In part one, I discussed how the Paris attacks could be a harbinger of future events both in Europe and the United States. Instead of attempting to limit the number of terrorist attacks to zero, we as individuals and as a society should learn from such attacks with the ultimate goal of becoming resilient to terrorism and its goals; namely that of instilling fear. By decoupling the fear of a terrorist attack from actions in Iraq and Syria, we can meaningfully move forward in defeating the so-called Islamic State (IS) and lay the groundwork for stability there and elsewhere, something I will explore more in the second half of this series.

In the previous article, I argued that regardless of the so-called Islamic State’s (IS) motivation behind the Paris attacks, it is foolish to think that Western society could turn back the clock to pre-9/11. Terrorism is diffuse and used by many groups. The spread of technology and shift of power to non-state actors enables them to plan and communicate from half a world away and direct or inspire others to conduct an attack in the U.S. Homeland. This means that attacks such as San Bernardino, Paris, or the failed 2010 Times Square bombing can come from anyone at any time, and Western society cannot just wish such a threat away.

How we currently address the threat of terrorism

When a terrorist attack happens, we as a society enter into a well-worn cycle. We blame law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or the government as a whole for such failures. There is a brief flurry of media reports, and then we try to go on with our lives in the hope that ‘never again’ will terrorists conduct an attack in our country. While some adjustments do occur, we never step back and look at how terrorism plays out in our lives as a free and open society.

This ‘never again’ mindset propels us to run in place by leaving our society stuck in a fear-based rut that is focused on security-at-all-expenses. This makes our focus (and our politician’s) extremely short-term and single-minded and translates to an overwhelming focus on a single actor or event, such as defeating the IS in Iraq and Syria. However, what this fails to take into account is that the world is an interconnected system, and while we apply pressure to IS in Iraq and Syria, the group grows elsewhere in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia regions.

Once can peruse the headlines to see how this fear-based way of living can have second and third order consequences. Some politicians claim that the solution is to ban refugees from war-torn locations, from denying an entire religious sect from entering the country, and subjecting those already in the country to big brother like monitoring. While some state that such claims are made to drum up support, the fact that such an argument is not immediately and widely denounced underscores that such ideas might at least resonate somewhat in our society.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. In an open society we can choose to accept that terrorists will try to disrupt our day-to-day mode of life, try to unseat us from our values, but we will not give them the attention such groups desire. In other words, we can accept that terrorism is a tactic, but we reject its goal of invoking terror. One way to reduce such fear is by becoming an antifragile society and reorienting how we look at terrorist attacks.

How to stop worrying and live an antifragile life

To start, it is important to look at what living a resilient—or better put antifragile—life would give us. Nassim Taleb discusses in his book Antifragile that an organism that grows when exposed to stress is an antifragile organism. One of the best examples is to think of weightlifting. As you expose your body to heavier and heavier weights, your muscles grow in response, and soon you find that lifting what was once a heavy weight is not so hard.

Antifragility is already practiced somewhat in our response to terrorist attacks. When an attack happens, we break down the ‘how’ of the attack and institute changes to prevent similar attacks from happening. On 9/11 hijackers stormed the cockpit of airplanes, so we installed locked cockpit doors. However, we stop at this very mechanical application of antifragility, satisfied that one minor adjustment is able to stop terrorism write large. Thus, we become surprised when terrorists naturally adapt to such adjustments and enter a fear-driven cycle as explained above.

Instead, we can go one-step further and adjust our own lives to defeat terrorist goals. We can recognize that terrorist attacks will occur regardless of counterterrorism pressure, and that even with the best intelligence and police effort, terrorists are bound to attack occasionally. But these attacks are more often smaller and cause few casualties. Instead of trying to tightly control our environment, we can learn to grow and thrive in a world of chaos and disorder—true antifragility.

Reorient your thinking - Terrorist Attacks are like Earthquakes

I have found it helpful to think of terrorist attacks like earthquake events. Taking some charts from the book The Signal and the Noise, you can see how there are many smaller terrorist attacks in NATO countries that claim tens of lives, and only a few attacks—such as 9/11—that claim thousands. It is important to remember that this chart takes into account counterterrorism responses, so the chart really shows a system in balance between the terrorist and counterterrorist.

Armed with this understanding, we begin to see that security is only part of our approach to building a more stable outcome in places like Iraq and Syria. Because we have adjusted our security apparatus previously in an antifragile manner to stop all but the smallest attacks, we can move from a failed ‘never again’ strategy to one that pursues broader goals and resists propping up autocratic governments that suppress its constituents and provides an environment for terrorism.

Take a look at Iraq and Syria. Instead of a fear-based, security minded policy focused on the immediate issue of defeating the IS at the expense of everything else, we pursue the defeat of the IS in addition to building governments in Iraq and Syria that are more representative and cognizant of historical norms in those two countries (something I will explore more in the next post). This broader focus aligns our strategic goals with our desired outcomes in the region, and prevents us jumping from crisis to crisis, such as scrambling to figure out how to deal with the fallout after the IS is defeated.

I will be honest, a life of antifragility is not void of sadness and tragedy, but it is grounded in reality and enables our society to live a life without fear. I know that I touched the wave tops of some concepts unfamiliar to readers. If you are interested in learning more, I have included some reference materials for you to explore further.

Resources

Antifragile by Nissan Taleb

Developing Situation Awareness by Art of Manliness blog

Resilience by Eric Greitens

When fear drives policy – The Bridge blog