The Spectrum of Terror: Making Sense of the Latest Attacks in Jerusalem

This year has witnessed a rise in attacks in Jerusalem by Arabs who live in the city itself--those with the blue Israeli identity card and the freedom to travel throughout Jerusalem and Israel. This should be a cause for concern, as attacks are originating in areas other than the territories and among Arabs who enjoy more freedom of movement than those in the territories. The very policies that Israel has implemented to secure the country from attack have led some of the Arabs with the most freedoms to carry out attacks against Israelis--not with the backing of terrorist organizations, but on their own.

In order to make sense of this year's attacks, it is important not to tar all forms of "terror" with the same brush, as it seems many Israelis are quick to do. This tendency creates the false impression that Israel is facing a monolithic jihadist threat, which results in a failure to deal appropriately with different forms of terror. A distinction must be drawn between terror organized and perpetrated by extremist Islamic organizations such as Hamas, and attacks which are planned and carried out by individuals. In other words, suicide bombings and the recent bulldozer and car attacks, are not the same--not in the sense that one is any less abhorrent, but rather in the way we must understand them.

Terror can be seen on a spectrum, according to differences in planning and preparation, organizational backing, and ideological motivation. The suicide bombing is terror in the most traditional sense. It is well-planned, has the logistical and financial backing of a terror network, and is motivated by a twisted and violent Islamic fundamentalism bent on the destruction of the State of Israel.

This year's attacks, however, have moved away from this form of terror, along the spectrum, beginning with the attack at the Merkaz Harav yeshiva in which an Arab from East Jerusalem murdered a room full of students. That attack was clearly planned in advance, as the shooter traveled armed into West Jerusalem, and targeted a specific yeshiva which preaches Jewish settlement in the West Bank. While there was an ideological element to the attack as well, it was not supported by a terrorist network (although some tried to claim responsibility). The bulldozer attacks in Jerusalem were further along the spectrum. While the attacks may have been planned in advance, there was not much preparation necessary, they were not backed by a terrorist network, and they were of a more spontaneous nature than the attack at Mercaz Harav.

Still further along the spectrum is the most recent attack in Jerusalem, in which a 19-year old Arab plowed his family car into a group of soldiers crossing the street. This attack had an even more spontaneous quality (given the fact that the attacker did not have access to any special weapon such as a bulldozer), did not have (or need) the backing of a terrorist network, and was not motivated by a specific Islamist ideology. Rather, it seems to have been fueled by general discontentment and a suicidal urge that resulted from a failed attempt at marrying a relative. In the Middle East, for the disturbed and discontented there is an obvious target--the "other". Because it is in the context of the larger conflict, that person is termed a terrorist in the same vein as a suicide bomber.

Understanding the movement of attacks along this spectrum highlights the newest and perhaps most serious danger to Israeli security. Just as it is more difficult to fight a terrorist organization than a country, it is infinitely more difficult to prevent attacks planned and carried out by individuals than it is to fight a terrorist organization. In fact, Israeli police have admitted that they have no solution to this form of attack and have no method to prevent them. This difficulty is only magnified by the fact that the perpetrators of the last four attacks have come from East Jerusalem, and had complete freedom of movement within Jerusalem and Israel.

In addition, as the attacks move further along the spectrum of terror, they are motivated less by extremist ideology, and more by general discontentment and unhappiness, which is naturally blamed on Israeli policies. In fact, the Shin Bet security service recently concluded that the separation wall around Jerusalem has isolated East Jerusalem Arabs from the rest of the Palestinian population, causing them to become more extreme. As they are pushed up against a wall (quite literally), they see few options, and are more likely to resort to violence.

And this is not limited to Arabs in Jerusalem. In recent weeks there have been a number of incidents at checkpoints in the territories, including an attack in which an elderly Palestinian woman threw acid in the eyes of an Israeli soldier.

In the face of the growing trend toward "individual" terror, the hard-lined right wing approach simply does not provide a viable solution. Much of the right-wing position is based on the (correct) argument that terrorist organizations are motivated by a twisted ideology and will stop at nothing short of Israel's destruction. However, this argument collapses when faced with attacks which result not from a fundamentalist ideology, but more out of individual discontentment.

For example, Shin-Bet has repeatedly concluded that the demolition of terrorist homes does not prevent terror, and actually incites more terror attacks--both those carried out by organizations and those carried out by individuals. More importantly, while it is possible to implement a hard-lined policy toward a terrorist organization, which would include arrests and targeted assassinations, it is quite impossible to do so when terror comes from individuals rather than an identifiable organization.

The only treatment for this problem is to attack the root of Arab discontent. While this should not mean, of course, dismantling the entire security apparatus, it means that a concerted effort must be made to change the status quo and address the root cause of the problem rather than simply treating its symptoms. It may be impossible to prevent a religious fanatic or extremist from attempting to carry out an attack. But it is definitely possible to prevent an average individual from being drawn toward twisted ideology because of discontentment, or using an attack on Israelis as a way to commit suicide. If real effort is not made immediately to alleviate the difficulties faced by the Arab population, it will result in irreparable damage and the movement of more and more discontented Arabs toward violence against Israel.