Written Assignment - Consequence Management

Terrorism_the_Basics_The_Basics_----_1._What_is_terrorism_1.pdf

Home >Social Science homework help >Sociology homework help >Written Assignment - Consequence Management

wHat is terrorism?

Concern over terrorism has become a part of life in the twenty-first century. Although terrorism is not new, the events of 9/11/2001 in the United States, the Madrid train bombings in 2004, the London transport bombings in 2005, continuing suicide attacks in Iraq and Israel/Palestine, and terrorist violence in many other places has focused attention on these types of events. Terrorism, of course, has occurred in many countries and in many contexts. It is not new phenomenon even though events such as these have made terrorism a more prominent concern in many countries. As a result, it is very important to have a better understanding of what terrorism is – why it occurs, who is responsible, what the terrorists hope to accomplish, and what the future holds for terrorism. These questions and others are basic to the topic of this book.

Although many people have a good idea of what terrorism is, it is useful from the outset to have a working definition as to what can be considered terrorism (and what cannot be considered terrorism). It has frequently been stated that: “One person’s freedom fighter is another person’s terrorist.” Basically this statement says that terrorism, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. People have a tendency to brand those who use violence for purposes that they disagree with as terrorists while they regard those using the same kinds of violence in a “just cause” as freedom fighters. It is essential to have a definition that will apply to violent activities regardless of who is opposing or supporting the individuals involved or who the targets are. The fact that terrorism includes all kinds of groups should not blind us to the fact that what might be defined as terrorism by virtually everyone, could be acceptable to others in some circumstances. If Jews in Europe facing Hitler’s efforts to

Lutz, James, and Brenda J. Lutz. Terrorism: the Basics : The Basics, Taylor & Francis Group, 2011. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/apus/detail.action?docID=668578. Created from apus on 2021-09-13 23:47:45.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics2

exterminate them had resorted to terrorism in self-defense, such actions would clearly have been justifiable.

DefInITIon of TeRRoRIsm There are many definitions of terrorism that have been used. Oftentimes the definitions are created to identify certain groups as falling within the definition since the term terrorist has a very negative association. If a group is labeled as a terrorist group, then it is easier to mobilize public opinion against it. If supporters of the group are considered to be freedom fighters or a national liberation front, the likelihood that they will be able to generate more sympathy is increased. Other definitions attempt to be more neutral, but it is important to recognize that any definition will include groups that some individuals would exclude because they agree with the goals of the organizations. In other cases, the definition might exclude groups that others think should be considered as terrorists. The best approach, of course, is to first specify a definition and then to determine whether or not a particular group fits the definition. Even with the arguments over the definitions, there are some common elements used by scholars, governments, and journalists.

There are a number of basic components necessary in order for a group to be considered as a terrorist organization. The following characteristics combine to provide a useful and usable definition of terrorism.

Terrorism involves political aims and motives. It is violent or threatens violence. It is designed to generate fear in a target audience that extends beyond the immediate victims of the violence. The violence is conducted by an identifiable organization. The violence involves a non-state actor or actors as either the perpetrator, the victim of the violence, or both. finally, the acts of violence are designed to create power in situations in which power previously had been lacking (i.e. the violence attempts to enhance the power base of the organization undertaking the actions).

The key elements of the definition will be discussed in the sections to follow. The importance of the various characteristics will

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 3

be obvious in many of the other chapters as well. This definition will underlay much of the discussion in the following chapters and will demonstrate why it is important and why it combines in a useful way to describe the phenomenon that we know as terrorism.

PolITIcAl oBjecTIves The first key element of this definition is that the violence is primarily undertaken for political reasons. The fact that the actions are initiated to achieve political ends is a key element that separates terrorist acts from other forms of violence. The political objectives separate terrorism from violence that is launched for financial reasons or because of personal issues. Kidnappings of prominent political leaders or corporate executives to make political statements are different from those kidnappings that serve as criminal ventures to raise money for the abductors. The use of fear to extort money from businesses (the protection rackets of American gangster fame) is criminal, not political. Sometimes, of course, opposition groups have used kidnapping or bank robberies to finance their organizations, and they have been known to use violence or the threat of violence to levy “revolutionary taxes” on groups that could be forced to pay. In these cases, the goals are still generally political because the money received is used to fund subsequent political activities, including possibly more violence, rather than leading to gains in personal wealth.

While political objectives are a key for defining terrorism, the goals that are sought by terrorists can fall into a number of categories. The terrorists may be seeking to have a change in policies, or a change in leadership, or even a change in boundaries. The attainment of these objectives may be ones that are seen by the terrorists to be immediately possible or they may see them as being the end points of a long struggle. Some groups have indeed geared themselves for a long struggle to achieve these goals while others may believe that a show of violence is all that is necessary to topple the government in power or bring about the other changes that they desire.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics4

vIolence The second element of a terrorist action is that the activity involves violence or the threat of violence. Requests for changes, demonstrations, and petitions are not terrorism, no matter how disconcerting they may be to a government. Although massive demonstrations may make a government apprehensive about the future, there is no direct threat of violence. Actual violence is fairly obvious when it occurs. Terrorism can also involve the credible threat of violence. One situation in which the threat of violence might be present would be one in which a group issues an ultimatum requiring action; if the appropriate action does not occur, violence will result. The threat of violence is only likely to be effective as a technique, however, with a group that has already demonstrated that it is able and willing to use violence. A political organization that has never undertaken any type of political violence is unlikely to be credible in its threats. Once violence has been used, however, the threat of additional violence may generate the necessary fear that the dissident group desires and lead the government to give in to the specific demands of the group. Hoaxes can, as a consequence, be part of a terrorist campaign, especially when they follow upon actual earlier violent actions.

TARGeT AuDIence For violence, and even political violence, to qualify as terrorism, it must include a target audience beyond the immediate victims. The violence is intended to influence the target audience or audiences as part of the attempt to gain the political objectives of the organization. If a political leader is assassinated with the goal of removing that individual in order to permit the next in line to move up, the death is political violence, but it has no target audience and it is not terrorism. It is a practical effort to put someone else in power. For an assassination to be a terrorist action, it must involve parties beyond the assassin or assassins and the immediate victim. If a political leader is assassinated in order to send a message to other members of the political elite that they need to change policies or make concessions in order to avoid a similar fate, then that assassination is a terrorist act. Bombings

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 5

of buildings (with or without casualties) or car bombs in crowded areas are often intended to show the general public that they are vulnerable. The resulting fear may lead the public to put pressure on the government to change policies or weaken public support for the leaders in power who clearly are unable to protect the citizens from dissidents. Frequently the victims of terrorist actions are members of the target audience since that is the easiest way to send a message to all the other members of the target audience. One of the primary goals of the violence is to create fear in the target audience. Thus, the immediate victims are usually not chosen specifically, but are simply convenient targets. The target audience, not the immediate victims of a terrorist act, is the key group that terrorist organizations are attempting to influence, and the goal is to generate fear in the target audience.

The need to reach a target audience is one reason why terrorist groups seek publicity. If no one knows of a terrorist act, the goals have not been achieved. If the deaths of government personnel are ascribed to a plane crash rather than a bomb on the aircraft, the target audience will draw the wrong conclusion about threats to the state or to the safety of individuals. The need for publicity is a key reason why some terrorist organizations have established pre-set code words with the media so that they can authenticate the claims of the organization when they provide a warning that a bomb is about to detonate. Of course, it will not be necessary in all cases for particular organizations to claim credit for particular terrorist actions. If a terrorist group has been active in the past, violence against the government or its supporters will be ascribed to the group without any need for a pronouncement from the terrorist group. The local situation and the target will often make it clear that the cause of a particular group of dissidents is behind the activity. If swastikas are painted on a Jewish synagogue, the anti-Semitic message is obvious. If a car bomb goes off at the headquarters of the ruling party, the general population is likely to know whether it is a local minority group or whether it is the political opposition that is behind the attack. Even if the source of the violence is obvious, it will still be necessary for information about the action to reach the target audience.

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics6

oRGAnIzATIon For political violence to be terrorism there must be an identifiable organization. A lone individual is unlikely to be able to carry out the actions, reach the target audience, and present the political demands for the changes that are necessary to end the violence. An effective campaign to create change also requires enough actions to be credible, an effort beyond a single individual over time. A political assassination to change a leader can be very effective even if the assassin is killed if the change in leadership results in a desired change in the government. If the leader is simply replaced by another person with the same program and policies, then nothing has been accomplished and the solitary individual who was seeking the change is likely to be killed or captured. Terrorist actions almost inevitably lead to casualties or arrests among the dissidents; thus, a single individual is very likely to be captured or killed. Large organizations do not have to be as concerned about casualties among the members, while smaller organizations have to conserve scarce resources (members).

Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber in the United States, is a classic example of the limitations inherent with campaigns by one individual. Kaczynski sent package bombs to a variety of individuals. He was essentially upset over the pace of modernization and damaging changes that were occurring in the environment. His bombings over the years inspired fear, but the target audience was unclear, and it was not obvious what actions the target audience was expected to take. The FBI and other police agencies knew that the bombings were related due to forensic analyses, but they were unable to establish the linkages between the victims, and were they were unable to identify the political agenda of the person behind them. Until Kaczynski had a rambling manifesto published, his goals were unclear. Once they were published, he was identified by his writing and arrested. His activities demonstrate the need for a broader organization and the need for publicity (as well as the dangers that may come with greater publicity).

Organizational structures have changed in recent times with improved communications and transportation that have resulted in

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 7

a smaller world. Organizations, such as Al Qaeda, can maintain linkages with each other and even support or cooperate with groups that are not a formal part of the organization. Al Qaeda, for example, has supported actions by other groups that were not part of the organization. It provided funding and technical support for a number of attacks when it agreed with the goals and when it thought there was a chance of successful actions. With mobile phones, the internet, and other forms of communication, such improvised or informal cooperative arrangements can extend the reach of a formal organization and make it much more dangerous. Basically terrorist groups set up a network operation. The network does increase the dangers and at the same time often makes it more difficult for the authorities to infiltrate informers or breakup the groups involved.

Another form of organization that is present in the modern world is what has come to be called leaderless resistance. Leaderless resistance involves individuals or small groups that identify with some larger cause acting to achieve the goals of a larger group. There may be an organization that provides some direction to those wishing to undertake such “lone wolf” attacks by indicating appropriate targets or disseminating information on how to make bombs or use other types of violence. The individuals who were responsible for the London transport bombings in 2005 were not formal members of Al Qaeda or any other formal group. They did identify, however, with the goals of Al Qaeda and similar groups, and they saw their action as part of the broader struggle of militant Islam against activities of the West with which they disagreed. These individual attacks do add to the strength of a group, and there is an element of implied organization present. There has to be some group that provides a central reference for the identification and perhaps even to provide information on targets and techniques. The individuals agree with the broader goals, and they clearly seek to link themselves with the broader cause and to influence a target audience. This kind of loosely coordinated activity thus exists in addition to the more conventionally organized groups; they do not replace them completely.

The anarchists were a group that operated in the late 1800s and the early 1900s seeking to change political systems to provide

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics8

greater benefits for average citizens and the working class. The anarchists first attempted to bring about political change through education efforts designed to convince the political elite to extend greater rights and freedom to the general population. When these efforts failed, the anarchists decided to use violence in their attempts to bring about change. The anarchists attacked political leaders in many countries. The targets included reigning monarchs and elected political leaders. Some were members of organized groups, but in some cases individual anarchists would attempt to assassinate prominent leaders as part of this broader struggle. The anarchists thus provide one of the earlier examples of a form of leaderless resistance.

AcToRs oTheR ThAn sTATes InvolveD The actions of countries directed against other countries are excluded in this definition of terrorism. Countries involved in wars have always attempted to inspire terror in their enemies, but these kinds of activities are part of international relations. Similarly, in situations of tension between countries, their intelligence agencies may engage in activities designed to spread fear or undermine their opponents. The CIA (American Central Intelligence Agency) and allies like Secret Intelligence Service (United Kingdom) as well as the KGB (former Soviet intelligence service) engaged in many kinds of activities designed to weaken the Soviet Union and its allies or the United States and its allies respectively during the Cold War between these countries. At least, at times, the activities of these agencies were successful. The exclusion of activities between states is not intended to dismiss the importance of their actions, nor is it intended to deny that sometimes these activities can be horrific and cause devastation. During World War II, for example, both sides bombed cities in an effort to destroy the morale of the civilian populations. The bombings culminated with the destruction of Dresden and the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, all of which resulted in the deaths of large numbers of people. Massacres of civilians and similar types of activities undertaken by government forces during wartime are clearly evil as well. Actions such as these are not being dismissed and definitely

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 9

not accepted. They are simply part of another area of study and analysis for political science and international relations.

There are three situations in which terrorism can occur within this definition: first, dissidents may target a government or governments; second, governments may target a group of their own citizens or support groups that target a group of their own citizens; or third, groups may target each other with such violence independent of government. By far the most frequent form that terrorism has taken is violence by dissident groups against their own government or foreign governments. The groups involved are using the violence as part of an effort to get the government to change policies or to bring about other changes in a political system. Governments may also tolerate situations in which local groups use violence in an effort to create terror in some portion of its own population that it fears or distrusts. Since governments have police, security, and military forces to deal with what are perceived to be domestic threats, this form of terrorism is less likely to occur. If the targets of the violence are groups opposed to the government, there may even be active support from the authorities. Finally, groups may battle among themselves in efforts to end the political activities of the opposing group or drive out another group. In Turkey in the 1970s left-wing groups and right-wing groups targeted each other with violence and terrorism as they competed to bring about different types of changes. When India and Pakistan were being formed out of the former British India in 1947, Hindus and Muslims attacked each other, and Muslim refugees from India and Hindu refugees from the new state of Pakistan fled in fear.

WeAPon of The WeAk The last part of the definition depends on the fact that terrorist actions are used to improve the power situation of the organization that is using this form of political violence. While the specific agendas of groups using terrorism are quite different, they all share this characteristic. They are attempting to improve their power situation – to increase their probability of being able to influence political decisions. Terrorist campaigns are frequently mounted by organizations that have failed to bring about their desired changes

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics10

by other means, i.e. they are politically weak. The groups have failed in democratic elections to gain enough power to bring about change. Governments have ignored peaceful protests and appeals, or they have been met by government repression that prevents further efforts at peaceful change.

A group that can influence the military to undertake a coup in their country to take over the government to bring about the changes that are desired will not have to rely on terrorism. Groups in the past that could organize a rebellion and mobilize sufficient troops to march on the capital and attempt to defeat the government did not have to rely on terrorism since they have more powerful sources. When civil wars break out, both sides have sufficient forces to engage in such a conflict. While one or both sides in a civil war may rely on terror techniques much as countries do during wartime, these activities are not central to the conflict. Terrorism remains a tool to be used by groups that lack the possibility of these kinds of peaceful or violent protests against a current government. Since they are relatively powerless in the conventional political setting of their own society due to limited electoral appeal or limited support in the face of government repression, they resort to unconventional means (terrorism) in an effort to improve their power base. When governments turn to supporting terrorist groups against their own citizens it is because they cannot be sure that they will be successful in relying on conventional police techniques or forms of repression. Thus, their reliance on terrorism is also a reflection of weakness.

ATTAckInG cIvIlIAns Some definitions of terrorism include the specification that the targets of terrorist violence are civilians. The insurgent attacks on military personnel in Iraq, for example, are not normally considered terrorist attacks. Civilians are often the targets for terrorism because the target population consists mainly of civilians and terrorists usually attack members of the target audience. Adding this component to a definition of terrorism, however, adds complexity. Are off-duty police, reserve military personnel, or civilians acceptable targets? What about civilian employees working on military bases? When attacks result in the deaths of both civilians and military

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 11

personnel, are the civilians considered the targets or acceptable collateral damage? To include this component in the definition also may require knowledge of the intentions of those launching the attacks. As a consequence, it does not seem necessary to include the targeting of civilians as a key component of the definition, but it is useful to recognize that civilian populations are often the intended targets of terrorist attacks, if for no other reason than to increase the resulting fear among a target population as noted.

TeRRoRIsm As PsycholoGIcAl WARfARe Terrorism is ultimately a form of psychological warfare. The goal of the terrorist group is to spread fear in the target population in order to bring about some kind of change. The goals of the terrorists have been met when the greatest amount of fear has been caused by the terrorist attack. The most effective terrorist actions are those that reach the largest number of people. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 in the United States generated immense amounts of fear because of the death toll and the symbolism involved. The 2005 transport bombings in London did not kill as many people but indicated to many in the United Kingdom that they could be at risk. The anthrax scare in the United States coming so soon after the attacks of 9/11 in October of 2001 generated a great deal of fear while resulting in the deaths of less than a dozen people. The hope of the terrorists is that the attacks will undermine confidence in the public or the elite and lead to the desired changes or to the weakening of a state, which in turn makes it more vulnerable to continued terrorism or other forms of violence.

One of the things that can heighten the fear that occurs with terrorism is the idea that the violence is random. In actuality, terrorism is seldom random by intent; in fact, it has to be distinctly

Fear in a target audience is one of the key goals of campaigns of terrorism. Terrorism is ultimately a form of psychological warfare that is directed against this target audience. (Wilkinson 1975: 81)

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics12

non-random in order to be successful. The targets of terrorist attacks, whether they are people or objects, are chosen from among a similar group of targets. One member of the group is interchangeable with another. The randomness occurs in the sense that any individual member of a group can become the target for the violence to send the message to others. While the victims of a lethal attack are likely to be random in the sense of being victims, they become victims because they are members of a specific group. The appearance of complete randomness in the choice of targets, however, can increase the fear of the target audience. The end result of this situation for the target audience is the knowledge that any of them could indeed become victims and that no one is safe.

DIPlomATIc AnD leGAl DefInITIons of TeRRoRIsm The definition used above is one that is designed to aid in understanding terrorism, but it cannot serve as an appropriate definition in a court of law. Governments usually need a more precise legal definition if they are going to use their courts and legal systems to try, convict, and punish individuals who are involved in terrorist actions, and it may be essential for a government that has to decide whether or not a person accused of terrorism elsewhere should be extradited. In many cases, however, national legal systems will not require any special definition of terrorism. Hijacking an airplane, setting off a bomb, and killing people are already crimes under national laws, even when the crimes are undertaken for political purposes. If a state wishes to impose stiffer penalties for crimes associated with terrorism, however, then some sort of legal definition becomes important. Prosecutors must be able to prove that political intent or political objectives were behind the violence. Sometimes terrorists on trial are more than happy to proclaim their political goals, but in other cases such intent may be quite difficult to prove. A legal definition does not require the specification of a target audience or information on the level of organization involved. Similarly, if a national legislature desires to prohibit financial contributions to terrorist groups, then the government has to provide some system for designating which

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 13

groups are prohibited and how they are defined. That type of legal definition may be more difficult.

Efforts at the international level to come up with treaties and conventions banning terrorism have, to date, not been particularly successful. One of the problems with such a convention is the difficulty in defining terrorism in terms that would be acceptable to all the countries concerned. Some countries, especially in the developing world, are afraid that national liberation fronts would be considered terrorist groups. Arab countries have long considered Palestinian groups opposed to Israel to be national liberation movements rather than terrorist groups, and they would resist any international definition that would automatically consider these groups to be terrorist organizations. As Andrew Silke (2004: 5) noted, even close allies can disagree about the definition of terrorism. Early in the twenty-first century both the United States and the United Kingdom had lists of organizations that they considered to be terrorist groups. Thirteen different dissident groups were on both lists, but the United Kingdom had eight groups not on the US list, and the United States had fifteen not on the British list.

Countries would find it inconvenient to extradite or prosecute persons who would be considered as terrorists under an international convention. The United States or United Kingdom would have been loath to extradite Iraqi dissidents responsible for bombs directed against the regime of Saddam Hussein when he was still in power. Governments no doubt prefer a certain amount of flexibility in determining who constitutes a terrorist, permitting the government to take whatever actions seem best. Governments will at times have to make the distinction between freedom fighter and terrorist – when the same action is acceptable and when it is not. Politicians will have to decide, and national public opinion will be important in that decision. Governments will always be caught between choosing to support consistent approaches and taking into account special circumstances that might exist.

GueRRIllA WARfARe AnD TeRRoRIsm Terrorism and guerrilla warfare have some things in common. Both are weapons of the weak used by dissident groups that lack

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

Terrorism: The Basics14

the ability to challenge the government in other ways. Guerrilla groups, however, generally target police, the security forces, and the military. They are less likely to target civilians in their attacks. When guerrilla groups begin to target civilians, they usually cross over into terrorism, and some dissident groups may indeed combine military action against military forces and terror attacks against soft civilian targets. Effective guerrilla warfare may require more resources and personnel than terrorism; thus, a shift to guerrilla tactics from purely terrorist attacks may signal the success of the dissident movement in moving to a higher stage. While guerrilla tactics may be used by dissident movements, they are unlikely to be used by governments to attacks their own citizens. Governments are more likely to rely on repression not terrorism.

conclusIons While there are many definitions of terrorism, the keys include political objectives, violence, target audiences, organization, a non- state actor as the target or perpetrator, and groups that have limited resources. The definition is not specific to any one group nor does it exclude others. This definition is in accord with what Tore Bjorgo (2005a: 2) notes in that terrorism “is primarily an extremism of means, not one of ends.” Definitions used by governments for legal purposes need to be more detailed and specific. Governments may want less precise definitions when dealing with foreign countries in order to avoid making unpopular decisions or extraditing individuals for terrorism to foreign governments. Terrorism is ultimately a form of psychological warfare that is designed to use fear to influence people. While guerrilla activity shares some similarity to terrorist attacks, guerrilla groups are more likely to attack military or police targets and only use terrorist tactics to supplement their other attacks.

key TeRms anarchists, CIA, extradition, KGB, leaderless resistance, London transport bombings, Madrid train bombings, 9/11 attacks, Al Qaeda, Secret Intelligence Service, Unabomber

C op

yr ig

ht ©

2 01

1. T

ay lo

r &

F ra

nc is

G ro

up . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

WhaT is Terrorism? 15