World destruction: a cultural analysis of a threat communique. (Case Study).

At ten o'clock in the morning on October 26, 1990, I was working in my office analyzing transcripts and audiotapes of actual hostage negotiation incidents when I received a phone call from an individual I know in a U.S. government agency in Washington, D.C. This individual mentioned that he was working on a threat assessment of a letter he just had received and wanted to know if I could provide a cultural analysis. His primary question was, "Does this letter appear to be an authentic letter written in an Arab cultural style or could it be written by someone trying to appear as an Arab terrorist?" I told him that I could do a cultural analysis of the letter to answer his question. Little did I realize what that simple statement would involve. (1)

To start with, I learned that a letter was sent on October 16, 1990, and received by military attaches in Washington, D.C., from the embassies of Italy, Australia, Great Britain, and Canada. The writer used the correct names and addresses of the attaches and also sent letters to embassies in London. The one-page communique was written in capital letters in four sections with the subheadings: "Current Situation," "Covert Deployment," "Strategic Warning," and "Technical Verification." Centered at the top of the page, the communique began with-

Urgent Communique

United Nations Security Council

(New York City, USA)

In the sacred name of Allah

(Blessings be upon his holy name)

He who begets not and is not begotten.

It concluded with the name of the writer, Brotherhood of Allah, and essentially stated that certain chemical-biological agents were placed in a number of cities in the world and would be activated if the United States attacked Kuwait. Further, the writer demanded that newspapers throughout the world publish the communique. (2)

Various U.S. government agencies analyzed the communique and provided a determination in the areas of technical feasibility assessment (Can the writer accomplish the threat?), psychological assessment (Is there evidence of psychological disorder of the writer?), and cultural assessment (Is there evidence of the cultural background of the letter writer?). My quick briefing by one of these agencies ended when I was informed, "We need to send in our analysis by 5 p.m. today, so we will need your assessment by 4 p.m. Any problem with that?" Thus, I began 6 hours of intense analysis.

Understanding Cultural Analysis

A cultural analysis is important and can provide a valuable tool for the investigation and analysis of communications, whether those messages are in verbal or written form. All people receive their primary socialization in culture groups, from which they learn specific patterns of perception, meaning, and behavior. These patterns, "because they are learned typically early in life, often are out of awareness and deeply ingrained." (3) Further, simply because someone comes from a specific culture group does not mean that the individual can recognize these "out of awareness" aspects of perception and behavior. Therefore, identifiable, culturally based patterns of behavior emerge in interaction and communication with others. As an interculturalist (i.e., a specialist in how cultural differences influence behavior and social interaction between individuals and groups), my expertise lies in the identification of these cross-cultural patterns of difference.

Establishing Criteria for Cultural Analysis

To begin my work on the threat communique, I established two fundamental criteria for analyzing the document. First, the language translation criterion concerns the degree to which typical errors in writing made by the author of the communique represent typical errors native Arabic speakers make when working from the Arabic to the English language. Identifiable, culture-specific patterns of language translation emerge as individuals attempt to speak or write in a second language while using their primary language system as a reference. (4) For instance, common errors often occur among Koreans writing in English. Because the use of an article, such as a, does not exist in the Korean language, native Korean language speakers writing (or speaking) in English tend to drop the article in sentences (e.g., "I am going for walk now," rather than the correct "I am going for a walk now").

Finding Arabic-to-English language translation errors might suggest that the writer is a native Arabic language speaker. However, not finding these translation errors only means that the writer's command of English is sufficient to not make these errors. In this case, the writer may be a native English language speaker or an Arab or other foreign national proficient in the English language.

Second, the deeper cultural pattern criterion involves an identification of often-unconscious stylistic devices used in writing (and speaking) that provide evidence of deeper cultural elements that likely indicate the cultural background of the writer. Because these deeper cultural (rather than more surface language translation) elements often are "out of awareness," evidence of their presence in the communique is a fairly accurate indicator of the writer's cultural background or nationality.

Finding Evidence of Language Translation Errors

Sometimes, it is common for Arab-English language writing to contain certain errors. One common writing pattern, the Arabic use of the phrase as we all know, reflects a general assumption of common knowledge that may, in fact, not exist. Nevertheless, the phrase typically functions among Arab speakers as a linguistic convention for initiating communication. I found no evidence of this pattern in the communique.

Second, correct use of verb forms and tense often cause difficulties for nonnative speakers of English. For example, the verb be does not exist in Arabic; therefore, Arab writers often confuse tenses or otherwise use this verb improperly. In general, verb tense problems can continue a fairly long time while learning the English language. The communique writer used such phrases as "A variety of chemical-biological warfare (CBW) 'devices' have been covertly deployed..."; "All of the aforementioned CBW 'devices' will be activated immediately..."; and "If the sacred soil of Islam continues to be violated...." In these and other phrases, the writer correctly used have been, will be, and be throughout the document. I found no errors in verb tenses in the communique and, therefore, saw no evidence of this pattern. Similarly, nonnative English speakers typically make mistakes in subject-verb agreement, particularly when it is difficult to determine whether the subject is singular or plural. In the communique, the wri ter did a remarkably good job in maintaining proper subject-verb agreement. For example, "a pack of satanic infidel dogs is poised...."

Third, nonnative English language speakers often make prepositional errors. Prepositions express relationships typically in space and time between nouns, pronouns, or other words. For example, "He did not want to leave the store during the baseball game." Errors that nonnative English language speakers may make include, for instance, "I picked him out of the train station," rather than "I picked him up at the train station." The communique writer consistently used sentences that reflected the proper English language usage of prepositions. For example, "...pack of satanic infidel dogs is poised to strike at the fighting heart of Islam...." Again, I found no evidence of this pattern in the communique.

Fourth, Arab writers of English often use poorly constructed adjective clauses. This occurs with the duplication of basic clause functions in language by a personal pronoun of a function filled by a relative pronoun. Examples of this include: "The car I bought it does not work" or "The man I met him at the station was my friend." Again, the writer consistently employed English language sentences in which this type of error did not occur.

Fifth, Arabic relies heavily on coordination, rather than subordination, in sentence construction. Coordination typically can involve stringing or linking a number of separate ideas together with such words as and. This produces very long, complex, multi-idea sentences, which, in English, are better separated with commas and periods. The communique writer did a remarkably good job of separating various ideas, appropriately using commas and ending sentences correctly with periods. For example, "Needless to say, any and all attempts to locate them, via the utilization of current surveillance technology..." and "In recent months, a variety of chemical-biological warfare...." Throughout the document, I found no evidence of this pattern.

Finally, sometimes, misspelled words exist that may be spelled phonetically but are not correct. Only one word, appearing in the first line of the text, was misspelled: "At this very moment, a ravenously bllodthirsty pack of satanic...." This misspelling of bloodthirsty probably was a typographical error. Therefore, I found no evidence in the communique of this pattern of misspelling. Overall, the writer appeared highly skilled in the English language made none of the more common errors that I would expect from someone translating from Arabic to English.

Determining Evidence of Deeper Cultural Patterns

In Arabic, compared with English, more repetition of a thought (i.e., making the same point several times) occurs. Repetition of an idea functions in Arab cultures to demonstrate sincerity of the writer (or speaker) to the message, as well as a marker to distinguish the importance of one idea compared with another idea. (5) For example, this might be expressed in more ritualistic statements, such as inshallah ("if God wills it") and ishkoraallah ("thanks be to God"), as well as in a simple restatement of a message made earlier. I found the language used in the communique remarkably clear and succinct in its style. For example, the writer used statements, such as "In order to establish the 'bona fides' of this communique, extremely small but biochemically testable samples of....," to express rather clearly the message's intent. Thus, I found no evidence of the Arab pattern of repetition in the communique.

Second, an Arab cultural pattern puts a far greater degree of emotion in the beginning of a message to demonstrate the individual's personal commitment to the ideas presented. (6) At one level, the communique did contain statements that might, on the surface, appear to indicate greater emotional expressiveness. For example, "At this very moment, a ravenously bllodthirsty pack of satanic dogs is poised to strike at the fighting heart of Islam..."; "...the aforementioned infidel dogs have been significantly aided and abetted by a treacherous cabal of traitors to Islam..."; and "Moslem warriors are unafraid of death, because death (for the holy cause) to them means paradise, while death to infidels means only eternal damnation in hell."

The communique did have statements, such as "ravenously, bllodthirsty, infidel dogs," which are more highly emotionally charged. However, the letter remained uncharacteristically unemotional concerning the personal feelings and commitments of the writer and "his" people. The purpose of using more highly charged emotional expression within Arab discourse is to demonstrate the writer's personal commitments and feelings. In this respect, then, the writer did not connect the more emotionally charged language to his or her own viewpoint or actions. In fact, the writer did not use any inclusive terms to suggest that he or she was one of the "Moslem warriors." In the example, "Moslem warriors are unafraid of death...," the writer did not say what should have been a more natural phrase, "We Moslem warriors are unafraid of death...," nor did the writer place himself or herself in the picture by saying, "...to us means paradise...." Further, the writer gave a cultural rationale for death in this example. Typically, thi s would be assumed with no need to "spell it out" to someone else unless the writer wanted to show the reader that he or she knew something about Arab culture and Muslim religion. This represents fairly common information, so it is not particularly insightful.

Third, an American pattern of argument places the primary thesis statement at the beginning of a paragraph, whereas an Arabic one puts the main point at the end of a paragraph. This reflects a more general pattern of difference between American (English speakers) and Arab cultures in which Arab patterns of persuasion are found in the form of presentation, rather than the more precise logical structure and evidence of proof.7 For example, the writer began the second paragraph of the communique with a clear thesis statement: "If any part of the Republic of Iraq, including province number nineteen (19) 'Kuwait,' is attacked by anyone, for any reason whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, then all...." In each of the principal paragraphs, the main point was well stated at the beginning. Therefore, I found the logic of the writer clearly more America" than Arab.

Fourth, one of the deeper "out of awareness" aspects of cultural programming concerns the use of imagery, metaphors, and analogies. Because of this, how individuals employ imagery, metaphors, and analogies can be particularly insightful regarding their cultural identity. The communique writer used the phrase "...ravenously bllodthirsty pack of satanic infidel dogs...." From the cultural perspective of many Muslims, a dog generally is considered an "unclean" creature; an animal, for example, that they would not have in their home. However, the imagery used by the writer invoked a "pack of dogs." This is not the primary notion of an Arab cultural view of a dog (e.g., the term pack of dogs, or wolves, does not appear in Arabic dictionaries). (8)

In contrast, situations where Americans would think of dogs in a negative sense tend to include those where the animals are wild; run in packs; and attack, for example, defenseless deer. Clearly, this negative image of a dog from an American viewpoint is not the same as the negative connotative meaning of the animal from a Muslim or Arab cultural view. Therefore, I found the use of the term pack to describe "infidel dogs" not typical of the Arab or Muslim mind-set. Specifically, it is not that dogs run in "packs" that make them particularly vile to an Arab or Muslim warrior. Yet, the use of the term pack for Americans is critical in characterizing the dog as a vile animal. Thus, I found this particular use of imagery far more characteristic of an American, rather than an Arab, pattern.

Finally, a number of words and phrases cast daub on the Arabic background of the writer and also suggested that the writer was male and at least 45 years of age or older. First, the writer stated that "...the aforementioned infidel dogs have been significantly aided and abetted by...." The phrase significantly aided and abetted is common to American English language speakers. Further, the word aforementioned represents an older English language term for previously or "above." To me, this suggested that the writer possibly was older, perhaps 45 years of age or more. Second, the writer stated that "In recent months, a variety of chemical-biological warfare (CBW) 'devices' have been covertly deployed to a strategically significant number of 'safe' locations.... These 'devices' have been programmed in 'fail-safe' modes, so that (if located) any attempt...." The words devices and fail-safe illustrated the use of quotation marks to highlight an idea, while (if located) represented one of a number of examples that t he writer used of the parenthetical, another sophisticated English language device. Again, the writer used these more sophisticated English language elements properly. Also, the writer's use of the word safe was not typical. Safe, in the context of the communique, meant a location free from detection, something a person might have read in a spy novel. An Arab national would have had to know this rather uncommon meaning to have used it properly. Finally, the writer used a number of technical terms throughout (e.g., covert deployment and technical verification), possibly reflecting a military background or, more likely, indicating an avid reader of military and spy novels.

Providing the Analysis

Overall, I found no direct evidence that the writer's English language command was such that typical Arabic errors in English were present in the communique. The deeper cultural analysis suggested that the writer was an American attempting to sound like an Arab terrorist. The logic of the communique, the writing style, the use of words, the imagery of the "pack of dogs," and the technical terminology suggested that the writer was an American male in his 50s. After I submitted my analysis, authorities subsequently apprehended the writer. He was an American white male, in his 50s, living in the United States.

Conclusion

Traditionally, threat assessments have included both technical feasibility and psychological assessment. What was unique to the analysis of this threat communique was the additional cultural analysis. This provided a profile that assisted law enforcement authorities in their investigative efforts.

In addition to the integration of cultural analysis into overall threatening communication assessments, a targeted communication or discourse-based analysis of these threat messages also should be included as part of a comprehensive assessment procedure to augment more traditional technical feasibility and psychological profiling currently used in law enforcement. This communication and culture approach can prove useful in assessing the degree and intent of threat messages, identifying the writer/communicator, determining the writer's back-ground (e.g., nationality, age, and sex), and uncovering key message "hot buttons" embedded within the writer's communication. This significantly can aid law enforcement in selecting persuasive counter-messages more likely to impact the writer's behavior in predictable ways. Finally, this approach is not limited to assessing written communication. It also can apply to assessments of verbal threat as well.

Endnotes

(1.) The author based this article on his professional experience in the area of cultural analysis and his knowledge of the Arab culture.

(2.) The author does not present an exact copy of the threat communique. Rather, he provides an overall description of the letter, along with specific examples that illustrate the analysis he undertook.

(3.) Mitchell R. Hammer, "Negotiating Across the Cultural Divide: Intercultural Dynamics in Crisis Incidents," in R.G. Rogan, M. R. Hammer, and C.R. Van Zandt eds., Dynamic Processes of Crisis Negotiation (Westport, CT: Praeger Press, 1997), 105-114.

(4.) A.C. Purves, Writing Across Languages and Cultures (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1988).

(5.) E. Feghali, "Arab Cultural Communication Patterns," International Journal of Intercultural Relations 21(1997): 345-378.

(6.) Ibid.; and R. Cohen, Negotiating Across Cultures: International Communication in an Interdependent World (Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press, 1997).

(7.) Supra note 5.

(8.) See, for example, Almonjid (Beruit, Lebanon: Dar el-Machreq Publishers, 1992).

Dr. Hammer is a managing partner of a private crisis management group and a professor of international peace and conflict resolution at the American University in Washington, D.C.