Indeed, we are facing the philosophical contradiction of being victims of a situation that is generated by the own society. Violent attacks and extremist ideologies don’t come from nowhere but from the weakness of leaders and institutions at national and mostly important, at global level.

At European level it doesn’t make sense of expecting an “even closer Union” if there is not a change of the system, particularly in management of foreign affairs and military presence in countries with “extremist” groups.

The idea that extremism historically has existed is it true, but that the fact that these attacks are coming without a reason is not. In many cases there is a way – cruel and inappropriate- for defending themselves of what consider an outrageous invasion of their country and culture. In the case of Syria, the fight against a dictatorship and the indiscriminate attacks from the Government, has qualified them as “rebels” which in reality is it just an attempt for establishing a democratic system.

In Afghanistan*, there is a solid ideological position against military foreign presence. U.S. has shown clearly its ineffectiveness on fighting against the “rebels” and its devastating operations ended up in the complete destruction of entire cities and the massive killing of civilians. Nevertheless still persists in its policies by even more aggressive attacks.

In addition, United Nations become totally weak without leadership over a Security Council that goes almost independent with a disproportionate power from the big Nations responsible of reducing and preventing violence and extremism.

Is it not of receipt the indiscriminate military presence of Western countries in Middle East when it has become the real threat and the main reason for extremism.

In Europe and the trend for nationalism is radically different from Middle East extremism but is it also a reaction against the weakness of institutions and leaders with an alarming threat of escalating violence. Globalization needs to be reshaped accordingly to the new challenges and this kind of movements (Brexit, Catalonia, etc.) find his way precisely because there is no a harmonic connection and counterbalance that stops this “wave of extremism” at all levels.

Security will come with a change on the philosophical approach. It doesn’t help to make a war on extremism without attacking the roots of it and the needs and claims of the so-called “extremists”. Dialogue is not a concession but the only fair way to resolve threats and make changes with real impact.

We must demand Governments and leaders to stop the speech of “war against terrorism” and change for “war against lack of Diplomacy and Negotiation”.

“Inflating” the planet towards the real war and not the “political” war of power, extremism is only a sign that the system is not responsive, not a surreal enemy coming from nowhere.

*https://thesustainabilityreader.com/2017/08/23/afghanistan-the-anti-establishment-u-s-focus-that-turns-into-stronger-establishment/

*https://thesustainabilityreader.com/2016/12/28/new-cruel-rules-of-war-after-aleppo-1-violate-ihl-and-achieve-victory-2-fight-against-a-brutal-dictatorship-and-you-are-a-terrorist-3-destroy-a-city-evacuate-people-and-the-city-is-yours/