Woolwich

A tragedy occurred recently in Woolwich, London. Lee Rigby, a 25 year old member of the British military was murdered in broad daylight by two men shouting "Allahu Akbar." After trying to behead him with a machete and a cleaver, they then filmed a message detailing their justification as outrage at British foreign policy in Iraq and Afghanistan. An urgent Cobra defence meeting was then commenced by leading Police, Military and Government figures, describing the attack as "terrorism."

So far, two main streams of thought have dominated the political discussion as to why this tragic event occurred. The first is the one offered by ultra-Nationalists such as the EDL, who argue this is symptomatic of the large "evil" Islamic presence in Britain. The second one stream of thought is that unjust British foreign policy in the Iraq war and Afghanistan have raised tensions and made us a target for radical islamists. Both are incorrect.

Despite what the English Defence League may tell you, Woolwich was not a result of Islam's beliefs because Islam probably played a negligible role in the killer's motivation. Whether you are a Muslim or not isn't the deciding factor of whether you are going to kill someone, as evidenced by the many peaceful Muslims not inclined to murder anybody. The man was a Muslim, but that does not mean his Islamic faith caused the murder. Islam, like any culture or part of society, has its own share of bad people who do bad things.

Nor was British foreign policy the main cause of this atrocity, with some claiming we made ourselves "a target for terrorist attacks" Whilst the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan has angered many Muslims and other protestors, nearly all have found a way to oppose the wars peacefully. The foreign policy did not inspire normally peaceful people to suddenly murder. It has just provided an excuse for the already disturbed and violent to lash out in an exceptional and horrific manner. The cause of this murder was not foreign policy, but the inability of two people to deal with it in the peaceful way the majority of others had opted for.

The Woolwich tragedy was not caused by the killers' Islamic faith, or British foreign policy. It was caused because two presumably disturbed, volatile and violent men had the psychological capacity to kill someone and found an excuse to do so.

So why have these two false narratives of faith and policy garnered such attention and ground?

The first reason is because of our selective bias. We already have views and opinions, and we will subconsciously attempt to fit events into this frame of reference "as evidence" for those beliefs. The EDL want to believe Woolwich was the result of the Islamic faith because they already believe Islam is bad and this narrative supports that view. The anti-war campaigners want to believe this is the result of the Iraq war because that narrative would support and further justify their argument. Both these groups are large and have good media exposure, meaning these narratives gain intellectual ground quickly.

The adoption of these positions is also because they offer a "lesson" that can be learned, so as to prevent them happening again. They not only provide reason for the tragedy, but a comforting message that we can take steps to stop it re-occurring. This not only assures those worrying about their safety, but also ensures the tragedy did not occur in vain, because society can "learn" from it. This is another reason these narratives have proved popular; because they provide comfort and meaning.

In the anti-Islamic case , the "lesson" is that Islam should be removed from Britain, and this will stop tragedies like this occurring again. In the case of those who blame foreign policy, the "lesson" is that we need to withdraw from our conflicts faster, apologise, and take a more conciliatory approach in future issues, this will help prevent a similar event in the future.

However, this tragedy was not caused by these two things. It was caused by two men with warped morals deciding to kill someone, with Islamic outrage at foreign policy providing a convenient excuse. It was a senseless heinous act. There was no meaning to this violence. There is no lesson we can learn from it and no easy solution. There will always be violent people in the world, with the capacity and will to murder. Tragedy doesn't need to be meaningful, reveal an insight or provide a realisation. Woolwich was an example of this, perhaps increasing it's tragic nature. The blame and responsibility lies not with Islam or the Iraq war, but with the men that committed this atrocity.