International Terrorism
Definition of Terrorism
It is a premeditated use of aggression and hostility against the public with a view to achieve objectives and ends that are political or religious based or ideological as such. The actors inflict fear and coercion and unnecessary anxiety (Wordnet Search c. 2010).In the etymological sense, it is the methodical utilization of terror as a policy or strategy (Online Etymology Dictionary, n.d.)It is the illegal use of force or violent intimidation by a person or a group of people against the civilians or material things with an objective to inflict fear or compulsion to the society, governments largely because of ideological and political purposes (American Heritage, n.d.)It comprises violent acts enacted by groups of people that feel marginalized or discriminated against in their history (American Heritage, n.d.).
It is a pre-reflected utilization of illegitimate violence and threat to stir fear and coarse the civilians and governments as well as instilling fear on them with malicious political, religious or ideological-based factors (Military Department, n.d.). In the Law Code of United States terrorism means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents (US Code, n.d.).
As can be noted from the definitions above there is circularity in the meaning of terrorism. This implies that there are certain aspects of terrorism that are universally agreed upon. Generally, there is a perceived of terrorism as an activity geared towards certain political, ideological and religions intentions and objectives. In deed, use of the notion of coercion and intimidation features throughout the many definitions advanced. It is rather difficult to rule out any of the definitions first because they settle for a common understanding. The one that a person would be quick to discount is the cultural aspect of it in that it is a reaction of a marginalized group to oppressive authorities. Well, it has some truth but looking at it from the activities of terrorism today, there is a sharp dissimilarity. Other definitions fit since they concur with the general traits and motives that terrorism exhibit in the contemporary world.
Justification of Terrorism
It is widely believed that terrorists base their terrorism acts on religious grounds. As expressed from the definitions above, religion is one of the fundamental motives in terrorism. In deed, terrorism has been greatly adjoined to the teachings of Prophet Muhammad. However there is a big antagonism to this view. According to Prophet Muhammad, there are six things that one should take caution. That when one speaks, should do so in truth promises made should be fulfilled share and emancipation of ones trust only chaste thoughts are to be entertained guard your hand from striking, taking illegal and malicious objects (Baldev, R. 2007).
In the modern opinions advanced, the quest to justify terrorism on moral basis succumbs to skeptism and incredulity, in the scholarly point of view as well as the popularly held views. Robespierre dictum that virtue devoid of terror is powerless has lost credibility I the modern context as compared in the past it has no appropriate moral grounding (Kapitan, T. 2007).
As noted in the cultural connotation of terrorism above terrorism is justified as an affirmative action by an oppressed group. Its claims and dynamics are justified on the fact that it is a war against oppression. It is believed that morally conservative Muslims regard United States as the principal actors in the global decadence and corruption and as such see Muslims as the greatest evil. United States is has an economic interest in the oil and this is regarded as the reason why tyrant authorities are still in power in the Middle East. This promotes the notion that terrorism is morally justified and the only appropriate way to wage jihad against what is perceived as the rivals of God.
Guerilla forces are very swift in taking wars against civilized nations through acts of terrorism. They act under evil religious ideas which give them enthusiasm to die and more so to take the lives of others especially innocent people in their bid to carry out jihad activities. They believe that this will lead them to a paradise with beautiful houris.Civilizations founded on peace do not resort to terrorism however, terrorism is regarded as the best means that an oppressed civilization resorts to in hitting back to power and tyrannical military force. Terrorism is believed to be a tactical move in provoking the superior forces son that they can engage in war with the inferior forces. Terrorist pursue a certain cause through acts of terrorism. Juergensmeyer states that violence is a vocation to cleanse the world from the nonbeliever and inaccurate interpretations in a holy way. The holy terrorist is triumphant either by killing or by dying in the process of struggle.
A terrorist has been sharply distinguished from a criminal as follows as follows Terrorists find motivation and power from the cause and ideology behind the cause whereas for a criminal it is usually a vision in a vacuum with an aim to obtain a material good. A terrorist is focused unlike the criminal who is an opportunist. As stated above a terrorist is dedicated to a particular cause while on the contrary a criminal is without an obvious cause. Terrorists are disciplines, trained and altruistic contrary to the criminals in that they are undisciplined, untrained and egocentric. Above all, the targets for the terrorists have a symbolic value.
Terrorism reinforcement is a generational one. Individual members are made to feel that their rewards are within the terrorist groups. They reinforce the notion of isolation in the generations for instance, US-against-them belief. It is believed that this spirit of antisocial behavior within terrorist groups develops the conforming attitude and inclination inside the organization.
Structure and Organization common to Terror Groups
A terrorists organizations structure, association and membership, resources, and security influence their potentialities and achievements. The understanding of the present and developed models of terrorist organization enhances the comprehension and situational consciousness of terrorism in a contemporary dynamic environment (Philpott, D. 2007).
In the traditional appreciation of terrorism widely held images of a terrorist group working in tandem with a particular political agenda and catalyzed by ideology and struggle for national liberation dominated. Terrorism intimidations range al-Qaida and its affiliated units with regional, global and transnational and extend to domestic hostile groups and radical groups, unaffiliated terrorists with particular agendas and contingent capabilities. In investigating the structure of terrorist organizations, two aspects will be considered network and hierarchy. A terrorist may resort to either of the two or combine both of them (Philpott, D. 2007).
Contemporary groups organize and acclimatize opportunities that are accessible in the network model. Other groups acknowledging an ideology get more detailed effects on internal organization. Centralized influence and hierarchical structure is sought by the Leninist or Maoist groups. Terrorist more inclined to political ideologies majorly require an advanced hierarchical structure to be able to coordinate intentional terrorist violence through political action. For instance, cease-fire negotiations andor evading particular targets due to the political mileage embedded to it.
In deed, al-Al-Qaida, serves as an example that has emanated from a hierarchical structure to a more advanced networked organization. There are phases of hierarchy that are evident in senior leaders to ease operational coordination. There are affiliated networks that execute their actions on a more general guidance on waging terror. Groups with little connection with al-Qaida may carry out their terrorism acts as a result of the ideological statements of senior al-Qaida superiors.
It is believed that the organization and movement of groups can explain terrorism. In the case when a smaller group moves against a superior group creating casualties, it is at that point when that terrorism evolves. It is also believed that the organization and structure of terrorist groups are similar to those of communication and transportation networks. Terrorists organize themselves in a network of minute logistical structures. A node is where information, weapons or personnel are converged. This node is the critical point of target for counterterrorist dealings and operations. Once the node is destroyed, the whole networking system also collapses.
It is difficult to fathom a comprehensively the terrorist image. Terrorist behavior and intentions cannot be documented because it is always in fluxes. In other words, it changes depending on the historical, political, and social surroundings. Terrorism is a political aspect and far from crime or psychopathology. Terrorist are very intelligent and tactful in that they will adapt a new operation dissimilar from the old once they learn that there are efforts to profile it. For instance, in the case of suicide bombers who come from varying backgrounds not with any single description or identity.
Clash of Civilizations
World politics indicates a journey backwards leading to long-established spirit of rivalism among nation states (Huntington, S. 1993). He notes further that the principal cause of conflict in the modern world will not be fundamentally ideological or economical but it will be of a cultural nature. The major conflicts in the global politics will take place among nations and groups of unique civilizations. In deed, the clash of civilizations will be the rationale behind battle lines in the future days. The diversities in power and quest for military, economic and institutional dominance are the major instigators of the conflict in civilizations between the West and the rest of civilizations. Relativism in values and beliefs, are the other causes of such conflict. It is believed that the conflicts and convulsions from Muslim World must be sought from Islam itself.
The September 911 attacks have not been considered as mass murder criminal acts instead they are regarded as acts of war on United States, a reaction to their way of life and in deed their civilization. It is sad to note that the response to those criminal acts through use of coordinated and well-structured international investigative police or intelligence support, which is the widely advocated means, was undermined. Instead, declaration of wars on Afghanistan and Iraq became the choice and this was not the better option as it occasioned loss of more lives hence increasing the temperatures of acts of terror and violence.
Anarchist and Socialist Movements of the Nineteenth Century
Anarchism is believed to be a type of a social movement. Pierre-Joseph regards anarchy as the defiant and more so, a society without legal structures or government (cited in. Ostergaard, G. n.d.). He further notes that classical anarchism has a threefold classification namely Libertarian Socialism, Marxian Communism and Social Democracy.
The procedures in libertarian socialism in a bid to attain set goals and objectives is that the subjects involved may carry out their operations voluntarily and either peacefully or through violence. Anarchism is believed to be the basis of acts to terrorism due to its violent nature. Anarchism is movement in the social and political order which advocates the eradication of a structured and systematic government and the entire social hierarchy.
Fomenters of political violence need to be apprehended so that their malicious attempts may not spread therefore, causing harm to every body else. However, this process should be carried out within legal and just measures. Governments should solicit the intervention of international bodies like U.N. in their quest to apprehend the culprits so that they ensure they are following a just cause. Unilateral reinforcement may occasion more violence therefore, approaching it within a unified and more acceptable way renders the whole process legitimate and legal.
Criminal should be sought wherever they are and be put to justice for their wrong doings. None should be let to go scot free. However and as stated above every thing should be done according to the international standards and policies and in conformity of the laws in the state so long as they reflect the common good.
Conclusion
We have seen the various definitions of terrorism from different perspectives although most of the definitions have a common or rather similar ground. They regard terrorism as a pre-meditated course of action aimed at violence justification deriving from political, ideological and religious convictions and ideologies. I concur with these illustrations of terrorism. The cultural connotation of terrorism gets more emphasis in the reflections given by the theories of Samuel Huntington and Thomas Barnett. The clash of civilizations is a convincing interpretation of terrorism today. I concur with the view that terrorism is triggered by past historical hostility that translates to violence and terror acts.
Different civilizations should re-evaluate their past relationships with other civilizations so that they night address those historical grudges. In this era of democracy and affirmation of sovereignty among states, no civilizations should regard itself superior or as the best civilization. This only breeds hatred and animosity and for sure, acts of terror become the hit back and a way of re-affirming sovereignty.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment