable suicide, was part of samurai duty. It was also fostered and indoctrinated by the Imperial program to persuade the Japanese soldiers to commit these acts.

During the Battle for Berlin the Luftwaffe flew "Self-sacrifice missions" (Selbstopfreinsatz) against Soviet bridges over the River Oder. These 'total missions' were flown by pilots of the Leonidas Squadron under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Heiner Lange. From 17 April until 20 April 1945, using any aircraft that were available, the Luftwaffe claimed that the squadron destroyed 17 bridges, however the military historian Antony Beevor when writing about the incident thinks that this was exaggerated and that only the railway bridge at Küstrin was definitely destroyed. He comments that "thirty-five pilots and aircraft was a high price to pay for such a limited and temporary success". The missions were called off when the Soviet ground forces reached the vicinity of the squadron's airbase at Jüterbog.^[12]

Following World War II, Viet Minh "death volunteers" fought against the French colonial army by using a long stick-like explosive to detonate French tanks, as part of their urban warfare tactics.

In 1972 in the hall of the Lod airport in Tel Aviv, Israel, three Japanese used grenades and automatic rifles to kill 26 people and wound more than a hundred.^{[citation needed]} The group belonged to the Japanese Red Army (JRA) a terrorist organization created in 1969 and allied to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). Until then, no group involved in terrorism had conducted such a suicide operation in Israel. Members of the JRA became instructors in martial art and kamikaze operations at several Hezbollah training camps bringing the suicide techniques to the Middle East.

1980 to present

Lebanon, during its civil war, saw a modern suicide bombing: the Islamic Dawa Party's car bombing of the Iraqi embassy in Beirut, in December 1981. Hezbollah's bombing of the U.S. embassy in April 1983 and attack on United States Marine and French barracks in October 1983 brought suicide bombings international attention. Other parties to the civil war were quick to adopt the tactic, and by 1999 factions such as Hezbollah, the Amal Movement, the Ba'ath Party, and the Syrian Social Nationalist Party had carried out around 50 suicide bombings between them. (The latter of these groups sent the first female suicide bomber in 1985. Female combatants have existed throughout human history and in many different societies, so it is possible that females who engage in suicidal attacks are not new.) Hezbollah was the only one to attack overseas, bombing the Israeli embassy (and possibly the Argentine-Israeli Mutual Association building) in Buenos Aires; as its military and political power have grown, it has since abandoned the tactic.

Lebanon saw the first bombing, but it was the LTTE Tamil Tigers who perfected the tactic and inspired its use elsewhere [2]. Their Black Tiger unit have committed between 76 and 168 (estimates vary) suicide bombings since 1987.

Suicide bombing has, since 1993, been a particularly popular tactic amongst some Palestinian groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. Bombers affiliated with these groups often use so-called "suicide belts", explosive devices (often including shrapnel) designed to be strapped to the body under clothing. In order to maximize the loss of life, the bombers may seek out cafés or city buses crowded with people at rush hour, or less commonly a military target (for example, soldiers waiting for transport at roadside). By seeking enclosed locations, a successful bomber usually kills a number of people.

Palestinian television has aired a number of music videos and announcements that promote eternal reward for children who seek "shahada",^[13] which Palestinian Media Watch has claimed is "Islamic motivation of suicide terrorists".^[14] The Chicago Tribune has documented the concern of Palestinian parents that their children are encouraged to take part in suicide operations.^[15] Israeli sources have also alleged that Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah operate "Paradise Camps," training children as young as 11 to become suicide bombers.^[16][17]

The September 11, 2001 attacks involved the hijacking of large passenger jets which were deliberately flown into the towers of the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon, killing everyone aboard the planes and thousands more in and around the targeted buildings, thus making it one of the most destructive suicide attacks in history. The passenger jets selected were required to be fully fueled to fly cross-country, turning the planes themselves into the largest suicide bombs in history. The 'September 11' attacks also had a vast economic and political impact: for the cost of the lives of the 19 hijackers and financial expenditure of around US$100,000, al-Qaeda, the militant Islamist group responsible for the attacks, effected a trillion-dollar drop in global markets within one week, and triggered massive increases in military and security expenditure in response.

In December 22 2001, Richard Reid attempted to destroy the American Airlines Flight 63 by the means of a bomb hidden in a shoe. He was arrested after his attempt was foiled when he was unable to light the bomb's fuse.

After the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, Iraqi and foreign insurgents carried out waves of suicide bombings. They attacked United States military targets, although many civilian targets (eg. Shiite mosques, international offices of the UN and the Red Cross, Iraqi men waiting to apply for jobs with the new army and police force) were also attacked. In the lead up to the Iraqi parliamentary election, on January 30, 2005, suicide attacks upon civilian and security personnel involved with the elections increased, and there were reports of the insurgents co-opting disabled people as involuntary suicide bombers.^[18] Professor Pape suggests that the bombings of Iraqis by Iraqis target those believed to be in the service of the American occupation.

Suicide bombings have occurred in more than 30 countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, China, Colombia, Croatia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, the Palestinian territories, Panama, the Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Tunisia, Turkey, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. (Suicide planes were also used in the United States).

Range of opinions

World leaders, especially those of countries that experience suicide bombings, usually express resolve to continue on their previous course of affairs after such attacks. They denounce suicide bombings and sometimes vow not to let such bombings deter ordinary people from going about their everyday business.

Suicide bombings are sometimes followed by reprisals. As a successful suicide bomber cannot be targeted, the response is often a targeting of those believed to have sent the bomber. In targeting such organizations, Israel often uses military strikes against organizations, individuals, and possibly infrastructure. In the West Bank the IDF formerly demolished homes that belong to families whose children (or renters whose tenants) had volunteered for such missions (whether successfully or not),^[20] though an internal review starting in October 2004 brought an end the policy.^[21] The effectiveness of suicide bombings—notably those of the Japanese kamikazes, the Palestinian bombers, and even the September 11, 2001 attacks—is debatable. Although kamikaze attacks could not stop the Allied advance the Pacific, they inflicted more casualties and delayed the fall of Japan for longer than might have been the case using only the conventional methods available to the Japanese Empire. Subsequently, Japanese leaders acknowledged the great cost in losing many of their best young men in these actions. The attacks reinforced the resolution of the World War II Allies to destroy the Imperial force, and may have had a significant effect in the decision to use atomic bombs against Japan.

In the case of the September 11 attacks, the long-term effects remain to be seen, but in the short term, the results were negative for Al-Qaeda, as well as the Taliban Movement. Furthermore, since the September 11 attacks, Western nations have diverted massive resources towards stopping similar actions, as well as tightening up borders, and military actions against various countries that the U.S. and its allies believe to have been involved with terrorism. However, critics of the War on Terrorism suggest that in fact the results were profoundly negative, as the proceeding actions of the United States and other countries has increased the number of recruits, and their willingness to carry out suicide bombings.

It is more difficult to determine whether Palestinian suicide bombings have proved to be a successful tactic. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the suicide bombers were repeatedly deployed since the Oslo Accords.^[22] In 1996, the Israelis elected the conservative candidate Benjamin Netanyahu who promised to restore safety by conditioning every step in the peace process on Israel's assessment of the Palestinian Authority's fulfillment of its obligations in curbing violence as outlined in the Oslo agreements.

In the course of al-Aqsa Intifada which followed the collapse of the Camp David II summit between the PLO and Israel, the number of suicide attacks drastically increased. In response, Israel mobilized its army in order to seal off the Gaza Strip and reinstate military control of the West Bank, patrolling the area with tanks. The Israelis also began a campaign of targeted assassinations to kill militant Palestinian leaders, using jets and helicopters to deploy high-precision bombs and missiles.

The suicide missions, having killed hundreds and maimed thousands of Israelis, are believed by some to have brought on a move to the political right, increasing public support for hard-line policies towards the Palestinians, and a government headed by the former general, prime minister Ariel Sharon. In response to the suicide bombings, Sharon's government has imposed restrictions on the Palestinian community, making commerce, travel, school, and other aspects of life difficult for the Palestinians, with the average Palestinian suffering due to the choices of the suicide bombers. The Separation barrier under construction seem to be part of the Israeli government's efforts to stop suicide bombers from entering Israel proper.

Social support by some for this activity remained, however, as of the calling of a truce at the end of June 2003. This may be due to the economic or social purpose of the suicide bombing and the bombers' refusal to accept external judgements on those who sanction them.

If the objective is to kill as many people as possible, suicide bombing by terrorists may thus "work" as a tactic in that it costs fewer lives than any conventional military tactic and targeting unarmed civilians is much easier than targeting soldiers. As an objective designed to achieve some form of favorable outcome, especially a political outcome, most believe it to be a failure. Terrorist campaigns involving the targeting of civilians have never won a war. Analysts believe that in order to win or succeed, any guerrilla or terrorist campaign must first transform into something more than a guerrilla or terrorist movement.^[23] Such analysts believe that a terrorist cause has little political attraction and success may be achieved only by renouncing terrorism and transforming the passions into politics.

Israeli ultra-right politician and author Obadiah Shoher declared terrorism proper and efficient military tactics, and called for the Jews to answer in kind.^[24] Shoher praised Baruch Goldstein who massacred Palestinian worshippers inside a mosque.

Often extremists assert that, because they are outclassed militarily, suicide bombings are necessary. For example, the former leader of Hamas Sheikh Ahmad Yassin stated: "Once we have warplanes and missiles, then we can think of changing our means of legitimate self-defense. But right now, we can only tackle the fire with our bare hands and sacrifice ourselves."^[25]

Such views are challenged both from the outside and from within Islam. According to Islamic jurist and scholar Khaled Abou Al-Fadl,

The classical jurists, nearly without exception, argued that those who attack by stealth, while targeting noncombatants in order to terrorize the resident and wayfarer, are corrupters of the earth. "Resident and wayfarer" was a legal expression that meant that whether the attackers terrorize people in their urban centers or terrorize travelers, the result was the same: all such attacks constitute a corruption of the earth. The legal term given to people who act this way was muharibun (those who wage war against society), and the crime is called the crime of hiraba (waging war against society). The crime of hiraba was so serious and repugnant that, according to Islamic law, those guilty of this crime were considered enemies of humankind and were not to be given quarter or sanctuary anywhere. ... Those who are familiar with the classical tradition will find the parallels between what were described as crimes of hiraba and what is often called terrorism today nothing short of remarkable. The classical jurists considered crimes such as assassinations, setting fires, or poisoning water wells - that could indiscriminately kill the innocent - as offenses of hiraba. Furthermore, hijacking methods of transportation or crucifying people in order to spread fear and terror are also crimes of hiraba. Importantly, Islamic law strictly prohibited the taking of hostages, the mutilation of corpses, and torture.^[26]

The Islamic View

The vast majority of mainstream Islamic judicial opinion rejects suicide for any reason.^[27][28]

According to Professor Charles A. Kimball, chair of the Department of Religion at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, "There is only one verse in the Qur'an that contains a phrase related to suicide", Verse 4:29 of the Qur'an.^[29] It reads O you who believe! Do not consume your wealth in the wrong way-rather through trade mutually agreed to, and do not kill yourselves. Surely God is Merciful toward you. Some commentators believe that the phrase "do not kill yourselves" is better translated "do not kill each other", and some translations (e.g. Shakir) reflect that view. (A note on the Qur'an's unique textual density is perhaps in order here: It is not uncommon for a single Qur'anic Arabic phrase to embrace two or more complementary meanings at the same time, and this may be the case with 4:29.)

Mainstream Islamic groups such as the European Council for Fatwa and Research use the Quran'ic verse Al-Anam 6:151 (And take not life, which Allah has made sacred, except by way of justice and law) as further reason to prohibit suicide.^[30] In addition, the hadith unambiguously forbid suicide.^[31]

A contrary view is presented by Faisal Bodi writing in The Guardian, who said many Muslims celebrate suicide bombers as heroes defending things they hold sacred.^[32]

A tiny minority of Muslim clerics, while condemning the London bombings, have stated that under certain circumstances Islamic suicide bombings are justified. For example, Sayed Mohammed Musawi, head of the World Islamic League in London, insisted "there should be a clear distinction between the suicide bombing of those who are trying to defend themselves from occupiers, which is something different from those who kill civilians, which is a big crime."^[33] This is, however, far from the mainstream opinion; an overwhelming consensus of Muslim scholars hold that suicide attacks are simply forbidden.

Nevertheless, Islamist militant organisations (including Al-Qaeda, Hamas and Islamic Jihad) continue to argue that suicide operations are justified according to Islamic law, despite Islam's strict prohibition of suicide and murder.^[34][35] Irshad Manji, in a conversation with one leader of Islamic Jihad noted their ideology.

"What's the difference between suicide, which the Koran condemns, and martyrdom?" I asked. "Suicide," he replied, "is done out of despair. But remember: most of our martyrs today were very successful in their earthly lives." In short, there was a future to live for--and they detonated it anyway.

Since the four suicide bombings in London, there have been many scholastic refutations of suicide bombings from Sunni Muslims. Ihsanic Intelligence, a London-based Islamic think-tank, published their two-year study into suicide bombings in the name of Islam, titled 'The Hijacked Caravan',^[36] which concluded that, "The technique of suicide bombing is anathema, antithetical and abhorrent to Sunni Islam. It is considered legally forbidden, constituting a reprehensible innovation in the Islamic tradition, morally an enormity of sin combining suicide and murder and theologically an act which has consequences of eternal damnation."^[37] The Oxford-based Malayist jurist, Shaykh Muhammad Shaykh Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti, issued his landmark fatwa on suicide bombing and targeting innocent civilians, titled 'Defending the Transgressed, by Censuring the Reckless against the Killing of Civilians', where he states suicide bombing in its most widespread form, is