Potential explanations have already begun to proliferate as to why Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the suspect in custody after last week’s Fort Hood shooting, may have gone on his rampage. They include his radical Muslim faith, the emotional distress he may have encountered as a result of working with soldiers returning from war, and even his rumored ties, so far unsubstantiated, with several 9/11 hijackers. But no matter what reasons surface, the shooting will remain an inexplicable tragedy.
In the past few years, this country has been rocked by a number of destructive acts. The most upsetting-Seung-Hui Cho’s Virginia Tech shooting, the bombings of the World Trade Center, and the Columbine massacre, to name a few-have been so disturbing because of their senselessness. Although in each instance the perpetrators’ political and personal motivations eventually came to light, nothing was really explained. That a human being could inflict such pain on the world defies all logic and overwhelms any reason.
Even if we can’t understand such tragedies, we can learn from them. After the Columbine and Virginia Tech shootings, families, schools and communities increased their efforts to help troubled teens. The attacks of 9/11 made Americans too aware that we can’t ignore our place in an increasingly connected world. Holes in our security have been plugged. As a result of each event, a series of steps, both practical and philosophical, have been taken to ensure that such violence will not happen again.
There are lessons to be learned from Fort Hood, too. Warning signs that Hasan might have been unfit for military service weren’t given proper attention. According to his classmates at a military college, Hasan repeatedly made anti-American remarks and argued that Islamic law was more important than the U.S. Constitution. While at the Uniformed Services University, he gave a presentation defending the practice of suicide bombing. His classmates say they repeatedly notified their superiors about Hasan’s political activity; that he continued to serve in uniform suggests not enough scrutiny was given to his beliefs.
Hasan’s political views are protected by the First Amendment, and the government cannot censor them. But it can protect its interests, the safety of its citizens being foremost among them. Anyone professing views as extreme as Hasan’s, especially when they justify violence targeting civilians, should not be placed in a position of military leadership. The army should welcome people of all political and religious beliefs so long as they want to protect this country and civilians everywhere. It should not turn a blind eye to its members carrying those beliefs to destructive extremes.
Hasan’s ideology may have played a part in the shootings, but it’s doubtful that it was the only cause. Many Americans hold passionate political views; very few enforce them at gunpoint. Investigators will surely look into the state of Hasan’s mental health, and they should try to determine what pressures could drive someone to such an act. The armed forces already have programs designed to treat mental conditions, such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, but they should increase their efforts to recognize and help those faced with psychiatric problems.
Hasan also felt himself the victim of anti-Muslim hate. His relatives say he was upset over being harassed by other members of the Army. His car was keyed by a soldier angered by Hasan’s bumper sticker that read, “Allah is Love.” Another time, Hasan found a camel drawn on his car with the words “Camel jockey, get out!” written underneath.
To its credit, the Army has worked to discourage such prejudice, and in the aftermath of the shootings, Army Chief of Staff General George Casey asked commanders to guard against an anti-Muslim backlash and spoke of the importance of the diversity provided by the thousands of Muslims serving in the armed forces. While discrimination exists in almost all large institutions, the military relies on unquestioning loyalty between its members, and it should do everything in its power to eliminate prejudice in its ranks.
No matter how many precautions are taken, there will always be violent individuals who manage to take out their rage on others. It is possible that, even if the Army had heeded all the warning signs, Hasan may still have opened fire on Fort Hood. But the Army should learn from this event and examine its policies and procedures to do whatever it can to avert similar disasters in the future.
I pray for all those affected by the Fort Hood shooting. I also pray that in the wake of this tragedy, we do everything possible to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.
Nathaniel French is a junior theater studies major. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
