Difference between revisions of "Terrorism" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
(fixed)
 
(52 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
{{Claimed}}
+
{{Submitted}}{{Images OK}}{{Approved}}{{Paid}}{{copyedited}}
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 
[[Category:Sociology]]
 +
{{terrorism}}
  
 +
'''Terrorism''' is a term used to describe violence or other harmful acts committed (or threatened) against civilians by groups or persons for [[politics|political]] or other [[ideology|ideological]] goals. Most definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create [[fear]] or "terror," are perpetrated for a political goal (as opposed to a [[hate crime]] or "madman" attack), and deliberately target "non-combatants." Some definitions include a priori immunity for the "legitimate" [[government]]. Consistent definitions may not restrict or fix in advance the list of possible affected subjects and must include state terrorism. In many cases the determination of "legitimate" targets and the definition of "combatant" are disputed, especially by partisans to the [[conflict]] in question.
  
−
 
+
Many people find the terms "terrorism" and "terrorist" (someone who engages in terrorism) to have a negative connotation. These terms are often used as political labels to condemn violence or threat of violence by certain actors as [[morality|immoral]], indiscriminate, or unjustified. Those labeled "terrorists" may not identify themselves as such, and typically use other generic terms or terms specific to their situation, such as [[separatism|separatist]], [[freedom fighter]], liberator, [[revolution]]ary, [[guerrilla warfare|guerrilla]], or [[jihad]]i.  
−
 
+
{{toc}}
−
'''Terrorism''' [[Low intensity conflict]], [[Low intensity warfare]] is a term used to describe violence or other harmful acts committed (or threatened) against [[civilians]] by groups or persons for political or other ideological goals.<ref>"The divergent assessments of the same evidence on such an important issue shocks a leading terrorism researcher. 'The notion of terrorism is fairly straightforward &mdash; it is ideologically or politically motivated violence directed against civilian targets.'" said Professor Martin Rudner, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies at Ottawa's Carleton University." Humphreys, Adrian. [http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=a64f73d2-f672-4bd0-abb3-2584029db496 "One official's 'refugee' is another's 'terrorist'"], ''[[National Post]]'', January 17, 2006.</ref> Most [[definitions of terrorism]] include only those acts which are: intended to create fear or "terror," are perpetrated for a political goal (as opposed to a [[hate crime]] or "madman" attack), deliberately target "non-combatants." Some definitions include a priori immunity for the "legitimate" [[government]]. Consistent definitions may not restrict or fix in advance the list of possible affected subjects and must include [[state terrorism]]. In many cases the determination of "legitimate" targets and the definition of "combatant" is disputed (especially by partisans to the conflict in question).
+
While the name of the acts and actors may be disputed, the violence is nonetheless all too real and "terrible." Responses to the use of such methods to achieve any goal, worthy or not, have often involved additional violence, and ignored the reasons that led to the perpetration of the acts. Without addressing the underlying problems, solutions are unlikely.
−
 
+
[[File:UA Flight 175 hits WTC south tower 9-11 edit.jpeg|thumb|right|300px|Smoke billowing from the [[World Trade Center]] after the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|11 September 2001 terrorist attacks]]--one of the most striking examples of modern terrorism]]
−
As a form of [[unconventional warfare]], terrorism is sometimes used when attempting to force political change by: convincing a government or population to agree to demands to avoid future harm or fear of harm, destabilization of an existing government, motivating a disgruntled population to join an uprising, escalating a conflict in the hopes of disrupting the status quo, expressing the severity of a grievance, or drawing attention to a neglected cause.
 
−
 
 
−
Many people find the terms "terrorism" and '''"terrorist"''' (someone who engages in terrorism) to have a negative connotation. These terms are often used as political labels to condemn violence or threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, or unjustified. Those labeled "terrorists" rarely identify themselves as such, and typically use other generic terms or terms specific to their situation, such as: [[separatist]], [[freedom fighter]], liberator, [[revolutionary]], [[vigilante]], [[militant]], [[paramilitary]], [[guerrilla warfare|guerrilla]], [[rebel]], [[jihad]]i or [[mujaheddin]], or [[fedayeen]], or any similar-meaning word in other languages.
 
−
 
 
−
Terrorism has been used by a broad array of political organizations in furthering their objectives; both right-wing and left-wing political parties, [[nationalism|nationalistic]], and religious groups, revolutionaries and ruling governments.<ref name="britannica">{{cite web|url= http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9071797 |title= Terrorism |accessdate= 2006-08-11|accessmonthday= |accessyear= |author= |last= |first= |authorlink= |coauthors= |date= |year= |month= |format= |work= |publisher= Encyclopædia Britannica|pages= |language= |archiveurl= |archivedate=}}</ref> The presence of non-state actors in widespread armed conflict has created controversy regarding the application of the [[laws of war]].
 
−
 
 
 
==Definition==   
 
==Definition==   
−
[[Image:Twin Towers in fire - 911- Fema picture.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Smoke billowing from the [[World Trade Center]] after the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|11 September 2001 terrorist attacks]] - one of the most striking examples of modern terrorism]]
+
[[Image:Oklahomacitybombing-DF-ST-98-01356.jpg|thumb|250 px|Damage to the Murrah building in [[Oklahoma City, Oklahoma]], [[United States|USA]]]]
−
 
+
The term '''terrorism''' comes from the [[French language|French]] word ''terrorisme,'' which is based on the [[Latin language|Latin]] verb ''terrere'' (to cause to tremble).<ref name=Juergensmeyer>Mark Juergensmeyer, ''Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence'' (University of California Press, 2003, ISBN 0520240111).</ref>  
−
   
 
−
One 1988 study by the [[United States Army]]<ref>Dr. Jeffrey Record, [http://carlisle-www.army.mil/ssi/pubs/2003/bounding/bounding.pdf Bounding the Global War on Terrorism](PDF)</ref> found that more than one hundred (100) definitions of the word "terrorism" exist and have been used.
 
  
−
Terrorism is a crime in all countries where such acts occur, and is defined by statute&mdash;see ''[[Definition of terrorism]]'' for particular definitions. Common principles among legal definitions of terrorism provide an emerging consensus as to meaning and also foster cooperation between law enforcement personnel in different countries. Among these definitions there are several that do not recognize the possibility of [[Right to resist occupation|legitimate use of violence]] by civilians against an invader in an [[Occupied territories|occupied country]] and would, thus, label all [[resistance movement]]s as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence. Ultimately, the distinction is a [[Politics|political]] judgment.<ref>Ali Khan, [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=935347 A LEGAL THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM] Published in 19 Connecticut Law Review 945-972(1987)</ref> 
+
In November 2004, a [[United Nations|UN]] panel described terrorism as any act: <blockquote>intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act.<ref>UN, [https://news.un.org/en/story/2005/03/132432-call-action-not-more-words-annan-outlines-plan-radical-un-reform#.VlYUJHarTq4 With call for action, not more words, Annan outlines plan for radical UN reform.] March 21, 2005. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref></blockquote>
−
 
−
In November 2004, a UN panel described terrorism as any act: "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act."<ref>In a [http://www.un.org/unifeed/script.asp?scriptId=73 comentary issued by the UN] it states that ''The second part of the report [titled "Larger Freedom." by Kofi Annan, Secretary General, United Nations at the Security Council Meeting on 17 March, 2005], entitled "Freedom from Fear backs the definition of terrorism - an issue so divisive agreement on it has long eluded the world community - as any action "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act."''</ref>
 
  
−
Few words are as politically or emotionally charged as '''''[[terrorism]]'''''. A 1988 study by the [[United States Army|US Army]]<ref name = "Carlisle">[http://carlisle-www.army.mil/ssi/pubs/2003/bounding/bounding.pdf  (PDF)]</ref> counted 109 definitions of terrorism that covered a total of 22 different definitional elements. Terrorism expert [[Walter Laqueur]] in 1999 also has counted over 100 definitions and concludes that the ''"only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence"''. For this and for political reasons, many news sources avoid using this term, opting instead for less accusatory words like "bombers," "militants," etc.  
+
Few words are as politically or [[emotion]]ally charged as terrorism. A 1988 study by the [[United States Army|U.S. Army]] counted 109 definitions of terrorism that covered a total of 22 different definitional elements.<ref>Jeffrey Record, ''Bounding the Global War on Terrorism'' (University Press of the Pacific, 2004, ISBN 1410217337).</ref> Terrorism expert [[Walter Laqueur]] also counted over 100 definitions and concluded that the "only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence."<ref>Walter Laqueur, ''No End to War—Terrorism in the 21st Century'' (New York, 2003, ISBN 0826414354).</ref> For this and for political reasons, many news sources avoid using this term, opting instead for less accusatory words like "bombers," "militants," and so forth.  
  
−
Terrorism is a crime in many countries and is defined by statute (see below for particular definitions). Common principles amongst legal definitions of terrorism provide an emerging consensus as to meaning and also foster cooperation between law enforcement personnel in different countries.
+
Terrorism is a crime in many countries and is defined by statute. Common principles amongst legal definitions of terrorism provide an emerging consensus as to meaning and also foster cooperation between law enforcement personnel in different countries.
  
−
Among these definitions, several do not recognize the possibility of the [[Right to resist occupation|legitimate use of violence]] by civilians against an invader in an [[Occupied territories|occupied country]], and would thus label all [[resistance movement]]s as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence<ref name = "Washburn">[http://classes.washburnlaw.edu/khan/publications/19CLR945.htm  Washburn].</ref>.
+
Among these definitions, several do not recognize the possibility of the [[Right to resist occupation|legitimate use of violence]] by civilians against an invader in an [[Occupied territories|occupied country]], and would thus label all [[resistance movement]]s as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence. [[Russia]] for example includes in their terrorist list only those organizations which represent the greatest threat to their own security.<ref>Reuters, Russia says Hezbollah not a terrorist group: Ifax November 15, 2015.</ref> Ultimately, the distinction is a [[Politics|political]] judgment.<ref>Ali Khan, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=935347 A Legal Theory of International Terrorism] ''Connecticut Law Review'' 19 (1987):945-972. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> 
−
[[Russia]] for example includes in their terrorist list only those organizations which represent the greatest threat to their own security.<ref>
 
−
    {{cite news
 
−
    |title=Hezbollah not on Russia's "terrorist" list
 
−
    |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5980836,00.html
 
−
    |publisher=[[Associated Press]]
 
−
    |date-2006-07-28
 
−
    |accessdate=2006-08-10}}
 
−
</ref> Ultimately, the distinction is a [[Politics|political]] judgment.
 
  
−
It has also been argued that the political use of violent force and weapons that deliberately target or involve civilians, and do not focus mainly on military or government targets, is a common militant, terrorist, or [[guerilla]] tactic, and a main defining feature of these kinds of people. Most governments and "legitimate" military leaders do not openly attempt to use civilians as shields or aim at them during times of political conflict.  Whereas the definition of a terrorist can specify that a militant or a militant group has the criminal intent, planning, and actions to violently use civilian targets and civilian shields for political and economic ends.
+
As terrorism ultimately involves the use or threat of violence with the aim of creating [[fear]] not only to the victims but among a wide audience, it is fear which distinguishes terrorism from both conventional and guerrilla warfare. While both conventional military forces may engage in [[psychological warfare]] and guerrilla forces may engage in acts of terror and other forms of [[propaganda]], they both aim at military victory. Terrorism on the other hand aims to achieve political or other goals, when direct military victory is not possible. This has resulted in some social scientists referring to [[guerrilla warfare]] as the "weapon of the weak" and terrorism as the "weapon of the weakest."<ref>''Encyclopædia Britannica,'' [https://www.britannica.com/topic/terrorism Terrorism.] Retrieved July 9, 2019. </ref> 
  
−
As terrorism ultimately involves the use or threat of violence with the aim of creating [[fear]] not only to the victims but among a wide audience, it is fear which distinguishes terrorism from both conventional and guerrilla warfare. While both conventional military forces may engage in [[psychological warfare]] and guerrilla forces may engage in acts of terror and other forms of propaganda, they both aim at military victory. Terrorism on the other hand aims to achieve political or other goals, when direct military victory is not possible. This has resulted in some social scientists referring to guerrilla warfare as the "weapon of the weak" and terrorism as the "weapon of the weakest".<ref>'''Terrorism'''. (2006). In ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]''. Retrieved October 28, 2006, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-217761</ref>
+
===Definition controversy===
 +
[[Image:Russell square ambulances.jpg|thumb|250 px|left|Ambulances at Russell Square following the bombings of the London Underground and double-decker bus, [[London]], [[United Kingdom]] 7 July 2005]]
 +
The definition of terrorism is inherently controversial. The use of violence for the achievement of political ends is common to state and non-state groups. The difficulty is in agreeing on a basis for determining when the use of violence (directed at whom, by whom, for what ends) is legitimate. The majority of definitions in use have been written by agencies directly associated with a government, and are systematically biased to exclude governments from the definition. Some such definitions are so broad, like the [[Terrorism Act 2000]], as to include the disruption of a [[computer]] system wherein no violence is intended or results.
  
−
===Reasons for controversy===
+
The contemporary label of "terrorist" is highly [[pejorative]]; it is a badge which denotes a lack of legitimacy and [[morality]]. The appellation "terrorist" is therefore disputed. Attempts at defining the concept invariably arouse debate because rival definitions may be employed with a view to including the actions of certain parties, and excluding others. Thus, each party might still subjectively claim a legitimate basis for employing violence in pursuit of their own political cause or aim.
−
The definition of terrorism is inherently controversial. The use of violence for the achievement of political ends is common to state and non-state groups. The difficulty is in agreeing on a basis for determining when the use of violence (directed at whom, by whom, for what ends) is legitimate. The majority of definitions in use have been written by agencies directly associated with a government, and are systematically biased to exclude governments from the definition. Some such definitions are so broad, like the [[#Laws and government agencies|Terrorism Act 2000]], as to include the disruption of a computer system wherein no violence is intended or results.
 
  
−
The contemporary label of "terrorist" is highly [[pejorative]]; it is a badge which denotes a lack of legitimacy and morality. The application "terrorist" is therefore always deliberately disputed. Attempts at defining the concept invariably arouse debate because rival definitions may be employed with a view to including the actions of certain parties, and excluding others. Thus, each party might still subjectively claim a legitimate basis for employing violence in pursuit of their own political cause or aim.
+
This controversy can be summed up by the [[aphorism]], "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." This is exemplified when a group that uses [[irregular military]] methods is an ally of a [[state]] against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the state and starts to use the same methods against its former ally. During [[World War II]], the [[Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army]] was allied with the British, but during the [[Malayan Emergency]], members of its successor, the [[Malayan Races Liberation Army]], were branded terrorists by the British.<ref>Britannica Concise, [http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9371060/Malayan-People's-Anti-Japanese-Army Malayan People's Anti-Japanese Army.] Retrieved November 18, 2008.</ref> President [[Ronald Reagan]] and others in the American administration frequently called the [[Afghan Mujahideen]] "freedom fighters" during [[Soviet invasion of Afghanistan|their war]] against the [[Soviet Union]],<ref>Michel Chossudovsky, [https://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-analysis-from-ronald-reagan-and-the-soviet-afghan-war-to-george-w-bush-and-september-11-2001/20958 9/11 ANALYSIS: From Ronald Reagan and the Soviet-Afghan War to George W Bush and September 11, 2001] ''Global Research'', September 9, 2010. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> yet twenty years later when a new generation of Afghan men were fighting against what they perceive to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks were labeled terrorism by [[George W. Bush|President Bush]].<ref>White House, [https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020128-13.html President Meets with Afghan Interim Authority Chairman.] Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref>
  
−
The legitimate governments of [[nations]], and their police and military forces, need to investigate any potential planning of major [[criminal]] activity. This is true no matter the religion, creed, belief, background, self-label or political connection of the criminals. Terrorism might be best defined as the greatest possible degrees of criminal actions, other than [[war]] between internationally recognized nations, where the largest amounts of population are affected, and the greatest degree of economic activity is disrupted. A clear and distinct definition does continue to be a logical problem that requires debate without [[Fear Mongering]], racial profiling, or unjust law enforcement procedures. Legitimate policing organizations do need the powers and procedures to investigate certain groups and individuals based on reasonable suspicions and [[evidence]]. Large degrees of criminal acts do need to be prevented by some reasonable means within any national boundary. This does require some notion of "terrorist" organizations and activities. [[Lawyers]], [[judges]], [[police]], [[politicians]], [[law]] makers, NGO's, and the general public all need some basic [[definition]] of "terrorism" to proceed with fair prosecutions and [[court]] trials under the [[rule of law]].
+
Some groups, when involved in a "liberation" struggle, are called terrorist by governments or [[mass media|media]]. Later, these same persons, as leaders of the liberated nations, are called statesmen by similar organizations. Notable examples include [[Nobel Peace Prize]] laureates [[Menachem Begin]],<ref>BBC, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/israel_at_50/profiles/81305.stm BBC News: PROFILES: Menachem Begin.] Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> [[Yasser Arafat]],<ref>The Nobel Prize, [https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1994/arafat/facts/ Yasser Arafat] Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> and [[Nelson Mandela]].<ref>BBC News, [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-12305154 Nelson Mandela's life and times] Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref>
  
−
===Definitions===
+
===Key criteria===
−
====Dictionaries====
+
Groups accused of terrorism often prefer terms that reflect legitimate military or ideological action.<ref>Alex Perry, [http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1109554,00.html How Much to Tip the Terrorist?] ''Time Magazine,'' September 26, 2005. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> However, legitimacy does not preclude the reality of terrorism:
−
* The '''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]''' defines '''terrorism''' as "a policy intended to strike with terror those against whom it is adopted; the employment of methods of intimidation; the fact of terrorising or condition of being terrorised."
+
<blockquote>There is the famous statement: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." But that is grossly leading. It assesses the validity of the cause when terrorism is an act. One can have a perfectly beautiful cause and yet if one commits terrorist acts, it is terrorism regardless.<ref>Sheldon Anderson, Mark Allen Peterson, and Stanley W. Toops, ''International Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Global Issues'' ( Routledge, 2017, ISBN 0813350492).</ref></blockquote>
−
* '''[[Webster's New International Dictionary]]''' defines '''terrorism''' as the "act of [[Fear#Terror|terrorizing]], or state of being terrorized; specif.: '''a''' The system of the [[Reign of Terror]]. '''b''' A mode of governing, or of opposing government, by intimidation.  '''c''' Any policy of intimidation.
 
−
*The definition of the term in the '''Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics''' (2nd edition) begins:
 
−
::Term with no agreement amongst government or academic analysts, but almost invariably used in a pejorative sense, most frequently to describe life-threatening actions perpetrated by politically motivated self-appointed sub-state groups.
 
  
−
*The '''[[American Heritage Dictionary]]''' defines '''terrorism''' as "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."
+
[[Image:Kenya bombing 2.jpg|right|thumb|250 px|Wreckage from the bombing of the US Embassy in [[Nairobi]], [[Kenya]] in 1998]]
−
*The '''[[Online Etymology Dictionary]]''' refers to '''terrorism''' as the "systematic use of terror as a policy" and describes the word's origin in the specific sense of "government intimidation during the [[Reign of Terror]] in France."
+
Most official definitions of terrorism focus on the nature of the act, not the validity of the cause. They outline the following key criteria: target, objective, motive, perpetrator, and legitimacy or legality of the act. Terrorism is also often recognizable by a following statement from the perpetrators.
  
−
====United Nations====
+
'''Violence'''—According to Walter Laqueur of the [[Center for Strategic and International Studies]], "the only general characteristic [of terrorism] generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence." However, the criterion of violence alone does not produce a useful definition, as it includes many acts not usually considered terrorism: [[War]], [[riot]], [[organized crime]], or even a simple [[assault]]. Property destruction that does not endanger life is not usually considered a [[violent crime]], but some have described property destruction by the [[Earth Liberation Front]] and [[Animal Liberation Front]] as terrorism.
−
* While the '''[[United Nations]]''' has not yet accepted a definition of terrorism,<ref name = "UNO">[http://www.unodc.org/unodc/terrorism_definitions.html  Terrorism definicions] by the United Nations Organisation.</ref> the UN's "academic consensus definition," written by terrorism expert A.P. Schmid and widely used by [[social scientist]]s, runs:
 
  
−
<blockquote>Terrorism is an [[anxiety]]-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby &mdash; in contrast to [[assassination]] &mdash; the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperilled) victims, and main targets are used to [[Manipulation|manipulate]] the main target (audience(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether [[intimidation]], [[coercion]], or [[propaganda]] is primarily sought," (Schmid, 1988).</blockquote>
+
'''Psychological impact and fear'''—The attack was carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact. Each act of terrorism is a “performance,” a product of internal logic, devised to have an impact on many large audiences. Terrorists also attack national symbols to show their power and to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government's legitimacy, while increasing the legitimacy of the given [[terrorist organization]] and/or [[ideology]] behind a terrorist act.<ref name=Juergensmeyer/> The [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11th attacks]] on the [[World Trade Center]] and [[Pentagon]] are examples of this. Attacking the World Trade Center symbolized the terrorist threat to the economic foundation of America and its [[capitalism|capitalist]] ideals, and attacking the Pentagon symbolized that America's great military strength is yet vulnerable at its very core to the terrorist’s power.
  
−
* UN short legal definition, also proposed by A.P. Schmid: an act of terrorism is the "peacetime equivalent of a [[war crime]]."<ref name = "UNO" />
+
'''Perpetrated for a Political Goal'''—Something all terrorist attacks have in common is their perpetration for a political purpose. Terrorism is a political tactic, not unlike letter writing or protesting, that is used by activists when they believe no other means will effect the kind of change they desire. The change is desired so badly that failure is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians. This is often where the interrelationship between terrorism and [[religion]] occurs. When a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious or "cosmic" struggle, such as over the control of an ancestral homeland or holy site such as Israel and Jerusalem, failing in the political goal (nationalism) becomes equated with spiritual failure, which, for the highly committed, is worse than their own death or the deaths of innocent civilians.<ref name=Juergensmeyer/>
  
−
*On March 17, 2005, a UN panel described terrorism as any act "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act."<ref name = "UN">[http://www.un.org/unifeed/script.asp?scriptId=73  United Nations].</ref>
+
'''Deliberate targeting of non-combatants'''—It is commonly held that the distinctive nature of terrorism lies in its intentional and specific selection of [[civilian]]s as direct targets. Much of the time, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings" that tie into a specific view of the world. Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists' goals of instilling fear, getting a message out to an audience, or otherwise accomplishing their political end.<ref name=Juergensmeyer/>
  
−
* The General Assembly resolution [http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/49/a49r060.htm 49/60], adopted on December 9, 1994, contains a provision describing terrorism:
+
'''Unlawfulness or illegitimacy'''—Some definitions of terrorism give weight to a distinction between the actions of a legitimate government and those of non-state actors, including individuals and small groups. In this view, government actions that might be violent, operate through fear, aim at political ends, and target civilians would not be terrorism if they are being pursued by agents who are accountable to legitimate governmental authority. Governmental accountability, presumably, would operate to limit and restrain the violence, both in volume and tactics. However, governments which repeatedly resort to these kinds of tactics tend to lose legitimacy, eroding the distinction between governmental and non-governmental violence.<ref>Ron Mock, ''Loving Without Giving In: Christian Responses to Terrorism and Tyranny'' (Cascadia Press, 2004), 24-28.</ref>
  
−
<blockquote>Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.</blockquote>
+
== History ==
 +
{{readout||right|250px|The term "terrorism" comes from the "[[Reign of Terror]]" in the [[French Revolution]]}}
 +
The modern English term "terrorism" (or "terrorist" from the French ''terroriste'') dates back to 1794 when it was used to describe the actions of the [[Jacobin Club]] in their rule of post-Revolutionary [[France]], the so-called "[[Reign of Terror]]."
  
−
According to [[Antonio Cassese]], that provision "sets out an acceptable definition of terrorism".<ref name = "Cassese">Cassese, A., ''International Law'', [[Oxford University Press]], 2002, ISBN 0-19-925939-9, p. 449.</ref>
+
Although there are earlier related examples, terrorism in the modern sense seems to have emerged around the mid-nineteenth century.
  
−
====European Union====
+
===Nineteenth century===
−
The European Union employs a definition of terrorism for legal/official purposes which is set out in Art. 1 of the ''Framework Decision on Combating Terrorism'' (2002)<ref name = "StateWatch">[http://www.statewatch.org/news/2002/jul/frameterr622en00030007.pdf  State Watch].</ref>.  This provides that terrorist offences are certain criminal offences set out in a list comprised largely of serious offences against persons and property which, "given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of: seriously intimidating a population; or unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act; or seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation."
+
An early example of the use of the term "terrorism" in the current sense is in [[Joseph Conrad]]'s 1907 story, ''The Secret Agent,'' where it is used to describe anarchists attempting to cause terror and foment social disruption by blowing up [[Greenwich Observatory]]: "The venomous spluttering of the old terrorist without teeth was heard."<ref name = "Conrad3">Joseph Conrad, [http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/jc/sa/sa03.html ''The Secret Agent,''] Ch. 3, 1907. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref></blockquote>
  
−
====United States====
+
<blockquote>What is one to say to an act of destructive ferocity so absurd as to be incomprehensible, inexplicable, and almost unthinkable; in fact, mad? Madness alone is truly terrifying, inasmuch as you cannot placate it either by threats, persuasion, or bribes.<ref name = "Conrad2">Joseph Conrad, [http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/jc/sa/sa02.html ''The Secret Agent,''] Ch. 2, 1907. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref></blockquote>
−
The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal Criminal Code.  Chapter 113B of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code defines terrorism and lists the crimes associated with terrorism<ref name = "CaseLaw">[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/113b/toc.html CaseLaw].</ref>.  In Section 2331 of Chapter 113b, terrorism is defined as:
 
  
−
<blockquote>
+
In 1867, the [[Irish Republican Brotherhood]], a [[revolution]]ary [[nationalism|nationalist]] group with support from [[Irish-American]]s, carried out attacks in [[England]]. These were the first acts of "[[Irish republicanism|republican]] terrorism," which became a recurrent feature of [[Britain|British]] history, and these [[Fenian]]s were the precursor of the [[Irish Republican Army]].
−
…activities that involve violent… or life-threatening acts… that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and… appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and… (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States… [or]… (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States…"
 
−
</blockquote>
 
  
−
[[Edward Peck]], former U.S. Chief of Mission in [[Iraq]] and ambassador to [[Mauritania]]:
+
In [[Russia]], by the mid-nineteenth century, the [[intelligentsia]] grew impatient with the slow pace of Tsarist reforms, and sought instead to transform peasant discontent into open revolution. Anarchists like [[Mikhail Bakunin]] maintained that progress was impossible without destruction. Their objective was nothing less than complete destruction of the state. Anything that contributed to this goal was regarded as moral. With the development of sufficiently powerful, stable, and affordable explosives, the gap closed between the firepower of the state and the means available to dissidents. Organized into secret societies like the [[People's Will]], Russian terrorists launched a campaign of terror against the state that climaxed in 1881, when Tsar [[Alexander II of Russia]] was assassinated.
  
−
<blockquote>
+
At about the same time, Anarchists in Europe and the United States also resorted to the use of [[dynamite]], as did [[Catalonia|Catalan]] nationalists such as [[La Reixa]] and [[Bandera Negra]].
−
In 1985, when I was the Deputy Director of the [[Reagan]] White House Task Force on Terrorism, they asked us — this is a Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism; I was the Deputy Director of the working group — they asked us to come up with a definition of terrorism that could be used throughout the government.  We produced about six, and each and every case, they were rejected, because careful reading would indicate that our own country had been involved in some of those activities. […] After the task force concluded its work, Congress got into it, and you can [[google]] into U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331, and read the U.S. definition of terrorism. And one of them in here says — one of the terms, “international terrorism,” means “activities that,” I quote, “appear to be intended to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.” […] Yes, well, certainly, you can think of a number of countries that have been involved in such activities. Ours is one of them. Israel is another. And so, the terrorist, of course, is in the eye of the beholder.<ref name = "DemocracyNow">[http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/28/1440244  Democracy Now].</ref>
 
−
</blockquote>
 
  
−
====Laws and government agencies====
+
Two groups within the [[Ottoman Empire]] also resorted to techniques considered by some historians to be in the same category as those used by the Anarchists. One group was those fighting for an independent [[Armenia]], divided into two parties, the [[Hunchak|Social Democrat Hunchakian Party]] and the [[Dashnak]]s or Armenian Revolutionary Federation. The other group was those fighting for an independent [[Macedonia (region)|Macedonia]], divided into two organizations, the [[Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization]] (IMRO) and the [[External Macedonian Revolutionary Organization]] (EMRO).
−
* '''U.S. [[Code of Federal Regulations]]''': "...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).
 
−
* Current '''U.S. national security strategy''': "premeditated, politically motivated violence against innocents."
 
−
* '''[[United States Department of Defense]]''': the "calculated use of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."
 
−
* '''[[USA PATRIOT Act]]''': "activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state, that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S." 
 
−
* The U.S. '''National Counter Terrorism Center''' ([[NCTC]]) described a terrorist act as one which was: "premeditated; perpetrated by a subnational or clandestine agent; politically motivated, potentially including religious, philosophical, or culturally symbolic motivations; violent; and perpetrated against a noncombatant target." [http://www.tkb.org/documents/Downloads/NCTC_Report.pdf]
 
  
−
* The '''[[Britain|British]] [[Terrorism Act 2000]]''' defines terrorism so as to include not only violent offences against persons and physical damage to property, but also acts "designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system".[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2000/00011-b.htm#1] This latter consideration would include shutting down a website whose views one dislikes. However this, and any of the other acts covered by the definition would also need to be (a) designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, AND (b)be done for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause.[the latter three terms are not defined in the Act]. [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2000/00011-b.htm#1]
+
The IMRO was founded in 1893 in [[Thessaloniki]], now in [[Greece]] but then part of the [[Ottoman Empire]]. This organization was driven by Slavic nationalism, and later acquired a reputation for ferocious attacks, including the 1934 assassination of [[Alexander I of Yugoslavia]] during a state visit to France.  
  
−
====Individuals====
+
The Fenians/IRA, the Hunchaks and Dashnaks, and the IMRO may be considered typical of nationalist terrorism, and equally illustrate the (itself controversial) expression that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." At least one of these groups achieved its goals: An independent [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]] came into being. So did an independent [[Republic of Macedonia|Macedonia]], but the original IMRO probably contributed little to this outcome. The territories of [[Armenia]], however, remain within the former [[Russian empire]].
−
* '''[[Schmid and Jongman]] (1983)''': "Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-)clandestine individual, group, or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal, or political reasons, whereby—in contrast to assassination—the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims are violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperiled) victims, and main targets are use to manipulate the main target (audience(s), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought".{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
−
* '''[[L. Ali Khan]]''': "Terrorism sprouts from the existence of aggrieved groups." <ref>[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=935347 A Legal Theory of International Terrorism]</ref>
 
−
* '''[[Jack Gibbs]] (1989)''': "Terrorism is illegal violence or threatened violence directed against human or nonhuman objects, provided that it: (1) was undertaken or ordered with a view to altering or maintaining at least one putative norm in at least one particular territorial unit or population: (2) had secretive, furtive, and/or clandestine features that were expected by the participants to conceal their personal identity and/or their future location; (3) was not undertaken or ordered to further the permanent defense of some area; (4) was not conventional warfare and because of their concealed personal identity, concealment of their future location, their threats, and/or their spatial mobility, the participants perceived themselves as less vulnerable to conventional military action; and (5) was perceived by the participants as contributing to the normative goal previously described (supra) by inculcating fear of violence in persons (perhaps an indefinite category of them) other than the immediate target of the actual or threatened violence and/or by publicizing some cause."{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
−
* '''[[David Rodin (Oxford Philosopher)]]''': "Terrorism is the deliberate, negligent, or reckless use of force against noncombatants, by state or nonstate actors for ideological ends and in the absence of a substantively just legal process."[http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ET/journal/issues/v114n4/114403/114403.web.pdf]
 
−
* '''[[Walter Laqueur]]''': "Terrorism constitutes the illegitimate use of force to achieve a political objective when innocent people are targeted."{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
−
* '''[[James M. Poland]]''': "Terrorism is the premeditated, deliberate, systematic murder, mayhem, and threatening of the innocent to create fear and intimidation in order to gain a political or tactical advantage, usually to influence an audience."{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
−
* '''[[M. Cherif Bassiouni]]''': "'Terrorism' has never been defined..." <ref>36 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 2&3, 2004, p. 305
 
−
</ref>
 
  
−
====Other====
+
===Twentieth century===
−
*'''[[League of Nations]]''' Convention (1937): all criminal acts directed against a State and intended or calculated to create a state of terror in the minds of particular persons or a group of persons or the general public.
+
Some of the most successful terrorist groups were the vast array of guerrilla, partisan, and resistance movements that were organized and supplied by the Allies during [[World War II]]. The British [[Special Operations Executive]] (SOE) conducted operations in every theater of the [[war]] and provided an invaluable contribution to allied victory. The SOE effectively invented modern terrorism, pioneering most of the tactics, techniques, and technologies that are the mainstays of modern terrorism.
  
−
==Criticisms of the term==
+
It could be said that throughout the [[Cold War]], both sides made extensive use of terrorist organizations to carry on a war by proxy. Many of the [[Islam]]ic terrorists of today were trained by the U.S. and UK to fight the USSR in [[Afghanistan]]. Similar groups, including the [[Viet Cong]], received training from Soviet and Chinese military "advisers."
−
Jason Burke, an expert in radical Islamic activity, has this to say on the word "terrorism":
 
  
−
:''"There are multiple ways of defining terrorism, and all are subjective. Most define terrorism as 'the use or threat of serious violence' to advance some kind of 'cause'. Some state clearly the kinds of group ('sub-national', 'non-state') or cause (political, ideological, religious) to which they refer. Others merely rely on the instinct of most people when confronted with innocent civilians being killed or maimed by men armed with explosives, firearms or other weapons. None is satisfactory, and grave problems with the use of the term persist. Terrorism is after all, a tactic. the term 'war on terrorism' is thus effectively nonsensical. As there is no space here to explore this involved and difficult debate, my preference is, on the whole, for the less loaded term 'militancy'. This is not an attempt to condone such actions, merely to analyse them in a clearer way."'' ("Al Qaeda," ch.2, p.22)
+
The most sustained terrorist campaign of the twentieth century was that of the [[Irish Republican Army]]. The first campaign saw 26 of the 32 counties gain independence. A second campaign became know as "[[the Troubles]]" between 1972 and 1997, with the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army]] conducting [[bomb]]ings, [[assassination]]s, and even [[Mortar (weapon)|mortar]] attacks on the Prime Minister's residence, [[10 Downing Street]].
  
−
Other arguments include that:
+
Today, modern weapons technology has made it possible for individuals to cause a large amount of destruction alone or with only a few conspirators.
−
:* There is no strict worldwide commonly accepted definition.
 
−
:* Any definition that could be agreed upon in, say, English-speaking countries would be biased towards those countries.
 
−
:* Almost every serious attempt to define the term have been sponsored by governments who instinctively attempt to draw a definition which excludes bodies like themselves. 
 
−
:* Most groups called "terrorist" deny such accusations. Virtually no organisation openly calls itself terrorist.
 
−
:* Many groups call all their enemies "terrorist."
 
−
:* The word is very loosely applied and very difficult to challenge when it is being used inappropriately, for example in war situations or against non-violent persons. 
 
−
:* It allows governments to apply a different standard of law to that of ordinary criminal law on the basis of a unilateral decision. 
 
−
:* There is no hope that people will ever all agree who is "terrorist" and who is not.
 
−
:* The term as widely used in the West reflects a bias towards the status quo. Violence by established governments is sold as "defence," even when that claim is considered dubious by some; any attempt to oppose the established order through military means, however, is often labelled "terrorism."
 
−
:* If we labelled groups terrorist on the basis of how their opponents perceive them, such labels would be very controversial, for example:
 
−
::* State of [[Israel]], [[USA]] but also the states of [[Syria]], [[Iraq]], [[Iran]], [[Afghanistan]] under the rule of the [[Taliban]]
 
−
::* The Contemporary [[Palestine Liberation Organization]]
 
−
::* Groups conducting revolution, such as the [[Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)]], are routinely denigrated as "terrorist"
 
−
::* Almost all guerrilla groups (like [[Tamil Tigers]] or Chechen rebels) are accused of being "terrorist," but almost all guerrilla groups accuse countries they fight against of likewise being "terrorist."
 
−
::* Resistance movement during World War II. Some historians even claim that resistance in Poland used biological weapons.
 
  
 +
==Causes==
 +
The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political [[conflict]]. The type of conflict varies widely; historical examples include:
 +
* [[Secession]] of a territory to form a new sovereign state
 +
* Dominance of territory or resources by various [[ethnic groups]]
 +
* Imposition of a particular form of government, such as [[democracy]], [[theocracy]], or [[anarchy]]
 +
* Economic deprivation of a population
 +
* Opposition to a domestic government or occupying army
  
−
 
+
Terrorism is a form of [[asymmetric warfare]], and is more common when direct [[conventional warfare]] either cannot be (due to differentials in available forces) or is not being used to resolve the underlying conflict. In some cases, the rationale for a terrorist attack may be uncertain (as in the many attacks for which no group or individual claims responsibility) or unrelated to any large-scale social conflict (such as the [[Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway]] by [[Aum Shinrikyo]]).
−
 
 
−
==Key criteria==
 
−
Official definitions determine counter-terrorism policy and are often developed to serve it. Most official definitions outline the following key criteria: target, objective, motive, perpetrator, and legitimacy or legality of the act. Terrorism is also often recognizable by a following statement from the perpetrators.
 
−
 
 
−
'''Violence''' &ndash; According to Walter Laqueur of the [[Center for Strategic and International Studies]], "the only general characteristic [of terrorism] generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence." However, the criterion of violence alone does not produce a useful definition, as it includes many acts not usually considered terrorism: [[war]], [[riot]], [[organized crime]], or even a simple [[assault]]. Property destruction that does not endanger life is not usually considered a [[violent crime]], but some have described property destruction by the [[Earth Liberation Front]] and [[Animal Liberation Front]] as terrorism.
 
−
 
 
−
'''Psychological impact and fear''' &ndash; The attack was carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact.  Each act of terrorism is a “performance,” a product of internal logic, devised to have an impact on many large audiences.  Terrorists also attack national symbols to show their power and to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to.  This may negatively affect a government's legitimacy, while increasing the legitimacy of the given [[terrorist organization]] and/or [[ideology]] behind a terrorist act.<ref>Juergensmeyer, Mark. 2000. ''Terror in the Mind of God''. University of California Press. Ch. 7 pp. 125-135 </ref>  The [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11th attacks]] on the [[World Trade Center]] and [[Pentagon]] are examples of this.  Attacking the World Trade Center symbolizes that the terrorists can threaten the economic foundation of America and its capitalist ideals, and attacking the Pentagon symbolizes that America's great and prided military strength is yet vulnerable at its very core to the terrorists power.
 
−
 
 
−
'''Perpetrated for a Political Goal''' &ndash; Something all terrorist attacks have in common is their perpetration for a political purpose.  Terrorism is a political tactic, not unlike letter writing or protesting, that is used by activists when they believe no other means will effect the kind of change they desire.  The change is desired so badly that failure is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians.  This is often where the interrelationship between terrorism and religion occurs.  When a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious or "cosmic"<ref> Juergensmeyer, Mark. 2000. ''Terror in the Mind of God.'' University of California Press. Ch 8-10. </ref> struggle, such as over the control of an ancestral homeland or holy site such as Israel and Jerusalem, failing in the political goal (nationalism) becomes equated with spiritual failure, which, for the highly committed, is worse than their own death or the deaths of innocent civilians.
 
−
 
 
−
'''Deliberate targeting of non-combatants''' &ndash; It is commonly held that the distinctive nature of terrorism lies in its intentional and specific selection of [[civilian]]s as direct targets. Much of the time, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings" that tie into a specific view of the world that the terrorist possess.  Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists' goals of instilling fear, getting a message out to an audience, or otherwise accomplishing their political end.<ref>Juergensmeyer, Mark. 2000. ''Terror in the Mind of God''. University of California Press. Ch. 7 pp. 127-128 </ref>
 
−
 
 
−
'''Unlawfulness or illegitimacy''' &ndash; Some definitions of terrorism give weight to a distinction between the actions of a legitimate government and those of non-state actors, including individuals and small groups.  In this view, government actions that might be violent, operate through fear, aim at political ends, and target civilians would not be terrorism if they are being pursued by agents who are accountable to legitimate governmental authority.  Governmental accountability, presumably, would operate to limit and restrain the violence, both in volume and tactics. Furthermore, taking this approach to the definition of terrorism would help prevent some of the analytic problems associated with characterizing some military tactics (such as firebombing of cities) which are designed to affect civilian support for the enemy war effort.  However, governments which repeatedly resort to these kinds of tactics tend to lose legitimacy, whether philosophically or politically.  Loss of legitimacy erodes the distinction between governmental and non-governmental violence where there is a consistent practice of targeting civilians.<ref>Mock, Ron. 2004. ''Loving Without Giving In: Christian Responses to Terrorism and Tyranny''. Cascadia Press. Ch. 1 pp. 24-28</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==Pejorative use==
 
−
In his book "''Inside Terrorism''" Bruce Hoffman wrote in ''Chapter One: Defining Terrorism'' that
 
−
{{cquote|
 
−
On one point, at least, everyone agrees: terrorism is a pejorative term. It is a word with intrinsically negative connotations that is generally applied to one's enemies and opponents, or to those with whom one disagrees and would otherwise prefer to ignore. `What is called terrorism', Brian Jenkins has written, `thus seems to depend on one's point of view. Use of the term implies a moral judgment; and if one party can successfully attach the label terrorist to its opponent, then it has indirectly persuaded others to adopt its moral viewpoint.' Hence the decision to call someone or label some organization `terrorist' becomes almost unavoidably subjective, depending largely on whether one sympathizes with or opposes the person/group/cause concerned. If one identifies with the victim of the violence, for example, then the act is terrorism. If, however, one identifies with the perpetrator, the violent act is regarded in a more sympathetic, if not positive (or, at the worst, an ambivalent) light; and it is not terrorism.<ref name="Hoffman-1998-p31">Hoffman, Bruce "''Inside Terrorism''" Columbia University Press 1998 ISBN 0-231-11468-0. Page 32. See review in The [[New York Times]][http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/h/hoffman-terrorism.html Inside Terrorism] [http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:RPT6zpTtE08J:www.nytimes.com/books/first/h/hoffman-terrorism.html+%22everyone+agrees:+terrorism+is+a+pejorative+term%22&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=1&lr=lang_en Google cached copy]</ref>}}
 
−
 
 
−
The difference between the words "terrorist" or "terrorism" and the terms above can be summed up by the [[aphorism]], "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." This is exemplified when a group that uses [[irregular military]] methods is an ally of a [[State]] against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the State and starts to use the same methods against its former ally. During World War II the [[Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army]] was allied with the British, but during the [[Malayan Emergency]], members of its successor, the [[Malayan Races Liberation Army]], were branded terrorists by the British.<ref>[http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9371060/Malayan-People's-Anti-Japanese-Army Malayan People's Anti-Japanese Army] Britannica Concise</ref><ref>Dr Chris Clark ''[http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/remembering1942/malaya/index.htm Malayan Emergency, 16 June 1948]'', 16 June, 2003</ref> More recently, [[President Reagan]] and others in the American administration frequently called the [[mujaheddin#Afghan Mujahideen|Afghan Mujahideen]] freedom fighters during [[Soviet invasion of Afghanistan|their war]] against the [[Soviet Union]],<ref>[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAreagan.htm Ronald Reagan, speech to National Conservative Political Action Conference] 8 March, 1985. On the [[Spartacus Educational]] web site</ref> yet twenty years later when a new generation of Afghan men are fighting against what they perceive to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks are labelled terrorism by [[George W. Bush|President Bush]].<ref>[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020128-13.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060209-2.html President Discusses Progress in War on Terror to National Guard] [[White House]] web site February 9, 2006</ref> Groups accused of terrorism usually prefer terms that reflect legitimate military or idealogical action.<ref>Sudha Ramachandran ''[http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FK12Ak01.html Death behind the wheel in Iraq]'' [[Asian Times]], November 12 2004, "Insurgent groups that use suicide attacks therefore do not like their attacks to be described as suicide terrorism. They prefer to use terms like "martyrdom ..."</ref><ref> Alex Perry [http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1109554,00.html How Much to Tip the Terrorist?] [[Time Magazine]], September 26, 2005. "The Tamil Tigers would dispute that tag, of course. Like other guerrillas and suicide bombers, they prefer the term “freedom fighters.”</ref><ref name="TCCACR">[http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dtra/terrorism_concepts.doc TERRORISM: CONCEPTS, CAUSES, AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION] [[George Mason University]] [[Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution]], Printed by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, January 2003</ref> According to leading terrorism researcher Professor Martin Rudner, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies at Ottawa's Carleton University, {{cquote|"There is the famous statement: 'One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.' But that is grossly leading. It assesses the validity of the cause when terrorism is an act. One can have a perfectly beautiful cause and yet if one commits terrorist acts, it is terrorism regardless."<ref>Humphreys, Adrian. [http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=a64f73d2-f672-4bd0-abb3-2584029db496 "One official's 'refugee' is another's 'terrorist'"], ''[[National Post]]'', January 17, 2006.</ref>}}
 
−
 
 
−
Some groups, when involved in a "liberation" struggle, have been called terrorist by the Western governments or media. Later, these same persons, as leaders of the liberated nations, are called statesmen by similar organizations. Two examples are [[Nobel Peace Prize]] laureates [[Menachem Begin]] and [[Nelson Mandela]].<ref>Theodore P. Seto ''[http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v35-issue4/seto.pdf The Morality of Terrorism]'' Includes a list in the [[Times]] published on July 23 1946 which were described as Jewish terrorist actions, including those launched by Irgun which Begin was a leading member</ref><ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/israel_at_50/profiles/81305.stm BBC News: PROFILES: Menachem Begin] BBC website "Under Begin's command, the underground terrorist group Irgun carried out numerous acts of violence."</ref><ref>Eqbal Ahmad ''"[http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-1328039/Straight-talk-on-terrorism.html Straight talk on terrorism]"'' [[Monthly Review]], January, 2002. "including Menachem Begin, appearing in "Wanted" posters saying, "Terrorists, reward this much." The highest reward I have seen offered was 100,000 British pounds for the head of Menachem Begin"</ref><ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4583684.stmBBC NEWS: World: Middle East: Sharon's legacy does not include peace] BBC website "Ariel Sharon will be compared to Menachem Begin, another warrior turned statesman, who gave up the Sinai and made peace with Egypt."</ref><ref>Lord Desai [http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199798/ldhansrd/vo980903/text/80903-04.htm  Hansard, House of Lords] 3 September 1998 : Column 72, "''However, Jomo Kenyatta, Nelson Mandela and Menachem Begin&mdash;to give just three examples&mdash;were all denounced as terrorists but all proved to be successful political leaders of their countries and good friends of the United Kingdom.''"</ref><ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4255106.stm BBC NEWS:World: Americas: UN reforms receive mixed response] BBC website "Of all groups active in recent times, the ANC perhaps represents best the traditional dichotomous view of armed struggle. Once regarded by western governments as a terrorist group, it now forms the legitimate, elected government of South Africa, with Nelson Mandela one of the world's genuinely iconic figures."</ref><ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1454208.stm BBC NEWS: World: Africa: Profile: Nelson Mandela] BBC website "Nelson Mandela remains one of the world's most revered statesman"</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Sometimes states that are close allies, for reasons of history, culture and politics, can disagree over whether members of a certain organization are terrorists. For example for many years some branches of the United States government refused to label members of the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army|Irish Republican Army]] (IRA) as terrorists, while it was using methods against one of United States closest allies, that, that ally (Britain), branded as terrorist attacks. This was highlighted by the [[Quinn v. Robinson]] case.<ref>[http://www.law.syr.edu/faculty/arzt/icl/quinn.pdf Quinn v. Robinson (pdf), 783 F2d. 776 (9th Cir. 1986)](PDF), web site of the [[Syracuse University College of Law]]</ref><ref>Page 17, [http://www.law.du.edu/ilj/online_issues_folder/mccabe.final.4.26.03.pdf  NORTHERN IRELAND: TP , T , S 11] (PDF) [[Queen's University Belfast]] School of Law</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
For these and other reasons, media outlets wishing to preserve a reputation for impartiality are extremely careful in their use of the term.<ref name="GUSG">[http://www.guardian.co.uk/styleguide/page/0,5817,184833,00.html Guardian Unlimited style guide]</ref><ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/assets/advice/guidanceontheuseoflanguagewhenreportingterrorism.doc BBC editorial guidelines on the use of language when reporting terrorism]</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
==Democracy and domestic terrorism==
 
−
The relationship between domestic terrorism and democracy is complex. Research shows that such terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate political freedom and that the nations with the least terrorism are the most democratic nations.<ref>[http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/11.04/05-terror.html]</ref><ref>[http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~.aabadie.academic.ksg/povterr.pdf]</ref><ref>[http://titan.iwu.edu/~econ/uer/articles/kevin_goldstein.pdf]</ref> 
 
−
However, one study suggests that suicide terrorism may be an exception to this general rule.  Evidence regarding this particular method of terrorism reveals that every modern suicide campaign has targeted a democracy- a state with a considerable degree of political freedom. The study suggests that concessions awarded to terrorists during the 80s and 90s for suicide attacks increased their frequency.<ref>Pape, Robert A.  "The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism," American Political Science Review, 2003.  97 (3): pp. 1-19.</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
Some examples of "terrorism" in non-democracies to include [[ETA]] under [[Francisco Franco]], the [[Shining Path]] under [[Alberto Fujimori]], and the [[Kurdistan Workers Party]] when [[Turkey]] was ruled by military leaders. Democracies such as the [[United States]], [[Israel]], and the [[Philippines]] have experienced domestic terrorism.
 
−
 
 
−
While a nation espousing democratic ideology may claim a sense of legitimacy or higher moral ground than regimes that promote terrorism, any act of terrorism within the former creates a dilemma for the democratic state.  On one hand, a state that prides itself in its tolerance of peaceful demonstration may choose to approach the problem of terrorism in ways outlined by its constitution; this may render that state ineffective in dealing with the problem, which could reflect upon its citizens a sense of impotency in a time of crisis.  On the other hand, should that same terrorized state go outside its constitution to deal with the problem, the very notion of democracy itself pales in meaning.  This, some social theorists would conclude, may very well play into the initial plans of the acting terrorist(s); namely, to delegitimize democracy.<ref>shabad, goldie and francisco jose llera ramo.  "Political Violence in a Democratic State," Terrorism in Context.  Ed. Martha Crenshaw. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1995. pp467.</ref>
 
  
 
== Perpetrators ==
 
== Perpetrators ==
 +
Acts of terrorism can be carried out by individuals, groups, or states. A state can sponsor terrorism by funding a terrorist organization, harboring terrorism, and also using state resources, such as the military, to directly perform acts of terrorism. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such. Opinions as to whether acts of violence by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism or not vary widely. For some, the distinction between "war" and "terrorism" is only semantic.<ref>Paul Pillar, [https://www.cato-unbound.org/2010/02/17/paul-pillar/semantics-terrorism The Semantics of Terrorism] ''CATO Unbound'', February 17, 2010. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref>
  
−
Acts of terrorism can be carried out by individuals, groups, or states. According to some definitions, clandestine or semi-clandestine state actors may also carry out terrorist acts outside the framework of a state of war. The most common image of terrorism is that it is carried out by small and secretive [[Covert cell|cells]], highly motivated to serve a particular cause. However, many of the most deadly operations in recent time, such as [[9/11]], the [[7 July 2005 London bombings|London underground bombing]], and the [[2002 Bali bombing]] were planned and carried out by a close clique, comprised of close friends, family members and other strong social networks.  These groups benefited from the free flow of information, and were able overcome the obstacles they encountered where others failed due to lack of information and communication.<ref>Sageman, Mark. 2004. "Social Networks and the Jihad." Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Ch. 5 pp. 166-167 </ref>  
+
The most common image of terrorism is that it is carried out by small and secretive [[Covert cell|cells]], highly motivated to serve a particular cause. However, many of the most deadly operations in the twenty-first century, such as [[September 11, 2001 attacks|9/11]], the [[7 July 2005 London bombings|London underground bombing]], and the [[2002 Bali bombing]] were planned and carried out by a close clique, comprised of close friends, family members, and other strong social networks.  These groups benefited from the free flow of information, and were able overcome the obstacles they encountered where others failed due to lack of information and communication.<ref>Mark Sageman, ''Social Networks and the Jihad'' (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 166-167. </ref>
−
Over the years, many people have attempted to come up with a [[terrorist profile]] to attempt to explain these individuals' actions through their psychology and social circumstances. Others, like Roderick Hindery, have sought to discern profiles in the propaganda tactics used by terrorists.
 
−
 
 
−
=== Terrorist groups ===
 
−
Most organizations that are accused of being a "'''terrorist organization'''" will deny using [[terrorism]] as a [[military tactic]] to achieve their goals, and there is no international consensus on the bureaucratic [[definition of terrorism]].
 
−
 
 
−
=== State sponsors ===
 
−
 
 
−
A state can sponsor terrorism by funding a terrorist organization, harboring terrorism, and also using state resources, such as the military, to directly perform acts of terrorism. Opinions as to which acts of violence by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism or not vary widely. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such.
 
  
 
==Tactics==
 
==Tactics==
−
 
+
Terrorist attacks are often targeted to maximize fear and publicity. They usually employ [[explosive]]s or [[poison]], but there is also concern about terrorist attacks using [[weapons of mass destruction]]. Terrorist organizations usually methodically plan attacks in advance, and may train participants, plant "undercover" agents, and raise money from supporters or through [[organized crime]]. Communication may occur through modern [[telecommunications]], or through old-fashioned methods such as [[courier]]s.
−
Terrorist attacks are often targeted to maximize fear and publicity. They usually [[explosives]] or [[poison]], but there is also concern about terrorist attacks using [[weapons of mass destruction]]. Terrorist organizations usually methodically plan attacks in advance, and may train participants, plant "undercover" agents, and raise money from supporters or through [[organized crime]].  Communication may occur through modern [[telecommunications]], or through old-fashioned methods such as [[courier]]s.
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
Terrorist attacks are often targeted to maximize fear and publicity. They usually use [[explosives]] or [[poison]], but there is also concern about terrorist attacks using [[weapons of mass destruction]]. Terrorist organizations usually methodically plan attacks in advance, and may train participants, plant "undercover" agents, and raise money from supporters or through [[organized crime]]. Communication may occur through modern [[telecommunications]], or through old-fashioned methods such as [[courier]]s.  
 
  
 
===Methods of attack===
 
===Methods of attack===
 
Terrorists seek to demoralize and paralyze their enemy with fear, and also to pressure governments into conceding to the terrorist's agenda.
 
Terrorists seek to demoralize and paralyze their enemy with fear, and also to pressure governments into conceding to the terrorist's agenda.
  
−
While they act according to different motivations and goals, all terrorist groups have one tactic in common: to achieve maximum publicity in order to intimidate and generate a message as a means to attain its objectives. Terrorism uses violence on one part of society to instill fear in the larger part of society to make a change. Terrorism employs propaganda as a tactic to ensure the attention of the public through the attention from the media. The term [[Propaganda of the deed|Propaganda of the  Deed]], coined by [[Errico Malatesta|Malatesta]], Cafiero, and Covelli, states that the message is most strongly conveyed through violence.<ref> Garrison, Arthur. 2004. "Defining Terrorism." Criminal Justice Studies. Vol 17. pp. 259-279</ref>
+
While they act according to different motivations and goals, all terrorist groups have one tactic in common: to achieve maximum publicity in order to intimidate and generate a message as a means to attain its objectives. Terrorism uses violence on one part of society to instill fear in the larger part of society to make a change. Terrorism employs [[propaganda]] as a tactic to ensure the attention of the public through the attention from the [[mass media|media]]. The term "Propaganda of the Deed," coined by [[Errico Malatesta|Malatesta]], Cafiero, and Covelli, states that the message is most strongly conveyed through violence.<ref>Arthur Garrison, "Defining Terrorism," ''Criminal Justice Studies'' 17 (2004): 259-279.</ref>
−
 
 
−
Often damage is done with an [[improvised explosive device]] although chemical weapons have been used on occasion. A source of concern is also a possible use of a [[nuclear weapon]] or [[biological weapon]]s. In the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], planes were used as [[guided missile|guided]] [[incendiary device]]s.
 
  
−
Terrorist groups may arrange for secondary devices to detonate at a slightly later time in order to kill emergency-response personnel attempting to attend to the dead and wounded. Repeated or suspected use of secondary devices can also delay emergency response out of concern that such devices may exist. Examples include a (failed) device that was meant to release cyanide-gas during the February 26, 1993 [[World Trade Center bombing]]; and a second car bomb that detonated 20 minutes after the December 1, 2001 [[Ben Yehuda Street Bombing]] by [[Hamas]] in [[Jerusalem]].
+
Often, damage is done with an [[improvised explosive device]] although chemical weapons have been used on occasion. A source of concern is also a possible use of a [[nuclear weapon]] or [[biological weapon]]s. Terrorist groups may also use [[chemical weapon]]s as in the Sarin gas attack on the [[Tokyo]] subway in 1995.<ref>ABC News Online, [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2004-07-28/court-upholds-death-sentences-for-sarin-gas/2016616 Court upholds death sentences for sarin gas attackers.]  July 28, 2004. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> In the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], planes were used as [[guided missile|guided]] [[incendiary device]]s.
  
−
Terrorist groups may also use [[chemical weapons]] as in the [[Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway]] and the [[2007 chlorine bombings in Iraq]].
+
Terrorist groups may arrange for secondary devices to detonate at a slightly later time in order to kill emergency-response personnel attempting to attend to the dead and wounded. Repeated or suspected use of secondary devices can also delay emergency response out of concern that such devices may exist. Examples include a (failed) device that was meant to release [[cyanide]]-gas during the February 26, 1993 [[World Trade Center bombing]]; and a second car bomb that detonated 20 minutes after the December 1, 2001 [[Ben Yehuda Street Bombing]] by [[Hamas]] in [[Jerusalem]].
  
 
===Training===
 
===Training===
−
 
+
Training camps have often been used to prepare terrorists to mount their attacks. For the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], the pilots also took flying courses. The range of training depends greatly on the level of support the terrorist organization receives from various organizations and states. In nearly every case the training incorporates the philosophy and agenda of the groups leadership as justification for the training as well as the potential acts of terrorism which may be committed. State sanctioned training is by far the most extensive and thorough, often employing professional soldiers and covert operatives of the supporting state. The training generally includes physical fitness, combat or [[martial art]]s, firearms, explosives, intelligence/counterintelligence, and field craft. More specialized training may include mission specific subjects such as, language, cultural familiarization, communications, and surveillance techniques. In every instance the quality of training is extremely high and well organized.
−
There are and have been training camps for terrorists. For the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], the pilots also took flying courses. The range of training depends greatly on the level of support the terrorist organization receives from various organizations and states. In nearly every case the training incorporates the philosophy and agenda of the groups leadership as justification for the training as well as the potential acts of terrorism which may be committed. State sanctioned training is by far the most extensive and thorough, often employing professional soldiers and covert operatives of the supporting state. The training generally includes physical fitness, combat or martial arts, firearms, explosives, intelligence/counterintelligence, and field craft. More specialized training may include mission specific subjects such as, language, cultural familiarization, communications, and surveillance techniques. In every instance the quality of training is extremely high and well organized.
 
−
 
 
−
===Preparation===
 
−
Preparation of a major attack such as the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] may take years, whereas a simpler attack, depending on the availability of arms, may be almost spontaneous.
 
  
 
===Cover===
 
===Cover===
Line 214: Line 119:
  
 
===Funding===
 
===Funding===
−
 
+
Funding can be raised in both legal and illegal ways. Some of the most common ways to raise funds are through [[charitable organization|charities]], well funded organizations, or a non-violent organization with similar ideologies. In the absence of state funding, terrorists may rely on [[organized crime]] to fund their activities. This has included [[kidnapping]], [[drug trafficking]], or [[robbery]]. Some terrorist cells have relied on [[identity theft]] and [[fraud]] to raise funds.  
−
Funding can be raised in both legal and illegal ways. Some of the most common ways to raise funds are through charities, well funded organizations, or a non violent organization with similar ideologies. In the absence of state funding, terrorists may rely on [[organized crime]] to fund their activities. This has included [[kidnapping]], [[drug trafficking]], or [[robbery]]. Some terroist cells have rellied on identity theft and fraud to raise funds. In one method, the cell members tape record phone conversations with a potiential victim. Then they cut and edit the tape for use in calls to the victim's friends, family, and associates. This way, they can give orders to an ever expanding net of victims who think they are following requests from a trusted source. Additionally, terrorists have also found many more sources of revenue.
 
  
 
===Communication===
 
===Communication===
−
The revolution in communication technology over the past 10-15 years has dramatically changed how terrorist organizations communicate. E-mails, fax transmissions, websites, cell phones, and satellite telephones have made it possible for organizations to contemplate a global strategy. However, too great a reliance on this new technology leaves organizations vulnerable to sophisticated monitoring of communication and triangulation of its source. When the media published the information that the U.S. government was tracking Osama bin Laden by monitoring his phone calls, he ceased using this method to communicate.<ref>Sageman, Marc. 2004. ''Social Networks and the Jihad''. Philadelphia: University of  
+
The revolution in communications technology has dramatically changed how terrorist organizations communicate. E-mails, fax transmissions, websites, cell phones, and satellite telephones have made it possible for organizations to contemplate a global strategy. However, too great a reliance on such technology leaves organizations vulnerable to sophisticated monitoring of communication. When the media published the information that the U.S. government was tracking [[Osama bin Laden]] by monitoring his phone calls, he ceased using this method to communicate.<ref>Marc Sageman, ''Social Networks and the Jihad'' (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 158-161.</ref>
−
Pennsylvania Press. Ch. 5 pp. 158-161 </ref>
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
==Causes==
 
−
 
 
−
The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political [[conflict]].
 
−
 
 
−
The type of conflict varies widely; historical examples include:
 
−
* [[Secession]] of a territory to form a new sovereign state
 
−
* Dominance of territory or resources by various [[ethnic groups]]
 
−
* Imposition of a particular form of government, such as [[democracy]], [[theocracy]], or [[anarchy]]
 
−
* Economic deprivation of a population
 
−
* Opposition to a domestic government or occupying army
 
−
 
 
−
Terrorism is a form of [[asymmetric warfare]], and is more common when direct [[conventional warfare]] either cannot be (due to differentials in available forces) or is not being used to resolve the underlying conflict.
 
−
 
 
−
In some cases, the rationale for a terrorist attack may be uncertain (as in the many attacks for which no group or individual claims responsibility) or unrelated to any large-scale social conflict (such as the [[Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway]] by [[Aum Shinrikyo]]).
 
  
 
==Responses to terrorism==
 
==Responses to terrorism==
−
 
+
Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignment of the [[political spectrum]] and reassessments of [[value system|fundamental values]]. Responses that are directed specifically at preventing terrorist attacks are termed "counter-terrorism." Examples of several counter-terrorism strategies follow.
−
 
 
−
Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the [[political spectrum]] and reassessments of [[value system|fundamental values]]. The term '''counter-terrorism''' has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.
 
−
 
 
−
Specific types of responses include:
 
−
* Targeted laws, criminal procedures, deportations, and enhanced police powers
 
−
* Target hardening, such as locking doors or adding traffic barriers
 
−
* Preemptive or reactive military action
 
−
* Increased intelligence and surveillance activities
 
−
* Preemptive humanitarian activities
 
−
* More permissive interrogation and detention policies
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
'''Responses to [[terrorism]]''' are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the [[political spectrum]] and reassessments of [[value system|fundamental values]]. The term '''counter-terrorism''' has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.
 
  
 
===Target-hardening===
 
===Target-hardening===
−
 
+
Whatever the target of terrorists, there are multiple ways of hardening the targets to prevent the terrorists from hitting their mark. One method is to place [[Jersey barrier]] or other sturdy obstacles outside tall or politically sensitive buildings to prevent car and [[truck bomb]]ing. Aircraft cockpits are kept locked during flights, and have reinforced doors, which only the pilots in the cabin are capable of opening. [[England|English]] [[train stations]] removed their [[waste bin]]s in response to the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army|Provisional IRA]] threat, as convenient locations for depositing bombs. [[Scotland|Scottish]] stations removed theirs after the [[7 July 2005 London Bombings|July 7 bombing]] of London as a precautionary measure. The [[Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority]] purchased bomb-resistant barriers after the [[September 11 terrorist attacks]].
−
Whatever the target of terrorists, there are multiple ways of hardening the targets to prevent the terrorists from hitting their mark. One method is to place [[Jersey barrier]] or other sturdy obstacles outside tall or politically sensitive buildings to prevent car and [[truck bomb]]ing. Aircraft cockpits are kept locked during flights, and have reinforced doors, which only the pilots in the cabin are capable of opening. [[England|English]] [[train stations]] removed their [[waste bin]]s in response to the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army|Provisional IRA]] threat, as convenient locations for depositing bombs. [[Scotland|Scottish]] stations removed theirs after the [[7 July 2005 London Bombings|7th  of July bombing]] of London as a precautionary measure. The [[Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority]] purchased bomb-resistant barriers after the [[September 11 terrorist attacks]].
 
  
 
===Preemptive neutralization===
 
===Preemptive neutralization===
−
Some countries see pre-emptive attacks as a legitimate strategy. This includes capturing, killing, or disabling suspected terrorists before they can mount an attack. [[Israel]], the [[United States]], and [[Russia]] have taken this approach, while Western European states generally do not.
+
Some countries see preemptive attacks as a legitimate strategy. This includes capturing, killing, or disabling suspected terrorists before they can mount an attack. [[Israel]], the [[United States]], and [[Russia]] have taken this approach, while Western European states generally have not.
  
−
Another major method of pre-emptive neutralization is [[interrogation]] of known or suspected terrorists to obtain information about specific plots, targets, the identity of other terrorists, and whether the interrogation subjects himself as guilty of terrorist involvement. Sometimes more extreme methods are used to increase [[suggestibility]], such as [[sleep deprivation]] or drugs. Such methods may lead captives to offer false information in an attempt to stop the treatment, or due to the confusion brought on by it.
+
Another major method of preemptive neutralization is [[interrogation]] of known or suspected terrorists to obtain information about specific plots, targets, and the identity of other terrorists.  
  
 
===Domestic intelligence and surveillance===
 
===Domestic intelligence and surveillance===
−
Most counter-terrorism strategies involve an increase in standard police and domestic intelligence. The central activities are traditional: [[telephone tapping|interception of communications]], and the tracing of persons. New technology has, however, expanded the range of such operations. Domestic intelligence is often directed at specific groups, defined on the basis of origin or religion, which is a source of political controversy. [[Mass surveillance]] of an entire population raises objections on [[civil liberties]] grounds.
+
Most counter-terrorism strategies involve an increase in standard police and domestic intelligence. The central activities are traditional: [[telephone tapping|Interception of communications]] and the tracing of persons. New technology has, however, expanded the range of such operations. Domestic intelligence is often directed at specific groups, defined on the basis of origin or religion, which is a source of political controversy. [[Mass surveillance]] of an entire population raises objections on [[civil liberties]] grounds.
  
 
===Military intervention===
 
===Military intervention===
−
Terrorism has often been used to justify military intervention in countries where terrorists are said to be based. That was the main stated justification for the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|U.S. invasion of Afghanistan]]. It was also a stated justification for the [[second Russian invasion of Chechnya]].   
+
Terrorism has been used to justify military intervention in countries where terrorists are said to be based. That was the main stated justification for the [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|U.S. invasion of Afghanistan]]. It was also a stated justification for the [[second Russian invasion of Chechnya]].   
  
−
History has shown that military intervention has rarely been successful in stopping or preventing terrorism.  Although military action can disrupt a terrorist group's operations temporarily, it rarely ends the threat.  <ref>Pape, Robert A. 2005. ''Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism.''. New York: Random House. Ch. 12 pp. 237-250 </ref> Provoking repression is actually a key goal of terrorism, as most of the time it increases the popularity of the terrorist cause (source?)as well as furthers the motivation for continuing terrorism. Most probably such a strategy against terrorism is not successful and cannot be as the structural causes of terrorism are not addressed: Relative deprivation that leads to frustration, aggressive foreign policy that leads to ´hate`, and psychosocial effects of globalization (as well as other causes) are not solved. Thus repression by the military in itself - particularly if it is not accompanied by other measures - usually leads to short term victories, but tend to be unsuccessful in the long run (e.g. [[France]] and the [[National Liberation Front (Algeria)|National Liberation Front]]). However, new methods such as those taken in [[Iraq]] have yet to be seen as beneficial or ineffectual. Currently, it seems that the measures in Iraq have strongly incited terrorism.
+
Such a strategy against terrorism may not be successful since it does not address the causes of terrorism: Relative deprivation that leads to frustration, aggressive foreign policy that leads to hate, and psychosocial effects of [[globalization]], for example. Thus repression by the military in itself--particularly if it is not accompanied by other measures--may result in short term victories, but be unsuccessful in the long run.  
  
 
===Non-military Intervention===
 
===Non-military Intervention===
−
The [[human security]] paradigm outlines a non-military approach which aims to address the enduring underlying inequalities which fuel terrorist activity. Causal factors need to be delineated and measures implemented which allow equal access to resources and [[sustainability]] for all peoples. Such activities empower citizens providing 'freedom from fear' and 'freedom from want'. This can take many forms including the provision of clean drinking water, education, vaccination programs, provision of food and shelter and protection from violence, military or otherwise. Successful human security campaigns have been characterised by the participation of a diverse group of actors including governments, [[NGOs]], and citizens.
+
The [[human security]] paradigm outlines a non-military approach which aims to address the enduring underlying inequalities which fuel terrorist activity. Causal factors are delineated and measures implemented which allow equal access to resources and [[sustainability]] for all peoples. Such activities empower citizens providing "freedom from fear" and "freedom from want." This can take many forms including the provision of clean drinking water, education, and vaccination programs, provision of food and shelter and protection from violence, military or otherwise. Successful human security campaigns have been characterized by the participation of a diverse group of actors including governments, [[NGOs]], and citizens.
  
 
===Terrorism and human rights===
 
===Terrorism and human rights===
 
One of the primary difficulties of implementing effective counter-terrorist measures is the waning of civil liberties and individual privacy that such measures often entail, both for citizens of, and for those detained by states attempting to combat terror. At times, measures designed to tighten security have been seen as abuses of power or even violations of [[human rights]].
 
One of the primary difficulties of implementing effective counter-terrorist measures is the waning of civil liberties and individual privacy that such measures often entail, both for citizens of, and for those detained by states attempting to combat terror. At times, measures designed to tighten security have been seen as abuses of power or even violations of [[human rights]].
  
−
Examples of these problems can include prolonged, incommunicado detention without judicial review; risk of subjecting to torture during the transfer, return and extradition of people between or within countries; and the adoption of security measures that restrain the rights or freedoms of citizens and breach principles of non-discrimination. <ref name="Human Rights News 2004"> Human Rights News (2004): "Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism," in the Briefing to the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm online]</ref> Examples include:
+
Examples of these problems can include prolonged, incommunicado detention without judicial review; risk of subjecting to torture during the transfer, return and extradition of people between or within countries; and the adoption of security measures that restrain the rights or freedoms of citizens and breach principles of non-discrimination.<ref name="Human Rights News 2004">Human Rights News, [https://www.hrw.org/news/2004/01/29/human-rights-and-counter-terrorism Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism.] January 29, 2004. Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref>  
  
−
*In November 2003, Malaysia passed new counter-terror laws that were widely criticized by local [[human rights]] groups for being vague and overbroad. Critics claim that the laws put the basic rights of free expression, association, and assembly at risk. Malaysia persisted in holding around 100 alleged militants without trial, including five Malaysian students detained for alleged terrorist activity while studying in Karachi, Pakistan. <ref name="Human Rights News 2004"> Human Rights News (2004): "Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism," in the Briefing to the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm online]</ref>
+
Many would argue that such violations exacerbate rather than counter the terrorist threat.<ref name="Human Rights News 2004"/> Human rights advocates argue for the crucial role of [[human rights]] protection as an intrinsic part to fight against terrorism. A section on confronting terrorism in the recommendations in the Madrid Agenda arising from the Madrid Summit on Democracy and Terrorism (Madrid 8-11 March 2005) reads as follows:  
−
*In November 2003, a Canadian-Syrian national, Maher Arar, alleged publicly that he had been tortured in a Syrian prison after being handed over to the Syrian authorities by U.S. <ref name="Human Rights News 2004"> Human Rights News (2004): "Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism," in the Briefing to the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm online]</ref>
+
<blockquote>Democratic principles and values are essential tools in the fight against terrorism. Any successful strategy for dealing with terrorism requires terrorists to be isolated. Consequently, the preference must be to treat terrorism as criminal acts to be handled through existing systems of law enforcement and with full respect for human rights and the rule of law. We recommend: (1) Taking effective measures to make impunity impossible either for acts of terrorism or for the abuse of human rights in counter-terrorism measures. (2) The incorporation of human rights laws in all anti-terrorism programmers and policies of national governments as well as international bodies.<ref> Secretariat Counter-Terrorism Task Force, [http://www.clubmadrid.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/folleto-MADRID_AGENDA1.pdf The Madrid Agenda – Club of Madrid, 11 March 2005] Retrieved July 9, 2019.</ref> </blockquote>
−
*In December 2003, Colombia's congress approved legislation that would give the military the power to arrest, tap telephones and carry out searches without warrants or any previous judicial order. <ref name="Human Rights News 2004"> Human Rights News (2004): "Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism," in the Briefing to the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm online]</ref>
 
−
* Images of torture and ill-treatment of detainees in US custody in Iraq and other locations have jeopardized the legitimacy of the US war on terror and brought on international scrutiny. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
 
−
*Hundreds of foreign nationals remain in prolonged indefinite detention without charge or trial in Guantánamo Bay, despite international and US constitutional standards outlawing such practices. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
 
−
*Hundreds of people suspected of connections with the Taliban or al Qa'eda remain in long-term arbitrary detention in Pakistan or in US-controlled centres in Afghanistan. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
 
−
*China has used the "war on terror" to justify its repression policies in the predominantly Muslim Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region to stifle Uighur identity. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
 
−
*In Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen and other countries, scores of people have been arrested and arbitrarily detained in connection with suspected terrorist acts or links to opposition armed groups. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
 
−
*Until 2005, 11 men remained in high security detention in the UK under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
 
  
−
Many would argue that such violations exacerbate rather than counter the terrorist threat. <ref name="Human Rights News 2004"> Human Rights News (2004): "Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism," in the Briefing to the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm online]</ref>  Human rights advocates argue for the crucial role of [[human rights]] protection as an intrinsic part to fight against terrorism. <ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref> This suggests, as proponents of [[human security]] have long argued, that respecting human rights may indeed help us to incur security. [[Amnesty International]] included a section on confronting terrorism in the recommendations in the Madrid Agenda arising from the Madrid Summit on Democracy and Terrorism (Madrid 8-11 March 2005):
+
While international efforts to combat terrorism have focused on the need to enhance cooperation between states, proponents of [[human rights]] (as well as [[human security]]) have suggested that more effort needs to be given to the effective inclusion of human rights protection as a crucial element in that cooperation. They argue that international human rights obligations do not stop at borders and a failure to respect human rights in one state may undermine its effectiveness in the international effort to cooperate to combat terrorism.<ref name="Human Rights News 2004"/>
  
−
:''"Democratic principles and values are essential tools in the fight against terrorism. Any successful strategy for dealing with terrorism requires terrorists to be isolated. Consequently, the preference must be to treat terrorism as criminal acts to be handled through existing systems of law enforcement and with full respect for [[human rights]] and the rule of law. We recommend: (1) taking effective measures to make impunity impossible either for acts of terrorism or for the abuse of human rights in counter-terrorism measures. (2) the incorporation of human rights laws in all anti-terrorism programmes and policies of national governments as well as international bodies.." ''<ref name="Amnesty International 2005"> Amnesty International (2005): "Counter-terrorism and criminal law in the EU." [http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGIOR610132005 online]</ref>
+
==Examples of major incidents of terrorism==
−
 
+
[[Image:Terrorincidents2001atlas.jpg|thumb|350px|right|"International Terrorist Incidents, 2001" by the U.S. [[Department of State]]]]
−
While international efforts to combat terrorism have focused on the need to enhance cooperation between states, proponents of human rights (as well as [[human security]]) have suggested that more effort needs to be given to the effective inclusion of [[human rights]] protection as a crucial element in that cooperation. They argue that international human rights obligations do not stop at borders and a failure to respect human rights in one state may undermine its effectiveness in the international effort to cooperate to combat terrorism. <ref name="Human Rights News 2004"> Human Rights News (2004): "Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism," in the Briefing to the 60th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm online]</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== History ==
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
The modern English term "terrorism" dates back to 1795 when it was used to describe the actions of the [[Jacobin Club]] in their rule of post-Revolutionary France, the so-called "[[Reign of Terror]]."
 
−
 
 
−
{{cleanup|February 2007}}
 
−
Although there are earlier related examples, the '''history of [[terrorism]]''' in the modern sense seems to have emerged around the mid 19th-century. 
 
−
 
 
−
===Origin===
 
−
The term "terrorism" comes from the [[French language|French]]  word ''terrorisme'', which is based on the [[Latin language|Latin]] verb ''terrere'' (to cause to tremble),<ref>Juergensmeyer, Mark. ''Terror in the Mind of God''. 2nd ed., University of California Press. (2001), p. 5 </ref> It has been related to the so-called 1793 [[Reign of Terror]] during the [[French Revolution]] {{Fact|date=March 2007}}.
 
−
 
 
−
===Nineteenth century===
 
−
 
 
−
The current use of the term "terrorism" is broader and relies more on the example of the 19th-century revolutionaries who used the technique of assassination, particularly the [[Anarchism|anarchists]] and [[Narodniks]] in [[Tsarist]] [[Russia]], whose most notable action was the assassination of [[Alexander II of Russia|Alexander II]]. An early example of its use in the current sense is in Joseph Conrad's 1907 story "The Secret Agent," where it is used to describe anarchists attempting to cause terror and foment social disruption by blowing up [[Greenwich Observatory]]: "The venomous spluttering of the old terrorist without teeth was heard."<ref name = "Conrad3">[http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/jc/sa/sa03.html Ch. 3] of CONRAD, Joseph, The Secret Agent, 1907.</ref>
 
−
 
 
−
<blockquote>
 
−
What is one to say to an act of destructive ferocity so absurd as to be incomprehensible, inexplicable, almost unthinkable; in fact, mad? Madness alone is truly terrifying, inasmuch as you cannot placate it either by threats, persuasion, or bribes.<ref name = "Conrad2">[http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/jc/sa/sa02.html Ch. 2] of CONRAD, Joseph, The Secret Agent, 1907.</ref>
 
−
</blockquote>
 
−
 
 
−
In 1867 the [[Irish Republican Brotherhood]], a [[revolutionary]] [[nationalist]] group with support from [[Irish-American]]s, carried out attacks in [[England]]. These were the first acts of "[[Irish republicanism|republican]] terrorism," which became a recurrent feature of [[Britain|British]] history, and these [[Fenian]]s were the precursor of the [[Irish Republican Army]].  The ideology of the group was [[Irish nationalism]].
 
−
 
 
−
In [[Russia]], by the mid-19th century, the [[intelligentsia]] grew impatient with the slow pace of [[Tsar]]ist reforms, and sought instead to transform peasant discontent into open revolution. Anarchists like [[Mikhail Bakunin]] maintained that progress was impossible without destruction. Their objective was nothing less than complete destruction of the state. Anything that contributed to this goal was regarded as moral. With the development of sufficiently powerful, stable, and affordable explosives, the gap closed between the firepower of the state and the means available to dissidents. Organized into secret societies like the [[People's Will]], Russian terrorists launched a campaign of terror against the state that climaxed in 1881 when Tsar [[Alexander II of Russia]] was assassinated.
 
−
 
 
−
At about the same time, Anarchists in Europe and the United States also resorted to the use of dynamite, as did [[Catalonia|Catalan]] nationalists such as [[La Reixa]] and [[Bandera Negra]].
 
−
 
 
−
Two groups within the [[Ottoman Empire]] also resorted to techniques considered by some historians to be in the same category as those used by the People's Will and the Anarchists. One group was those fighting for an independent [[Armenia]], divided into two parties, the [[Hunchak|Social Democrat Hunchakian Party]] and the [[Dashnak]]s or Armenian Revolutionary Federation. The other group was those fighting for an independent [[Macedonia (region)|Macedonia]], divided into two organizations, the [[Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization]] (IMRO) and the [[External Macedonian Revolutionary Organization]] (EMRO).
 
−
 
 
−
The IMRO was founded in 1893 in [[Thessaloniki]], now in Greece but then part of the [[Ottoman Empire]]. The organisation was driven by Slavic nationalism, and later acquired a reputation for ferocious attacks, including the 1934 assassination of [[Alexander I of Yugoslavia]] during a state visit to France.
 
−
 
 
−
The Fenians/IRA, the Hunchaks and Dashnaks, and the IMRO may be considered the prototype of all 'nationalist terrorism', and equally illustrate the (itself controversial) expression that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." At least one of these groups achieved its goals: an independent [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]] came into being. So did an independent [[Republic of Macedonia|Macedonia]], but the original IMRO probably contributed little to this outcome. The territories of today's [[Armenia]], however, are all in the former [[Russian empire]].
 
−
 
 
−
===Twentieth century===
 
−
 
 
−
A reincarnation of the 19th century [[Ku Klux Klan]] arose in the United States in 1915, and became active for several decades, using terrorist tactics to promote a doctrine of [[white supremacy]].
 
−
 
 
−
Some of the most successful terrorist groups were the vast array of guerilla, partisan, and resistance movements that were organised and supplied by the Allies during [[World War II]].  The British [[Special Operations Executive]] (SOE) conducted operations in every theatre of the war and provided an invaluable contribution to allied victory. The SOE effectively invented modern terrorism, pioneering most of the tactics, techniques and technologies that are the mainstays of modern terrorism.{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
−
 
 
−
Throughout the Cold War both sides made extensive use of terrorist organisations to carry on a war by proxy.  For example many of the Islamic terrorists of today were trained by the US and UK to fight the USSR in Afganistan.{{Fact|date=March 2007}}  Similar groups such as the [[Viet Cong]] received training from Soviet and Chinese military "advisors".{{Fact|date=March 2007}}
 
−
 
 
−
The most sustained terrorist campaign of the 20th century was that of the [[Irish Republican Army]].{{Fact|date=February 2007}}  [[Michael Collins (Irish leader)|Michael Collins]] led the first campaign which saw 26 of the 32 counties gain independence.{{Fact|date=March 2007}}  A second campaign became know as [[the Troubles]] between 1972 and 1997 with the [[Provisional Irish Republican Army]] conducting [[bomb]]ings, [[assassination]]s and even [[Mortar (weapon)|mortar]] attacks on [[10 Downing Street]].{{Fact|date=March 2007}}
 
−
 
 
−
Today, modern weapons technology has made it possible for a "super-empowered angry man"{{Fact|date=February 2007}} to cause a large amount of destruction by himself or with only a few conspirators.  It can be, and has been, conducted by small as well as large organizations.
 
−
 
 
−
Some people considered at some point in their lives to be terrorists, or supporters of terrorism, have gone on to become dedicated peace activists ([[Uri Avnery]]), respected statesmen ([[Yitzhak Shamir]]) or even [[Nobel Peace Prize]] laureates ([[Nelson Mandela]], [[Yasser Arafat]]).  Though in some instances, the label of terrorist may not follow the standard sense which requires the targeting of non-combatants.
 
−
 
 
−
Since 1968, the [[United States Department of State|U.S. State Department]] has tallied deaths due to terrorism. In 1985, it counted 816 deaths, the highest annual toll until then. The deaths decreased since the late 1980s, then rose to 3,295 in 2001, mainly as a result of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], which took about 3,000 lives. In 2003, more than 1,000 people died as a result of terrorist acts.  Many of these deaths resulted from [[suicide bombings]] in [[Chechnya]], [[Iraq]], [[India]] and [[Israel]]. It does not tally victims of state terrorism.
 
−
 
 
−
Data from the [[National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism]] Terrorism Knowledge Base showed a similar decline since the 1980s, especially in Western Europe. On the other hand, Asia experienced an increase in international terrorist attacks. Other regions experienced less consistent patterns over time.  From 1991 to 2003, there was a consistent increase in the number of casualties from international terrorist attacks in Asia, but few other consistent trends in casualties from international terrorist attacks. Three different regions had, in three different years,  a few attacks with a large number of casualties. Statistically, distribution of the severity of terrorist attacks follows a [[power law]],<ref name = "Arxiv">[http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0606007  Arxiv].</ref> much like that for [[war]]s and also natural disasters like [[earthquake]]s, [[flood]]s and [[forest fire]]s.{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
−
{{Unreferenced|date=February 2007}}
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
==Examples of major incidents==
 
−
[[Image:Terrorincidents2001atlas.jpg|thumb|350px|right|"International Terrorist Incidents, 2001" by the US [[Department of State]]]]
 
  
 
* The 1972 ''[[Munich massacre]]'' during the [[1972 Summer Olympics]] in [[Munich]], [[West Germany]]
 
* The 1972 ''[[Munich massacre]]'' during the [[1972 Summer Olympics]] in [[Munich]], [[West Germany]]
Line 361: Line 164:
 
* The June 1985 bombing of [[Air India Flight 182]] originating from Canada
 
* The June 1985 bombing of [[Air India Flight 182]] originating from Canada
 
* The destruction of [[Pan Am Flight 103]] over [[Lockerbie]], [[Scotland]] on December 21, 1988
 
* The destruction of [[Pan Am Flight 103]] over [[Lockerbie]], [[Scotland]] on December 21, 1988
−
* The killing of [[Nicaragua]]n civilians by the [[United States]] during the 1980s.
+
* The killing of [[Nicaragua]]n civilians by the [[United States]] during the 1980s
 
* The 1993 [[World Trade Center bombing]]
 
* The 1993 [[World Trade Center bombing]]
 
* The [[1993 Mumbai bombings]]
 
* The [[1993 Mumbai bombings]]
−
* The 1995 [[sarin]] gas attacks in Tokyo, Japan
+
* The 1995 [[sarin]] gas attacks in [[Tokyo]], [[Japan]]
 
* The [[Oklahoma City bombing]] by [[Timothy McVeigh]] on April 19, 1995
 
* The [[Oklahoma City bombing]] by [[Timothy McVeigh]] on April 19, 1995
 
* The [[Centennial Olympic Park bombing]] in 1996
 
* The [[Centennial Olympic Park bombing]] in 1996
−
* The [[1998 United States embassy bombings|US embassy bombings]] in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7 1998
+
* The [[1998 United States embassy bombings|U.S. embassy bombings]] in [[Kenya]] and [[Tanzania]] on August 7 1998
 
* The [[Omagh bombing]] in [[Northern Ireland]] (August 15, 1998)
 
* The [[Omagh bombing]] in [[Northern Ireland]] (August 15, 1998)
 
* The August 31 &ndash; September 22: [[Russian Apartment Bombings]] kills about 300 people, leading Russia into [[Second Chechen War]]
 
* The August 31 &ndash; September 22: [[Russian Apartment Bombings]] kills about 300 people, leading Russia into [[Second Chechen War]]
−
* The [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] in [[New York]], and [[Washington D.C.]]<ref> During the 9-11 attacks a fourth plane, [[United Airlines Flight 93]], a Boeing 757-222, crashed in a field in southwest Pennsylvania just outside of Shanksville (Somerset County), Pennsylvania, about 150 miles (240 km) northwest of Washington, D.C., at 10:03:11 a.m. local time (14:03:11 UTC), with parts and debris found up to eight miles away. The crash in Pennsylvania is believed to have resulted from the hijackers either deliberately crashing the aircraft or losing control of it as they fought with the passengers. It is also believed that the hijackers intended to crash the plane into the White House, or the Capitol building in Washington, D.C.</ref><ref>The Pentagon Building is actually across the [[Potomac River]] in [[Arlington County, Virginia]], but is generally considered to be a part of the greater Washington D.C. area</ref>
+
* The [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] in [[New York City]], and [[Washington D.C.]]<ref> During the 9-11 attacks a fourth plane, [[United Airlines Flight 93]], a Boeing 757-222, crashed in a field in southwest Pennsylvania just outside of Shanksville (Somerset County), Pennsylvania, about 150 miles (240 km) northwest of Washington, D.C., at 10:03:11 a.m. local time (14:03:11 UTC), with parts and debris found up to eight miles away. The crash in Pennsylvania is believed to have resulted from the hijackers either deliberately crashing the aircraft or losing control of it as they fought with the passengers. It is also believed that the hijackers intended to crash the plane into the White House, or the Capitol building in Washington, D.C.</ref><ref>The Pentagon Building is actually across the [[Potomac River]] in [[Arlington County, Virginia]], but is generally considered to be a part of the greater Washington D.C. area.</ref>
 
* The [[2001 Indian Parliament attack]] on December 13, 2001
 
* The [[2001 Indian Parliament attack]] on December 13, 2001
 
* The [[Passover Massacre]] on March 27, 2002 in [[Netanya, Israel]]
 
* The [[Passover Massacre]] on March 27, 2002 in [[Netanya, Israel]]
Line 378: Line 181:
 
* The July 7, 2005 [[7 July 2005 London bombings|bombings in London]]
 
* The July 7, 2005 [[7 July 2005 London bombings|bombings in London]]
 
* The [[2005 Bali bombings|second Bali bombing]] on October 1, 2005
 
* The [[2005 Bali bombings|second Bali bombing]] on October 1, 2005
−
* The [[11 July 2006 Mumbai train bombings|Mumbai train bombings]] on 11 July, 2006.  
+
* The [[11 July 2006 Mumbai train bombings|Mumbai train bombings]] on July 11, 2006.  
−
 
+
* The 2008 Mumbai attacks from November 26 November 29, 2008
−
Some terrorist attacks or plots were designed to kill thousands of people, but either failed or fell short. Such plans include the [[1993 World Trade Center bombing]], [[Operation Bojinka]], and  the [[2006 transatlantic aircraft plot]].
+
* The 2011 Norway attacks on July 22, 2011.
 +
* The Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013.
 +
* The Paris attacks on November 13, 2015.
  
−
==Further reading==
+
Some terrorist attacks or plots were designed to kill thousands of people, but either failed or fell short. Such plans include the [[1993 World Trade Center bombing]], [[Operation Bojinka]], the [[2006 transatlantic aircraft plot]], and the [[2007 Glasgow International Airport attack|June 30, 2007 Glasgow Airport Attack]] foiled by police and civilians.
  
−
* [[Hans Köchler]] (ed.), ''Terrorism and National Liberation. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Question of Terrorism.'' Frankfurt a.M./Bern/New York: Peter Lang, 1988, ISBN 3-8204-1217-4
+
==Notes==
−
*Walter Laqueur, ''No End to War - Terrorism in the 21st Century'', New York, 2003, ISBN 0-8264-1435-4
 
−
* [http://www.terrorfileonline.org/en/index.php/Main_Page ''U.S. Terrorism in the Americas''] an Encyclopedia "on violence promoted, supported and carried out by both the U.S. government and its servants in Latin America
 
−
* [[Lyal Sunga|Lyal S. Sunga]], <cite> US Anti-Terrorism Policy and Asia’s Options, in Johannen, Smith and Gomez, (eds.) September 11 & Political Freedoms: Asian Perspectives (Select) (2002) 242-264.
 
−
===UN conventions===
 
−
*United Nations: [http://untreaty.un.org/English/Terrorism.asp Conventions on Terrorism]
 
−
*[[United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime]]: [http://www.unodc.org/unodc/terrorism_conventions.html Conventions against terrorism] "There are 12 major multilateral conventions and protocols related to states' responsibilities for combating terrorism. But many states are not yet party to these legal instruments, or are not yet implementing them."
 
−
===News monitoring websites specalizing on articles on terrorism===
 
−
*[http://osint.isria.com A reliable and daily updated Open Sources Center that includes a "Terrorism" section.] by ISRIA.
 
−
*[http://diplomacymonitor.com/stu/dm.nsf/issued?openform&cat=Terrorism Diplomacy Monitor - Terrorism]
 
−
*[http://www.jihadmonitor.org/ Jihad Monitor]
 
−
===Papers and articles on global terrorism===
 
−
* Audrey Kurth Cronin, "Behind the Curve: Globalization and International Terrorism," ''International Security'', Vol. 27, No. 3 (Winter 2002/03), pp. 30-58.
 
−
* Stathis N. Kalyvas, [http://research.yale.edu/stathis/files/Paradox.pdf ''The Paradox of Terrorism in Civil Wars''] (2004) in ''Journal of Ethics'' 8:1, 97-138.
 
−
* [[Hans Köchler]], [http://hanskoechler.com/koechler-un-law-terrorism.pdf The United Nations, the International Rule of Law and Terrorism]. Supreme Court of the Philippines, Centenary Lecture (2002)
 
−
*[http://www.tkb.org/ MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base]
 
−
*[http://www.terrorism.com Terrorism Research Center] - Terrorism research site started in 1996.
 
−
*[http://terrorfinance.org Terror Finance Blog] - Multi-expert website dealing with terror finance issues.
 
−
*[http://www.terrorism-research.com/ Terrorism Research] - International Terrorism and Security Research
 
−
*[http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0502014/ Scale invariance in global terrorism]
 
−
*[http://www.debriefed.org/ Security News Line: Global Terrorism and Counter-terrorism www.debriefed.org]
 
−
*[http://statbel.fgov.be/studies/thesis_nl.asp?n=424 The Evolution of Terrorism in 2005. A statistical assessment] An article by Rik Coolsaet and Teun Van de Voorde, University of Ghent
 
−
*[http://www.polyarchy.org/essays/english/terrorism.html Terrorism/Anti-terrorism] - An analysis on the causes and uses of terrorism
 
−
*[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front] PBS "Frontline" 2005.
 
−
*[http://www.terroryzm.com Terrorism articles] Articles about terrorism in median Europe, Polish Terrorism Centre
 
−
===Papers and articles on terrorism and the United States (War on Terror and Homeland Security)===
 
−
* Ivan Arreguín-Toft, "Tunnel at the End of the Light: A Critique of U.S. Counter-terrorist Grand Strategy,"''Cambridge Review of International Affairs'', Vol. 15, No. 3 (2002), pp. 549-563.
 
−
*[http://web1.foreignpolicy.com/issue_julyaug_2006/TI-index/index.html The Terrorism Index] - Terrorism "scorecard" from ''Foreign Policy Magazine'' and the Center for American Progress
 
−
*[http://www.counterpunch.org/chomskyterror.html Noam Chomsky: The New War on Terror]
 
−
*[http://www.rand.org/media/experts/policy_areas/homeland_security_and_terrorism/index.html RAND Terrorism Experts Guide]
 
−
*[http://www.rewardsforjustice.net Most Wanted Terrorists]- Rewards for Justice
 
−
*[http://www.lawandterrorism.com Law, Terrorism and Homeland Security].  A collection of articles compiled by Greg McNeal, Fellow in Terrorism and Homeland Security at the Institute for Global Security Law and Policy.
 
−
*[http://ssrn.com/abstract=880076 "The Security Constitution," UCLA Law Review, Vol. 53, No. 29, 2005]
 
−
*[http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=War_on_terrorism SourceWatch article on the War on Terror]
 
−
*[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/enemywithin] The Enemy Within, PBS Frontline October 2006.
 
−
===Papers and articles on terrorism and Israel===
 
−
* Ariel Merari, "Terrorism as a Strategy in Insurgency," ''Terrorism and Political Violence'', Vol. 5, No. 4 (Winter 1993), pp. 213-251.
 
−
*[http://www.isayeret.com Israeli Counter Terror at isayeret.com]
 
−
*[http://www.ynetnews.com/home/0,7340,L-4176,00.html Israel Global Terror desk]
 
−
*[http://www.ariel-sharon-life-story.com/08-Ariel-Sharon-Biography-1971-War-against-Terrorism.shtml Ariel Sharon's 1971 Campaign against Terrorism - From Ariel Sharon's Life Story, a biography]
 
−
===Other===
 
−
*[http://www.swemorph.com/pdf/inmm-r2.pdf  Nuclear Facilities and Sabotage: Using Morphological Analysis as a Scenario and Strategy Development Laboratory] (PDF)
 
−
*[http://www.paradisepoisoned.com Paradise Poisoned: Learning About Conflict, Development and Terrorism from Sri Lanka's Civil Wars] by [[John Richardson (professor and author)|John Richardson]]
 
−
 
 
−
==Footnotes==
 
 
<references />
 
<references />
  
−
== External links ==
+
==References==
−
* [http://www.teachingterror.com/ ''Teaching Terrorism and Counterterrorism'' with lesson plans, bibliographies, resources; from US Military Academy]
+
* Anderson, Sheldon, Mark Allen Peterson, and Stanley W. Toops. ''International Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Global Issues''.  Routledge, 2017. ISBN 0813350492
−
*[http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=786048453686176230&q=terror+storm A documentary film about the history of government sponsored terrorism]
+
* Arreguín-Toft, Ivan. "Tunnel at the End of the Light: A Critique of U.S. Counter-terrorist Grand Strategy." ''Cambridge Review of International Affairs'' 15 (3) (2002): 549-563.
−
*[http://exposethis.blogspot.com A collection of videos about the 911 terror attacks]
+
* Cronin, Audrey Kurth. "Behind the Curve: Globalization and International Terrorism." ''International Security'' 27 (3) (Winter 2002/03): 30-58.
−
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CV1qZsoVQw A brief video showing support for terrorist activities of Ossama Bin Laden By World's #1 Muslim Debator & most moderate & logical considered Scholar Dr. Zakir Naik]
+
* Juergensmeyer, Mark. ''Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence''. University of California Press, 2003. ISBN 0520240111.
−
*[http://www.worldtradetribute.com September 11 memorial site]
+
* Köchler, Hans (ed.). ''Terrorism and National Liberation. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Question of Terrorism.'' New York: Peter Lang, 1988. ISBN 3820412174.
−
 
+
* Laqueur, Walter. ''No End to War: Terrorism in the 21st Century.'' New York: 2003. ISBN 0826414354.
−
* [http://www.gtcentre.unsw.edu.au/Publications/docs/pubs/terrorismDefinitions.pdf#search=%22terrorism%20%22legal%20definition%22%20%22 "What is 'Terrorism'? Problems of Legal Definition"] (2004) 27 University of New South Wales Law Journal 270.
+
* Merari, Ariel. "Terrorism as a Strategy in Insurgency." ''Terrorism and Political Violence'' 5 (4) (Winter 1993): 213-251.
−
*[http://www.counter-terrorism-law.org/Carliledefterror1.htm 'Review of definition of “Terrorism” in British Law published']
+
* Mock, Ron. ''Loving Without Giving In: Christian Responses to Terrorism and Tyranny''. Cascadia Publishing House, 2004. ISBN 978-1931038249.
 +
* Record, Jeffrey. ''Bounding the Global War on Terrorism''. University Press of the Pacific, 2004. ISBN 1410217337
 +
* Sageman, Marc. ''Social Networks and the Jihad''. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0812240658.
 +
* Sunga, Lyal. U.S. Anti-Terrorism Policy and Asia’s Options. In Johannen, Smith and Gomez (eds.), ''September 11 & Political Freedoms: Asian Perspectives'' (Select) (2002): 242-264.
  
 +
==External Links==
 +
All links retrieved April 30, 2023.
  
 +
* Hans Köchler, [http://hanskoechler.com/koechler-un-law-terrorism.pdf The United Nations, the International Rule of Law and Terrorism]. Supreme Court of the Philippines, Centenary Lecture (2002)
  
 
{{Credit1|Terrorism|102961578|Definition_of_terrorism|118563453|Tactics_of_terrorism|119464802|Responses_to_terrorism|119448220|History_of_terrorism|117029462|}}
 
{{Credit1|Terrorism|102961578|Definition_of_terrorism|118563453|Tactics_of_terrorism|119464802|Responses_to_terrorism|119448220|History_of_terrorism|117029462|}}

Latest revision as of 14:59, 30 April 2023

Terrorism
General
Definitions
History
International Conventions
Anti-terrorism legislation
Counter-terrorism
War on Terrorism
Red Terror
Great Terror
White Terror
Types
Agro-terrorism
Propaganda of the deed
Bioterrorism
Christian terrorism
Communist terrorism
Eco-terrorism
Islamist terrorism
Narcoterrorism
Nationalist
Nuclear terrorism
Political
Racist
Other religious terrorism
State
State-sponsored
Tactics
Tactics of terrorism
Hijacking
Car bombing
Suicide attack
Proxy bomb
Configurations
Fronts
Lone-wolf

Terrorism is a term used to describe violence or other harmful acts committed (or threatened) against civilians by groups or persons for political or other ideological goals. Most definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear or "terror," are perpetrated for a political goal (as opposed to a hate crime or "madman" attack), and deliberately target "non-combatants." Some definitions include a priori immunity for the "legitimate" government. Consistent definitions may not restrict or fix in advance the list of possible affected subjects and must include state terrorism. In many cases the determination of "legitimate" targets and the definition of "combatant" are disputed, especially by partisans to the conflict in question.

Many people find the terms "terrorism" and "terrorist" (someone who engages in terrorism) to have a negative connotation. These terms are often used as political labels to condemn violence or threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, or unjustified. Those labeled "terrorists" may not identify themselves as such, and typically use other generic terms or terms specific to their situation, such as separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, revolutionary, guerrilla, or jihadi.

While the name of the acts and actors may be disputed, the violence is nonetheless all too real and "terrible." Responses to the use of such methods to achieve any goal, worthy or not, have often involved additional violence, and ignored the reasons that led to the perpetration of the acts. Without addressing the underlying problems, solutions are unlikely.

Smoke billowing from the World Trade Center after the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks—one of the most striking examples of modern terrorism

Definition

Damage to the Murrah building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA

The term terrorism comes from the French word terrorisme, which is based on the Latin verb terrere (to cause to tremble).[1]

In November 2004, a UN panel described terrorism as any act:

intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act.[2]

Few words are as politically or emotionally charged as terrorism. A 1988 study by the U.S. Army counted 109 definitions of terrorism that covered a total of 22 different definitional elements.[3] Terrorism expert Walter Laqueur also counted over 100 definitions and concluded that the "only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence."[4] For this and for political reasons, many news sources avoid using this term, opting instead for less accusatory words like "bombers," "militants," and so forth.

Terrorism is a crime in many countries and is defined by statute. Common principles amongst legal definitions of terrorism provide an emerging consensus as to meaning and also foster cooperation between law enforcement personnel in different countries.

Among these definitions, several do not recognize the possibility of the legitimate use of violence by civilians against an invader in an occupied country, and would thus label all resistance movements as terrorist groups. Others make a distinction between lawful and unlawful use of violence. Russia for example includes in their terrorist list only those organizations which represent the greatest threat to their own security.[5] Ultimately, the distinction is a political judgment.[6]

As terrorism ultimately involves the use or threat of violence with the aim of creating fear not only to the victims but among a wide audience, it is fear which distinguishes terrorism from both conventional and guerrilla warfare. While both conventional military forces may engage in psychological warfare and guerrilla forces may engage in acts of terror and other forms of propaganda, they both aim at military victory. Terrorism on the other hand aims to achieve political or other goals, when direct military victory is not possible. This has resulted in some social scientists referring to guerrilla warfare as the "weapon of the weak" and terrorism as the "weapon of the weakest."[7]

Definition controversy

Ambulances at Russell Square following the bombings of the London Underground and double-decker bus, London, United Kingdom 7 July 2005

The definition of terrorism is inherently controversial. The use of violence for the achievement of political ends is common to state and non-state groups. The difficulty is in agreeing on a basis for determining when the use of violence (directed at whom, by whom, for what ends) is legitimate. The majority of definitions in use have been written by agencies directly associated with a government, and are systematically biased to exclude governments from the definition. Some such definitions are so broad, like the Terrorism Act 2000, as to include the disruption of a computer system wherein no violence is intended or results.

The contemporary label of "terrorist" is highly pejorative; it is a badge which denotes a lack of legitimacy and morality. The appellation "terrorist" is therefore disputed. Attempts at defining the concept invariably arouse debate because rival definitions may be employed with a view to including the actions of certain parties, and excluding others. Thus, each party might still subjectively claim a legitimate basis for employing violence in pursuit of their own political cause or aim.

This controversy can be summed up by the aphorism, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." This is exemplified when a group that uses irregular military methods is an ally of a state against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the state and starts to use the same methods against its former ally. During World War II, the Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army was allied with the British, but during the Malayan Emergency, members of its successor, the Malayan Races Liberation Army, were branded terrorists by the British.[8] President Ronald Reagan and others in the American administration frequently called the Afghan Mujahideen "freedom fighters" during their war against the Soviet Union,[9] yet twenty years later when a new generation of Afghan men were fighting against what they perceive to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks were labeled terrorism by President Bush.[10]

Some groups, when involved in a "liberation" struggle, are called terrorist by governments or media. Later, these same persons, as leaders of the liberated nations, are called statesmen by similar organizations. Notable examples include Nobel Peace Prize laureates Menachem Begin,[11] Yasser Arafat,[12] and Nelson Mandela.[13]

Key criteria

Groups accused of terrorism often prefer terms that reflect legitimate military or ideological action.[14] However, legitimacy does not preclude the reality of terrorism:

There is the famous statement: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." But that is grossly leading. It assesses the validity of the cause when terrorism is an act. One can have a perfectly beautiful cause and yet if one commits terrorist acts, it is terrorism regardless.[15]

Wreckage from the bombing of the US Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya in 1998

Most official definitions of terrorism focus on the nature of the act, not the validity of the cause. They outline the following key criteria: target, objective, motive, perpetrator, and legitimacy or legality of the act. Terrorism is also often recognizable by a following statement from the perpetrators.

Violence—According to Walter Laqueur of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, "the only general characteristic [of terrorism] generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence." However, the criterion of violence alone does not produce a useful definition, as it includes many acts not usually considered terrorism: War, riot, organized crime, or even a simple assault. Property destruction that does not endanger life is not usually considered a violent crime, but some have described property destruction by the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front as terrorism.

Psychological impact and fear—The attack was carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact. Each act of terrorism is a “performance,” a product of internal logic, devised to have an impact on many large audiences. Terrorists also attack national symbols to show their power and to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government's legitimacy, while increasing the legitimacy of the given terrorist organization and/or ideology behind a terrorist act.[1] The September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon are examples of this. Attacking the World Trade Center symbolized the terrorist threat to the economic foundation of America and its capitalist ideals, and attacking the Pentagon symbolized that America's great military strength is yet vulnerable at its very core to the terrorist’s power.

Perpetrated for a Political Goal—Something all terrorist attacks have in common is their perpetration for a political purpose. Terrorism is a political tactic, not unlike letter writing or protesting, that is used by activists when they believe no other means will effect the kind of change they desire. The change is desired so badly that failure is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians. This is often where the interrelationship between terrorism and religion occurs. When a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious or "cosmic" struggle, such as over the control of an ancestral homeland or holy site such as Israel and Jerusalem, failing in the political goal (nationalism) becomes equated with spiritual failure, which, for the highly committed, is worse than their own death or the deaths of innocent civilians.[1]

Deliberate targeting of non-combatants—It is commonly held that the distinctive nature of terrorism lies in its intentional and specific selection of civilians as direct targets. Much of the time, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings" that tie into a specific view of the world. Their suffering accomplishes the terrorists' goals of instilling fear, getting a message out to an audience, or otherwise accomplishing their political end.[1]

Unlawfulness or illegitimacy—Some definitions of terrorism give weight to a distinction between the actions of a legitimate government and those of non-state actors, including individuals and small groups. In this view, government actions that might be violent, operate through fear, aim at political ends, and target civilians would not be terrorism if they are being pursued by agents who are accountable to legitimate governmental authority. Governmental accountability, presumably, would operate to limit and restrain the violence, both in volume and tactics. However, governments which repeatedly resort to these kinds of tactics tend to lose legitimacy, eroding the distinction between governmental and non-governmental violence.[16]

History

Did you know?
The term "terrorism" comes from the "Reign of Terror" in the French Revolution

The modern English term "terrorism" (or "terrorist" from the French terroriste) dates back to 1794 when it was used to describe the actions of the Jacobin Club in their rule of post-Revolutionary France, the so-called "Reign of Terror."

Although there are earlier related examples, terrorism in the modern sense seems to have emerged around the mid-nineteenth century.

Nineteenth century

An early example of the use of the term "terrorism" in the current sense is in Joseph Conrad's 1907 story, The Secret Agent, where it is used to describe anarchists attempting to cause terror and foment social disruption by blowing up Greenwich Observatory: "The venomous spluttering of the old terrorist without teeth was heard."[17]

What is one to say to an act of destructive ferocity so absurd as to be incomprehensible, inexplicable, and almost unthinkable; in fact, mad? Madness alone is truly terrifying, inasmuch as you cannot placate it either by threats, persuasion, or bribes.[18]

In 1867, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, a revolutionary nationalist group with support from Irish-Americans, carried out attacks in England. These were the first acts of "republican terrorism," which became a recurrent feature of British history, and these Fenians were the precursor of the Irish Republican Army.

In Russia, by the mid-nineteenth century, the intelligentsia grew impatient with the slow pace of Tsarist reforms, and sought instead to transform peasant discontent into open revolution. Anarchists like Mikhail Bakunin maintained that progress was impossible without destruction. Their objective was nothing less than complete destruction of the state. Anything that contributed to this goal was regarded as moral. With the development of sufficiently powerful, stable, and affordable explosives, the gap closed between the firepower of the state and the means available to dissidents. Organized into secret societies like the People's Will, Russian terrorists launched a campaign of terror against the state that climaxed in 1881, when Tsar Alexander II of Russia was assassinated.

At about the same time, Anarchists in Europe and the United States also resorted to the use of dynamite, as did Catalan nationalists such as La Reixa and Bandera Negra.

Two groups within the Ottoman Empire also resorted to techniques considered by some historians to be in the same category as those used by the Anarchists. One group was those fighting for an independent Armenia, divided into two parties, the Social Democrat Hunchakian Party and the Dashnaks or Armenian Revolutionary Federation. The other group was those fighting for an independent Macedonia, divided into two organizations, the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) and the External Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (EMRO).

The IMRO was founded in 1893 in Thessaloniki, now in Greece but then part of the Ottoman Empire. This organization was driven by Slavic nationalism, and later acquired a reputation for ferocious attacks, including the 1934 assassination of Alexander I of Yugoslavia during a state visit to France.

The Fenians/IRA, the Hunchaks and Dashnaks, and the IMRO may be considered typical of nationalist terrorism, and equally illustrate the (itself controversial) expression that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." At least one of these groups achieved its goals: An independent Ireland came into being. So did an independent Macedonia, but the original IMRO probably contributed little to this outcome. The territories of Armenia, however, remain within the former Russian empire.

Twentieth century

Some of the most successful terrorist groups were the vast array of guerrilla, partisan, and resistance movements that were organized and supplied by the Allies during World War II. The British Special Operations Executive (SOE) conducted operations in every theater of the war and provided an invaluable contribution to allied victory. The SOE effectively invented modern terrorism, pioneering most of the tactics, techniques, and technologies that are the mainstays of modern terrorism.

It could be said that throughout the Cold War, both sides made extensive use of terrorist organizations to carry on a war by proxy. Many of the Islamic terrorists of today were trained by the U.S. and UK to fight the USSR in Afghanistan. Similar groups, including the Viet Cong, received training from Soviet and Chinese military "advisers."

The most sustained terrorist campaign of the twentieth century was that of the Irish Republican Army. The first campaign saw 26 of the 32 counties gain independence. A second campaign became know as "the Troubles" between 1972 and 1997, with the Provisional Irish Republican Army conducting bombings, assassinations, and even mortar attacks on the Prime Minister's residence, 10 Downing Street.

Today, modern weapons technology has made it possible for individuals to cause a large amount of destruction alone or with only a few conspirators.

Causes

The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political conflict. The type of conflict varies widely; historical examples include:

  • Secession of a territory to form a new sovereign state
  • Dominance of territory or resources by various ethnic groups
  • Imposition of a particular form of government, such as democracy, theocracy, or anarchy
  • Economic deprivation of a population
  • Opposition to a domestic government or occupying army

Terrorism is a form of asymmetric warfare, and is more common when direct conventional warfare either cannot be (due to differentials in available forces) or is not being used to resolve the underlying conflict. In some cases, the rationale for a terrorist attack may be uncertain (as in the many attacks for which no group or individual claims responsibility) or unrelated to any large-scale social conflict (such as the Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway by Aum Shinrikyo).

Perpetrators

Acts of terrorism can be carried out by individuals, groups, or states. A state can sponsor terrorism by funding a terrorist organization, harboring terrorism, and also using state resources, such as the military, to directly perform acts of terrorism. When states provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such. Opinions as to whether acts of violence by states consist of state-sponsored terrorism or not vary widely. For some, the distinction between "war" and "terrorism" is only semantic.[19]

The most common image of terrorism is that it is carried out by small and secretive cells, highly motivated to serve a particular cause. However, many of the most deadly operations in the twenty-first century, such as 9/11, the London underground bombing, and the 2002 Bali bombing were planned and carried out by a close clique, comprised of close friends, family members, and other strong social networks. These groups benefited from the free flow of information, and were able overcome the obstacles they encountered where others failed due to lack of information and communication.[20]

Tactics

Terrorist attacks are often targeted to maximize fear and publicity. They usually employ explosives or poison, but there is also concern about terrorist attacks using weapons of mass destruction. Terrorist organizations usually methodically plan attacks in advance, and may train participants, plant "undercover" agents, and raise money from supporters or through organized crime. Communication may occur through modern telecommunications, or through old-fashioned methods such as couriers.

Methods of attack

Terrorists seek to demoralize and paralyze their enemy with fear, and also to pressure governments into conceding to the terrorist's agenda.

While they act according to different motivations and goals, all terrorist groups have one tactic in common: to achieve maximum publicity in order to intimidate and generate a message as a means to attain its objectives. Terrorism uses violence on one part of society to instill fear in the larger part of society to make a change. Terrorism employs propaganda as a tactic to ensure the attention of the public through the attention from the media. The term "Propaganda of the Deed," coined by Malatesta, Cafiero, and Covelli, states that the message is most strongly conveyed through violence.[21]

Often, damage is done with an improvised explosive device although chemical weapons have been used on occasion. A source of concern is also a possible use of a nuclear weapon or biological weapons. Terrorist groups may also use chemical weapons as in the Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway in 1995.[22] In the September 11, 2001 attacks, planes were used as guided incendiary devices.

Terrorist groups may arrange for secondary devices to detonate at a slightly later time in order to kill emergency-response personnel attempting to attend to the dead and wounded. Repeated or suspected use of secondary devices can also delay emergency response out of concern that such devices may exist. Examples include a (failed) device that was meant to release cyanide-gas during the February 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing; and a second car bomb that detonated 20 minutes after the December 1, 2001 Ben Yehuda Street Bombing by Hamas in Jerusalem.

Training

Training camps have often been used to prepare terrorists to mount their attacks. For the September 11, 2001 attacks, the pilots also took flying courses. The range of training depends greatly on the level of support the terrorist organization receives from various organizations and states. In nearly every case the training incorporates the philosophy and agenda of the groups leadership as justification for the training as well as the potential acts of terrorism which may be committed. State sanctioned training is by far the most extensive and thorough, often employing professional soldiers and covert operatives of the supporting state. The training generally includes physical fitness, combat or martial arts, firearms, explosives, intelligence/counterintelligence, and field craft. More specialized training may include mission specific subjects such as, language, cultural familiarization, communications, and surveillance techniques. In every instance the quality of training is extremely high and well organized.

Cover

Where terrorism occurs in the context of open warfare or insurgency, its perpetrators may shelter behind a section of the local population. Examples include the Intifada on Israeli-occupied territory, and insurgency in Iraq. This population, which may be ethnically distinct from the counter-terrorist forces, is either sympathetic to their cause, indifferent, or acts under duress.

Terrorists preparing for the September 11, 2001 attacks changed their appearance to avoid looking radical.

Funding

Funding can be raised in both legal and illegal ways. Some of the most common ways to raise funds are through charities, well funded organizations, or a non-violent organization with similar ideologies. In the absence of state funding, terrorists may rely on organized crime to fund their activities. This has included kidnapping, drug trafficking, or robbery. Some terrorist cells have relied on identity theft and fraud to raise funds.

Communication

The revolution in communications technology has dramatically changed how terrorist organizations communicate. E-mails, fax transmissions, websites, cell phones, and satellite telephones have made it possible for organizations to contemplate a global strategy. However, too great a reliance on such technology leaves organizations vulnerable to sophisticated monitoring of communication. When the media published the information that the U.S. government was tracking Osama bin Laden by monitoring his phone calls, he ceased using this method to communicate.[23]

Responses to terrorism

Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignment of the political spectrum and reassessments of fundamental values. Responses that are directed specifically at preventing terrorist attacks are termed "counter-terrorism." Examples of several counter-terrorism strategies follow.

Target-hardening

Whatever the target of terrorists, there are multiple ways of hardening the targets to prevent the terrorists from hitting their mark. One method is to place Jersey barrier or other sturdy obstacles outside tall or politically sensitive buildings to prevent car and truck bombing. Aircraft cockpits are kept locked during flights, and have reinforced doors, which only the pilots in the cabin are capable of opening. English train stations removed their waste bins in response to the Provisional IRA threat, as convenient locations for depositing bombs. Scottish stations removed theirs after the July 7 bombing of London as a precautionary measure. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority purchased bomb-resistant barriers after the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Preemptive neutralization

Some countries see preemptive attacks as a legitimate strategy. This includes capturing, killing, or disabling suspected terrorists before they can mount an attack. Israel, the United States, and Russia have taken this approach, while Western European states generally have not.

Another major method of preemptive neutralization is interrogation of known or suspected terrorists to obtain information about specific plots, targets, and the identity of other terrorists.

Domestic intelligence and surveillance

Most counter-terrorism strategies involve an increase in standard police and domestic intelligence. The central activities are traditional: Interception of communications and the tracing of persons. New technology has, however, expanded the range of such operations. Domestic intelligence is often directed at specific groups, defined on the basis of origin or religion, which is a source of political controversy. Mass surveillance of an entire population raises objections on civil liberties grounds.

Military intervention

Terrorism has been used to justify military intervention in countries where terrorists are said to be based. That was the main stated justification for the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. It was also a stated justification for the second Russian invasion of Chechnya.

Such a strategy against terrorism may not be successful since it does not address the causes of terrorism: Relative deprivation that leads to frustration, aggressive foreign policy that leads to hate, and psychosocial effects of globalization, for example. Thus repression by the military in itself—particularly if it is not accompanied by other measures—may result in short term victories, but be unsuccessful in the long run.

Non-military Intervention

The human security paradigm outlines a non-military approach which aims to address the enduring underlying inequalities which fuel terrorist activity. Causal factors are delineated and measures implemented which allow equal access to resources and sustainability for all peoples. Such activities empower citizens providing "freedom from fear" and "freedom from want." This can take many forms including the provision of clean drinking water, education, and vaccination programs, provision of food and shelter and protection from violence, military or otherwise. Successful human security campaigns have been characterized by the participation of a diverse group of actors including governments, NGOs, and citizens.

Terrorism and human rights

One of the primary difficulties of implementing effective counter-terrorist measures is the waning of civil liberties and individual privacy that such measures often entail, both for citizens of, and for those detained by states attempting to combat terror. At times, measures designed to tighten security have been seen as abuses of power or even violations of human rights.

Examples of these problems can include prolonged, incommunicado detention without judicial review; risk of subjecting to torture during the transfer, return and extradition of people between or within countries; and the adoption of security measures that restrain the rights or freedoms of citizens and breach principles of non-discrimination.[24]

Many would argue that such violations exacerbate rather than counter the terrorist threat.[24] Human rights advocates argue for the crucial role of human rights protection as an intrinsic part to fight against terrorism. A section on confronting terrorism in the recommendations in the Madrid Agenda arising from the Madrid Summit on Democracy and Terrorism (Madrid 8-11 March 2005) reads as follows:

Democratic principles and values are essential tools in the fight against terrorism. Any successful strategy for dealing with terrorism requires terrorists to be isolated. Consequently, the preference must be to treat terrorism as criminal acts to be handled through existing systems of law enforcement and with full respect for human rights and the rule of law. We recommend: (1) Taking effective measures to make impunity impossible either for acts of terrorism or for the abuse of human rights in counter-terrorism measures. (2) The incorporation of human rights laws in all anti-terrorism programmers and policies of national governments as well as international bodies.[25]

While international efforts to combat terrorism have focused on the need to enhance cooperation between states, proponents of human rights (as well as human security) have suggested that more effort needs to be given to the effective inclusion of human rights protection as a crucial element in that cooperation. They argue that international human rights obligations do not stop at borders and a failure to respect human rights in one state may undermine its effectiveness in the international effort to cooperate to combat terrorism.[24]

Examples of major incidents of terrorism

"International Terrorist Incidents, 2001" by the U.S. Department of State
  • The 1972 Munich massacre during the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, West Germany
  • The December 1975 hostage taking at the OPEC headquarters in Vienna, Austria
  • The October 1984 bombing in Brighton, England, by the PIRA in an unsuccessful but lethal attempt to kill then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
  • The June 1985 bombing of Air India Flight 182 originating from Canada
  • The destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988
  • The killing of Nicaraguan civilians by the United States during the 1980s
  • The 1993 World Trade Center bombing
  • The 1993 Mumbai bombings
  • The 1995 sarin gas attacks in Tokyo, Japan
  • The Oklahoma City bombing by Timothy McVeigh on April 19, 1995
  • The Centennial Olympic Park bombing in 1996
  • The U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7 1998
  • The Omagh bombing in Northern Ireland (August 15, 1998)
  • The August 31 – September 22: Russian Apartment Bombings kills about 300 people, leading Russia into Second Chechen War
  • The September 11, 2001 attacks in New York City, and Washington D.C.[26][27]
  • The 2001 Indian Parliament attack on December 13, 2001
  • The Passover Massacre on March 27, 2002 in Netanya, Israel
  • The Moscow theatre siege and the Beslan school siege in Russia
  • The Bali bombing in October 2002
  • The March 11, 2004 attacks in Madrid
  • The July 7, 2005 bombings in London
  • The second Bali bombing on October 1, 2005
  • The Mumbai train bombings on July 11, 2006.
  • The 2008 Mumbai attacks from November 26 November 29, 2008
  • The 2011 Norway attacks on July 22, 2011.
  • The Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013.
  • The Paris attacks on November 13, 2015.

Some terrorist attacks or plots were designed to kill thousands of people, but either failed or fell short. Such plans include the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Operation Bojinka, the 2006 transatlantic aircraft plot, and the June 30, 2007 Glasgow Airport Attack foiled by police and civilians.

Notes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Mark Juergensmeyer, Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence (University of California Press, 2003, ISBN 0520240111).
  2. ↑ UN, With call for action, not more words, Annan outlines plan for radical UN reform. March 21, 2005. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  3. ↑ Jeffrey Record, Bounding the Global War on Terrorism (University Press of the Pacific, 2004, ISBN 1410217337).
  4. ↑ Walter Laqueur, No End to War—Terrorism in the 21st Century (New York, 2003, ISBN 0826414354).
  5. ↑ Reuters, Russia says Hezbollah not a terrorist group: Ifax November 15, 2015.
  6. ↑ Ali Khan, A Legal Theory of International Terrorism Connecticut Law Review 19 (1987):945-972. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  7. ↑ Encyclopædia Britannica, Terrorism. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  8. ↑ Britannica Concise, Malayan People's Anti-Japanese Army. Retrieved November 18, 2008.
  9. ↑ Michel Chossudovsky, 9/11 ANALYSIS: From Ronald Reagan and the Soviet-Afghan War to George W Bush and September 11, 2001 Global Research, September 9, 2010. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  10. ↑ White House, President Meets with Afghan Interim Authority Chairman. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  11. ↑ BBC, BBC News: PROFILES: Menachem Begin. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  12. ↑ The Nobel Prize, Yasser Arafat Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  13. ↑ BBC News, Nelson Mandela's life and times Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  14. ↑ Alex Perry, How Much to Tip the Terrorist? Time Magazine, September 26, 2005. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  15. ↑ Sheldon Anderson, Mark Allen Peterson, and Stanley W. Toops, International Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Global Issues ( Routledge, 2017, ISBN 0813350492).
  16. ↑ Ron Mock, Loving Without Giving In: Christian Responses to Terrorism and Tyranny (Cascadia Press, 2004), 24-28.
  17. ↑ Joseph Conrad, The Secret Agent, Ch. 3, 1907. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  18. ↑ Joseph Conrad, The Secret Agent, Ch. 2, 1907. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  19. ↑ Paul Pillar, The Semantics of Terrorism CATO Unbound, February 17, 2010. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  20. ↑ Mark Sageman, Social Networks and the Jihad (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 166-167.
  21. ↑ Arthur Garrison, "Defining Terrorism," Criminal Justice Studies 17 (2004): 259-279.
  22. ↑ ABC News Online, Court upholds death sentences for sarin gas attackers. July 28, 2004. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  23. ↑ Marc Sageman, Social Networks and the Jihad (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 158-161.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 Human Rights News, Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism. January 29, 2004. Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  25. ↑ Secretariat Counter-Terrorism Task Force, The Madrid Agenda – Club of Madrid, 11 March 2005 Retrieved July 9, 2019.
  26. ↑ During the 9-11 attacks a fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757-222, crashed in a field in southwest Pennsylvania just outside of Shanksville (Somerset County), Pennsylvania, about 150 miles (240 km) northwest of Washington, D.C., at 10:03:11 a.m. local time (14:03:11 UTC), with parts and debris found up to eight miles away. The crash in Pennsylvania is believed to have resulted from the hijackers either deliberately crashing the aircraft or losing control of it as they fought with the passengers. It is also believed that the hijackers intended to crash the plane into the White House, or the Capitol building in Washington, D.C.
  27. ↑ The Pentagon Building is actually across the Potomac River in Arlington County, Virginia, but is generally considered to be a part of the greater Washington D.C. area.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Anderson, Sheldon, Mark Allen Peterson, and Stanley W. Toops. International Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Global Issues. Routledge, 2017. ISBN 0813350492
  • Arreguín-Toft, Ivan. "Tunnel at the End of the Light: A Critique of U.S. Counter-terrorist Grand Strategy." Cambridge Review of International Affairs 15 (3) (2002): 549-563.
  • Cronin, Audrey Kurth. "Behind the Curve: Globalization and International Terrorism." International Security 27 (3) (Winter 2002/03): 30-58.
  • Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press, 2003. ISBN 0520240111.
  • Köchler, Hans (ed.). Terrorism and National Liberation. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Question of Terrorism. New York: Peter Lang, 1988. ISBN 3820412174.
  • Laqueur, Walter. No End to War: Terrorism in the 21st Century. New York: 2003. ISBN 0826414354.
  • Merari, Ariel. "Terrorism as a Strategy in Insurgency." Terrorism and Political Violence 5 (4) (Winter 1993): 213-251.
  • Mock, Ron. Loving Without Giving In: Christian Responses to Terrorism and Tyranny. Cascadia Publishing House, 2004. ISBN 978-1931038249.
  • Record, Jeffrey. Bounding the Global War on Terrorism. University Press of the Pacific, 2004. ISBN 1410217337
  • Sageman, Marc. Social Networks and the Jihad. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0812240658.
  • Sunga, Lyal. U.S. Anti-Terrorism Policy and Asia’s Options. In Johannen, Smith and Gomez (eds.), September 11 & Political Freedoms: Asian Perspectives (Select) (2002): 242-264.

External Links

All links retrieved April 30, 2023.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.

Retrieved from https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?title=Terrorism&oldid=1110729

Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Copyright Logo
Powered by MediaWiki