The youth and Misuse of Technology in Terrorism

15 December 2014

               This is the FM Gold channel of AIR, In the Programme News Analysis/Spotlight now we bring you the dialogue on the youth and misuse of technology in terrorism. Participants are anil Mr.Kamboch former IG BSF, Mrs.Saveetha pandey security analyst.

              

               The arrest of a young Indian, tech savvy, executive for the support of terror is actually an incident, incident in itself reflecting larger reality today; this is the serious question of youth influenced by a. Biotechnology b. Technology influencing the spread of terror. There are two aspects to it – 1. Changing pattern of the modality of the terrorism, 2. The section which following terror are being influential largely; these are two evolving pattern, rather they have evolved to such an extent that we see as a result of even a nascent Organisation like IS attracting so much of attention. The largest twitter was actually Creech your handle by the sand.  The denial is not withstanding, thus he told the channel 4, this was being done essentially to take them off his back. Secluded incident notwithstanding, I think it is important today to see how the youth is being drawn towards the radicalized front. What are your opinions, I would say on two senses. 1. Younger generation being attracted to terrorism 2. The use of younger generation by the Terror Organisation in the pursuit of Terror?

               Actually the youth they don’t have any matured mind, and they can be drawn towards any ideology. Actually these youths are firstly made to more interested in something, something new. And In case if they get influenced by technology or by the networking or social networking which is very easily available. They get influenced in to it and gradually these youth who are not matured whose minds are not matured they get influenced and gradually they are motivated, motivated to certain things. Once they get motivate, they gradually radicalized. And this thus take some time but it’s the easiest way, you don’t have to go to any madarsha, any training institutions, you don’t have to go anywhere else. In your leisure time you are being motivated, you’re being radicalized by such people, by such social networking. Once you get in to it, gradually you are tossed; and you are trapped in to it. And they give you task to do certain thing Once you are radicalized you don’t thing, you don’t apply your mind. And these youth can do anything for particular cause or particular religion. In this case it was ISIS who was using him, In that he has twitted, and has made almost what has come in media is 17,000 people following his twit and twitted with him. You can imagine, These 17,000 people must have got influenced, motivated by what he has twitted and in the same way in which he has been motivated, radicalized in same manner these 17k younger generation may be radicalized by his twit, the things which he have floated to them, teaching what he have told in social Network. Now you can imagine, 17k younger generation who have got influenced, they can spread all over. And it is a sort of… I can use a word “cancer” which can spread all over. And this particular ideology which spreading cannot be ignored at any stage. Now coming to another part. The people who are matured they don’t get easily radicalized; they don’t get influenced, because they know the pros and cons of it. The younger generation they are warm blood, they can do anything because they are not mature and the older generation they are not much use to it, the social network which we can FB, twitter which is easily done by the younger generation, the older people they do not know how to operate. So it is, so decision for them to go teaching place or to be preached by some preacher. And here is no preacher or teaching is required except what is available in the media, this is why the youth is being attracted.

                 Well, this is also debunked the older model or older saying that the poor, the poverty drive people to terrorism to crime. And then you know that’s how you have the can and fodder coming in the terror organization. If you look in to it, it require an extremely savvy mind for 24 year old engineer, it just one of the instants, in fact there are instants in other countries, you can even hear terrorist organization hiring very small children in terror bomb waiving, and there articulation of it and you see it how fast is trend some of the modality or you put them in gaming, In gaming you get terror games you get influenced by it. Even there are games you know which go to the extent of attacking or killing the heads of the state. All the survey show that people who are more entertain still you know for entertainment there are larger section which goes. Now you will see younger generation goes for Entertainment mode and so there is an attempt to moderate entire modern day technology around entertainment so that the younger generation attracted towards it.

Then the other section is what you have to see the other community moves from web 1.0 to 2.0. That is earlier they were information seeking, individually seeking now community seeking and also information spreading. That is how technology has become attractive. The other side is these terror organization are sometime smarter than the states. You will find that the most of the, even the western countries realized that the reach of the terrorist, goes farther more tech savvy. And you know that’s how they even grow. So how do you think, the state can run or take mechanism to stop this, you cannot undo or tell people not to use internet. Or what you say flipside of it, or tell them not to go in to gaming. Or tell them…you know…  How is it, will the state can take steps to check or curb this kind of Technology spread?

               Actually it the administrator who so ever has developed this particular twit or social networking, they should be held responsible for that, there should be governance to it. How to instill in to it?

              They can only be, I can give you particular example, for example in china, they have banned the Google, and nobody can use it. So that is an extreme. Not there should be certain term via media in which you can block, in case somebody using it in a negative way. The alert should go to the administrator; they should further inform the government intelligence agency who can track the identity from where this particular been originated. In case this could be developed by the administrator, though it is difficult, but this technology has to be developed. Otherwise this type of negative social working or the spreading of certain these things in the negative form will be really a curse for a particular country, not only for the country but to the entire world.

 Banning in  the.. Ban on Youtube, lot of call from the state. Denial in term led to circumventing the technology rather than making use of it. So, I think there is another element, education, basic education. My own feeling is, the state can run parallel program of you know, Singapore has done it for instant, both private sector level and state level, of correcting people on the myth about the religion, what religion permit, what it doesn’t permit. In fact this issue which we were discussing the issue in India, the issue which actually put you in trouble was beheading and deporting the IS ideology. I see, there can be Parallel channel, parallel website, were you know, you can demist or tell them exactly truth, or right kind of direction, even questions about the religion, religious ideology, community participation all that can take place. State also has to take positive role in forming parallel technology and parallel website, parallel gaming you can say. And Take an extra enthusiasm say, because banning is never a solution. So, I think state run parallel program, all it can learn from CSO, private sector where you can counter these things. You know what you have to attack is the basic idea of spreading, of course short term measure curbing technology, all checking from where these messages are going on. But I think the solution lies in the root cause of checking these spreaders are scattered and also countering the ideology of the extremist. And other issues I would like to bring are the role of CSO, I think there the role of education comes; role of education in technology is the very serious avenues, how to prevent, or how to keep the youth within the limits of the education. So I personally think, it is my opinion, I would like to know your opinion. How do you think about it, if the state tries to control or channelize the way as one of the example of Singapore, what would be the implication for the use of internet and the society in general.

As if Internet being used in the negative way, the same internet can be used for the betterment. For example, right form the childhood, the children should be taught about how to use the internet in a positive way, how to gain knowledge out of it. Instead of spreading something negative on that internet, that is be actually, right from the basic, when the child starts learning about the present technology, right from the beginning, he should be taught about the good things, good social behavior, about the good point. He should not be made his mind should not be turned towards negative, for example, the negative games which are coming, those weapons which are coming. If his mind should be taken off from there, right from the beginning, a child mind should be developed in to a positive use of that technology which is available for his age at that time, so this is about one thing can be done. Second is about the social worker, who should spread the word all around, what you said rightly the side by side Govt. should also carry on programs, not only programs in higher age groups, they should start right from schools,  right from when they learn handling of computer, handling of technologies. Right from that time, he should be motivated; his mind should be made in to that he should think about positive not about destruction. Younger generation, what I have seen, with my experience, still young children they are motivated towards destruction.  Instead of destruction, his mind should be towards building something.  That’s what I say

                   I completely agree with what you have said. In Initial I would say, countering should be of the both level, technical as well as society level. Especially because, the youth is getting embracing an attempt should be made not only through the program, the messages more attractive so that we can address the youth. Understanding the radicalization, as well as how they can use technology and how the things can be done in positive way. It should be done in individual level, society level, and state level, all combined together will have to fight the misuse of technology and spread of terror. So I think the idea or the myth that the terror is spread by the poor people and debunk. And also the terror doesn’t require any suffice we know what happened in 9/11 or Mumbai attack. So I think apart from policing or combined joint policing, all the anti-terror institution we have setup should work in three level, individual level, society level and also at the technology level. Unless an integrated reform or strategy is formed, it is very difficult to any de-radicalization program to succeed. Because you know even money making is through internet. And the state comes, when these terror organizations become self-suffice and controlling them becomes even difficult. That is why multi-prong-different level integrated approach is essential to deal with taking away the youth form radicalization and misuse of technology for radicalization.