Repercussions Of Constructivism And The Definition Of Terrorism

Modern terrorism, as deduced from this literature, is acts to violence strategically used by secular groups spanning international borders with the aim of achieving a desired outcome. Further, it can be seen as organized activity whose genesis can be traced back to the 1880’s. From then to now there are identifiable traits and patterns observed from different (terrorist) groups which have allowed for the conceptualization of the term modern terrorism. This concept therefore, can be best explained in the context of being a wave or having a life cycle. That means it is a cycle of activity demarked by phases from inception and expands along the way then eventually it declines. The world, thus far, has experienced four waves of modern

The word ‘terrorism’ can be traced back to the French Revolution and the reign of terror committed against the population of France in the 1790s. During this time, thousands of people were killed and the general population was severely oppressed. Also, some of the first instances of terrorist tactics, such as assassination and intimidation, were witnessed in the killing of prominent officials and other opponents of the Revolution. In general, terrorists aim to incite fear in the population through pre-meditated violent acts and gain publicity as a medium in achieving their goals. Such acts include taking hostages, bombings and assassinations, all of which create fear and compliance in a victim or audience. Terrorism can be distinguished from other types of political violence through its disregard for and intentional harming of innocent civilians. Also, terrorists usually adopt a state of mind where one side is always good and any opposition is bad and deserves to be punished. As a result, terrorists will always have some supporters who share the same radical thoughts as them and thus terrorism, as a whole, will always be accepted as a legitimate use of violence. This is the reasoning behind the famous phrase by Gerald Seymour, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”(QUOTE

Over the last couple of decades, terrorism has risen from near-obscurity to become a commonly held fear among members of society. Up until the late 90’s, incidents of terrorism never rose past 500. The numbers spiked the years following, reaching over 6,500 in 2006. (Mohamed, Roser) No longer can we dismiss acts of terrorism as irrelevant or isolated incidents. At first glance, terrorism seems irrational with motives too diverse to narrow down. For the sake of our lives and the safety of future generations, we must find ways to explain terrorism and discover ways we can stop its reign of terror in modern society. Answering these questions call for an examination and application of rationalist, culturalist, and structuralist approaches, as well as thorough investigation into a mixed design case study regarding the issue.

“Terrorism's particularly heinous but highly attractive means to achieve political objectives or even radically restructure political foundations is manifest within societies in all reaches of the world. While the practical application of terrorist methodologies comes across as a relatively straightforward craft, the conceptual and ideological understanding, and subsequent evaluation of its socio-political influence, implementation, and psychological impacts present difficult questions, and in some cases conceivably insurmountable obstacles” (Romaniuk 2014, para

Additionally, John Mueller lambasts what he labels as the socially constructed ‘terrorist industry,’ which he attacks for artificially inflating concerns over terrorist attacks. Instead, Mueller confirms that the damage caused by terrorism is not materially significant but stems primarily from the fear that it creates. Violent retaliation is viewed as a form of ‘self-flagellation’ that provides the terrorists with exactly what they want. As mentioned, realist definitions of power, self-interest and rationality lack explanatory prowess when non-state actors are able to subvert states thanks largely in part to the use of suicide-terrorism. The proliferation of terrorist groups and their use of suicide-tactics in many ways defies realist expectations and conclusions.

Dailymail.co.uk says that over 32,000 people died in 2014 alone (Dailymail 1). Terrorism can be interpreted many different ways. From the terrorist’s standpoint, terrorism is a helpful tool used to promote their way of life and to keep their people in line. From a pacifist’s point of view, terrorism is a dangerous thing, but should be left alone unless it is targeted toward them. From an activist’s point of view, terrorism is too dangerous to be left alone and must stop before it spreads. No matter what point of view it is being seen at, terrorism is dangerous and has ended the lives of too many citizens and soldiers.

Acts of terrorism are typically political oriented and ideologically motivated, ranging from specific goals expressed in terms of the might of political nation-states to more general purposes connected to the dilemma of certain people and groups. Therefore, terrorism can result from demands made by ethnic groups to receive representation in an existing political community or have its own state be formed, while terrorism can also be part of ideological fights for the acknowledgment of diminished expressions of ideas and ways of life. Because of the essentially political ideological objectives of terrorism, the fundamental ideas of terrorism are important to consider as the inspiring forces that fuel terrorist groups and individuals.

Terrorism is a significant and recurring situation that has changed the lives of people around the world, overwhelming them with fear and uncertainty of their future. It has become part of our daily lives today as we are still fighting wars to resolve many of the issues that began with the 9/11 attacks on the United States. Terrorism does not have a definitive definition but must meet certain conditions for it to be considered terrorism. There has to be a reason for an act that is deemed political, and it must affect the lives of innocent people, putting a sense of fear into them (Combs, Slann, “Terrorism”). Not only may the reason behind an act be political, but it could also be seen as religious as well (Sterba). Since the 9/11 attacks, terrorism

The Central Intelligence Agency defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents” (CIA). This term was specifically created to differentiate terrorism between other acts of violence. These doings of terrorism are not just any act but are specific acts of violence. A dominant reason behind terrorism tends to fall upon religious beliefs and culture ties.

Terrorism can be defined and viewed in many different ways. As discussed in “Terrorism and Political Violence,” by Alex Schmid, there are multiple frameworks in which terrorism can be defined (Schmid 2010, 197). In Schmid’s article, he discusses the five ways he feels terrorism can be looked at, terrorism as/and politics, terrorism as/and crime, terrorism as/and warfare, terrorism as/and communication and terrorism as/and religious fundamentalism (Schmid 2010, 197). This is interesting because it explores the concept of terrorism in different lenses, where each has its own motives, its own background and its own participants. This is important to understand because not every act of terrorism is done in the same light and for the same purposes. Just as any other crime, there are reasons behind the act. When studying terrorism, understanding motives makes all the difference, and understanding what is at stake for the attacker or the attacked helps fully conceptualize the matter.

In our society today, terrorism is not a word that goes unseen; terrorism can easily be followed back to early history. Though terrorism is well known by many, it is universally hard to define (Brown, 2008). Terrorism as a word can differ from person to person. One can describe it as strategy, while someone else might call it a tactic. Everyone can define what a word is to them based on their status in society. For instance, Someone who is a white male in the middle- class will see terrorism different than a Muslim male in the lower-middle class. Each point of view is incredibly important because this where we start to have opposing views and definitions (Brown, 2008).

In comparison Hoffman ignores the varying definitions concluding that ‘Terrorism is perhaps best viewed as the archetypal shark in the water’ (2002:313) which advances in order to survive. Thus, the concept has simply changed over time to remain relevant by combating counterterrorism efforts. Hoffman’s most apparent definition of terrorism is noted in Copeland’s article as “the deliberate creation and exploitation of fear through violence or the threat of violence in the pursuit of political change.’ (2001:3) However, in his own article he offers only a systematic clarification of terrorism in stating their aim to ‘undermine confidence in government and leadership’ (2002:313), which remains unchanged despite the context. Hoffman’s central argument focuses on the aftermath of 9/11 and therefore his definition holds the purpose of rethinking counterterrorism measures and merely as a byproduct in showing potential modern threats. To accurately analyse whether ‘New terrorism’ is relevant in understanding the current threats, a succinct definition of terrorism is needed so that its evolution can be noted. Although, the general aim to achieve change at any cost remains the same.

While there is a degree of agreement among political scientists on the alteration in the meaning and usage of the term terrorism over time, no widely accepted definition of the word exists today. It remains difficult to formulate a definition of the word under customary international law and legislative attempts to address the issue almost always fail. Consequently, its definition and interpretation shifts according to the interests and priorities of sovereign national governments. However, the understanding of the word terrorism is yet necessary to comprehend the phenomenon.

Terrorism in the twenty-first century has some similarities and differences from terrorism in the twentieth century. Terrorism is, in its broadest sense, the use or threatened use of violence in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim. Also useful to remember that because the two entities involved, the terrorists and the terrorized, are on the opposite end of the political, religious or ideological continuum, the same act is viewed by them differently. There is much sense in the phrase one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

The history of terrorism can be traced back as far as the French revolution. Some of these acts of terrorism only seem as distant reminders of our past, but at the same time, are not a far cry from today’s brutal acts; and although these acts seem distant, it doesn’t also mean they are no longer in the thoughts of individuals in today’s time.