Why are so many would-be terrorists engineers?
Engineers are characterized by a greater intolerance of uncertainty, a quality evident among extremists.
By Emmanuel Sivan Tags: Israel newsWhat links the following people: the Nigerian who wanted to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 to Detroit on Christmas Day; the two Palestinians arrested at Be'er Sheva's Central Bus Station and who are suspected of reconnoitering for a mass terror attack; Mohammed Abd al-Salam Faraj, leader of the killers of Anwar Sadat; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, planner of the attack on the Twin Towers; Mohamed Atta, who commanded the attack; and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?
Answer: all are engineers or students of engineering and applied science. There are other examples, such as in the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan, and in the Hamas leadership. We're talking about real engineers or students of the science, not the terrorist bomb makers often described as "engineers".
I am among those who attribute this phenomenon first and foremost to what is described as engineering thinking or an engineering mindset. The concept includes an assumption, which has been raised in psychological research, that engineering as a field of study and a profession tends to attract people who seek certainty, and their approach to the world is largely mechanistic. So they are characterized by a greater intolerance of uncertainty - a quality that is evident among extremists, both religious and secular.
Those with engineering mindsets are also characterized by an approach that requires society to operate "like clockwork" and abhors democratic politics, which requires compromises. It's clear that this is a cumulative tendency and not a stereotypical generalization.
I raised a similar thesis years ago at a Technion conference, where the presidents of similar institutions from around the world were invited to discuss "The image of the engineer in the 21st Century." A lively debate took place between supporters and opponents of the thesis. According to the organizer of the conference, the late physics Prof. Paul Singer, the number of those in favor and those opposed was about equal. If this is the case, it's possible to offer additional explanations, completing or overlapping this thesis.
First, cognitive dissonance, in other words, high expectations that end in bitter disappointment. In the Arab world the standards for being accepted into engineering programs are very high and the studies are demanding. On the other hand, work in the enormous public sector is routine, wages are low, subjection to hierarchy is humiliating and the position's social status is moderate - unless they are willing to go abroad to the United Arab Emirates, (which is how it is seen) from Cairo, Amman and Damascus. There wages are good, but amid social isolation and cultural desolation.
Today, employment in the Gulf is less available than even in the 1970s. In-depth interviews and focus groups have shown that Muslim engineers tend to interpret this situation as an expression of fundamental injustice that characterizes their societies, and from that the distance is short to viewing the radical Islamist solution as representative of the egalitarian ideal.
Second, it can be assumed that in technological fields, a young Muslim faces Western superiority (including the superiority of Japan, China and South Korea). How can this inferiority be explained in the Muslim world, which in the past was at the cutting edge of scientific progress? That Islam is in decline. Whoever aims to stop this decline and opposes blind imitation of the West to preserve his cultural uniqueness will find many people sharing the same outlook among the radical Islamist groups.
On the other hand, a young Muslim who studies humanities and social sciences will encounter critics of Western culture from within. Some observers have noted that Western culture is becoming impoverished, others have identified structural failures in the West and foresaw crisis and/or revolution: Karl Marx to Antonio Negri, Frantz Fanon to Joseph Stiglitz, Mikhail Bakunin to Naomi Klein. A young Muslim can join an anti-globalization movement without any relation to fundamentalist Islam and sense that he is fighting for a more just world; he can sense that through him flow major historical trends.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
The analysis completely ignores cause and effect. "A lot of terrorists are engineers" therefore lets find some phsycobabble to explain why. What about the thesis that to undertake a mission requires some level of intelligence and competence in a wide range of technical skills such as electronics, mechanics, physics and chemistry? Hmmmmm I wonder what type of qualification that person would need? It is also the case that many would be terrorists get entry visas into their target countries because there is a shortage of medical and engineering professionals. There never seems to be the same demand for those qualified in the arts. But lets ignore the above and go with the psychobabble. It is much more interesting and gets the author some publicity. Cheap Shot!!!!!!
I believe none of Palestinian engineers working in Intel's plant at Kiryat Gat or other Israel's high-tech company turned terrorist. Thanks to 10 years of incessant war and blockades, Palestinian economy does not exist any more. So, engineers logic is simple. "I cannot get job because of war. War won't stop as long as occupation lasts. Politicians cannot solve it. Therefore..." Restore Palestinian economy or find them other jobs according to qualification, so they won't turn terrorists.
Since there seem to be so many physician terrorists as well, I wonder if someone is going to come up with a psychobabble explanation for why that profession also attracts extremists. More likely, terrorists tend to be well educated in general and an engineering education is a big help if you want to figure out how to make a better bomb. The engineers therefore have an advantage in the competition for prominent roles in any terrorist group.
As a copyright lawyer I still can be amazed by patent lawyers. They are always on the search for technical certainty and provability to make their case. You can bring foam on their mouth by asking after that "yes, but is it original, does the work have the selfexisting originalety of creation that gives it copyright instead of being a copy of another work"? How they can hate norms, new insights and criteria from the world of arts and design after they counted the screws and the wires!
Being an engineer (though software one) I can't but ask: please define "so many"! What is the percentage of engineers among terrorists? What are other occupations available in the Muslim world for a male with a college degree ? To be a successful planner of a terrorist attack, one has to be literate in several areas of engineering, BTW. That might be another factor. In other words, there are factors which might play a more significant role that "uncertainty avoidance" (which is close to many hearts.) Either the hypothesis is not well substantiated, or the article does not do it justice...