NEED BY TOMORROW SUNDAY 12PM (Politics on Terrorism)

Whittaker and Crotty

Terrorism Defined

Terrorism is a difficult concept to define. For example, all individuals who detonate bombs in order to kill and maim innocent civilians are not terrorists. All murderers are not terrorists. Ted Bundy brutally murdered countless human beings. Although his crimes terrorized his victims, their families, the general public, he was a criminal - not a terrorist. The term "terrorism" is a political term. It describes an individual or groups who are using unlawful force or violence, or the threat thereof, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.

As Whittaker points out, terrorism can be objectively defined by the quality of the act. We know that all terrorists acts are crimes. However, the murder of individuals in the commission of a bank robbery is a crime, but it may or not be terrorism. If the motive of the Bank Robbery is to enrich the perpetrators, it is a crime. If the motive is to destabilize the nations banking system in order to bring down the government or to provide money to buy weapons to kill or threaten individuals to further some political objective, than it is a crime and an act of terrorism. Terrorism differs from ordinary crimes because its motivation is political.

Stephen Nathanson offers the following definition of Terrorism:

1. They are acts of serious, deliberate violence or destruction.

2. They are committed as part of a campaign to promote a political or social agenda.

3. They generally target limited numbers of people but aim to influence a larger group and/or the leaders who make decisions for the group.

4. They either kill or injure innocent people or pose a serious threat of such harms to innocent people.1

Incidents that have clear international consequences can be defined as international terrorism. For example, attacks on foreign diplomats, foreign nationals, airliners, and infrastructure by individuals from another country or a group that transcends international borders, Al-Queda for example, qualify as acts of international terrorism.

The motivation for terrorism is political. Generally, the direct cause of terrorism is a condition or circumstance that is perceived to be unjust. These issues may be addressed through a peaceful political process including strikes, demonstrations, boycotts, and regime change. However, when peaceful means are not available or fail extremists factions within the group seeking redress may turn to terrorism. For example, in modern states, separatist nationalism among Basques, Bretons, and Quebecois has motivated terrorism.

A dissatisfied minority or majority is not sufficient to cause terrorism. There are other necessary ingredients. There must be a perception of a lack of opportunity for political participation, and a final catalyst. The catalyst can be Government's use of extraordinary or unexpected force to quell peaceful attempts for redress or other forms of real or perceived intimidation/discrimination directed at group members. 2  

The politics and policies of "enforcement" or "establishment" terrorism

Terrorism in this context is generally state sponsored and perpetrated on the citizens of the state. There are numerous examples: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, the Soviet Union- especially under Stalin. A more recent example is Iraq under Saddam Hussein. The common thread in the use of enforcement or establishment terrorism is "the deliberate, systematic, murder, maiming, and menacing of the innocent by the state to inspire fear in order to gain political ends". 3  

The politics and policies of "agitational" or "revolutionary" terrorism

Following World War II, the term terrorism became associated with the revolutionary activity of oppressed individuals attempting to change the politics of their governments through the use of violence or the threat of violence. The term terrorism was used, at that time, primarily to describe nationalists or anti-colonial groups that emerged to oppose European rule in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. During the late 1940s and 1950s these groups these groups were also referred to as guerrilla fighters, insurgents, and freedom fighters. Their aim was the violent overthrow of a sitting government. In most cases, these governments were oppressive and dominated by foreign powers. Although these groups used terrorist tactics their political goals were often based on legitimate grievances against the policies of their governments.

Image: Head of U.S. delegation to the Counter-Terrorism International Conference Homeland Security adviser, Frances Fragos Townsend 2/5/2005. Ways to curb violence now as well as how to change an entire way of thinking in societies bound by religion and tradition, was the focus of the four-day terror conference in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, with experts from the United States, Britain and more than 50 other countries to share terror-busting techniques and lessons learned from cracking down on militants. (AP Photo/Amr Nabil)

M1. Responses to Terrorism

Responses to terrorism

The most important aspects of responses to acts of terrorism are: 1. determining who is responsible and 2. responding in an appropriate manner. An inappropriately strong or ill-considered response may injure or kill innocent people and/or increase the level of support for further terrorist activity. However, no response, or an inappropriately weak response, may also encourage support for additional acts of terrorism.

The best response to terrorism is one that will prevent future acts from occurring without killing innocent people. Good security is the most important element in combating terrorism. However, securing potential targets, borders, and actively seeking intelligence about potential terrorists and terrorist cells is a very difficult and costly proposition, but it is an essential ingredient in a comprehensive anti-terrorist program. The major problem with anti terrorist programs is the potential for limiting individual freedom. In the United States this is a key issue. One that has raised considerable controversy about trading security for individual freedom especially the right to privacy.

Anti-terrorism activities in the United States include searching individuals and their luggage at airports, monitoring telephone and computer traffic, and creating watch lists. All of the actions potentially place limits on the right to privacy and individual freedom. Citizens and their elected representatives need to determine how much individual freedom they are willing to sacrifice in order to reduce the threat of terrorism. 4

Eliminating the root causes of terrorism is the surest way to prevent terrorists from taking action. Poverty, ignorance, and lack of opportunity often assist terrorists in recruiting individuals to do their bidding. For example, in the Middle East, young, poor, disaffected individuals who have no educational or career opportunities are easy targets for terrorist recruiters. Recruiters relying on the doctrine of religious fundamentalism can depict the world in very stark terms: The West, especially the United States, is evil. The hegemony of the West is supported by corruption. The decay of Middle Eastern society is related to the intrusion of Western culture and religion.

Religious Fundamentalism, in this milieu is political. The policy is to rid the Middle East of Western cultural influence and to create a pure Islamic society. Many religions including Islam, Judaism and Christianity are convinced that they are right. Religious righteousness can permit terrorists to view their actions with moral certainty. It provides justification to eliminate evil associated with the other culture or religion. Terrorists motivated by Religious Righteousness perceive murder in the name of the cause as the work of their God.

The West would be well served by working to eliminate poverty, ignorance, and lack of opportunity in the Middle East. Also protecting the right of self determination to is essential to the development of stable governments that can combat terrorism.

The Politics of terror have become much more significant in the daily lives of people throughout the world. This is especially true for United States citizens. Before 9/11, terrorism was not a major issue in the politics of this country. There had been several incidents of terrorism prior to 9/11 - most notable being the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Both of these incidents were terrible and they caused a substantial amount of discomfort and anguish for most Americans. However, the events of 9/11 were unparalleled in the history of the United States. Not since Pearl Harbor had so many innocent Americans been killed. Two of America's most important symbols of power, the World Trade Center, and the Pentagon had been violated by terrorists. This vicious terrorist attack was too awful to comprehend. The pictures and the news coverage were shocking and almost to tragic to believe. Our sense of security and freedom was shaken to its core. The Federal Government acted quickly in passing the Patriot Act and in taking measures to attempt to improve airport security. The issues related to the potential loss of freedom associated with the Patriot Act and its contribution to our collective sense of security are issues that have been widely debated in the halls of congress, in the media, and by many special interest groups. There is constant speculation about the potential for another deadly attack. We now have a Department of Homeland Security and a new intelligence czar. Will these measures suffice or will we be asked to give up more freedom. These questions are central to the current debate about preventing future acts of terrorism.  

Works Cited

Crotty, William, ed. The Politics of Terror: The US Response to 9/11. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 2004.

Whittacker, David J., Ed. The Terrorism Reader, 3rd ed. London, Routledge 2001.

Image: Transportation security officers load a van with confiscated items at the Los Angeles International Airport, in Los Angeles, Thursday Aug. 10, 2006. Airport security gave passengers flyers with a list of prohibited items that included: liquids, gels, beverages, perfume and cologne containers, shampoo, creams and toothpaste . (AP Photo/Stefano Paltera)