Terrorism – Is There Any Working Global Frameworks to Counter It?

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

The word “terrorism” was first used during the French Revolution when British statesman Edmond Burke used the term to describe the actions of the Jacobin-dominated French government. Under the leadership of Maximilien Robespierre, thousands of people that were said to be enemies of the state were put on trial and then executed by use of the guillotine (O 'Connor, 2006). However, since the inception of the word, it has taken on a new meaning. One can now hear the word “terrorism” and be overcome by anger or even fear. Terrorism now seems to have turned to attacks against a government rather

Terrorism is a frightening reality that all people in today’s world must face. While some areas of the world are facing terrorism more than others nearly are regions and all people are facing the violence and devastating effects of terrorism in one form or another.

There are many differing definitions of terrorism. What is terrorism? How do we define it? Why is one man’s terrorist another man’s freedom fighter? These are just a few of the questions that face the world on a daily basis. There are many challenges that face the international community when it comes to how to define terrorism and what it constitutes. This paper will explore the challenges facing scholars when it comes to labeling terror and discuss potential ways to properly define it.

Terrorism can be defined different ways by different people. “Terrorism is violence- or the threat of violence used to achieve a political goal” (Terrorism 1), that was Opposing Viewpoint’s definition of terrorism. Opposing Viewpoints says that [Terrorism] “differs

In order to determine whether an action is a terrorist act or not, terrorism must first be defined. Terrorism is the use or threatening the use of violence as a weapon to influence a person or a group of people to change policies or influence decisions according to the terrorist’s desires. The terrorist can be a single person acting on personal wishes or a group of people with an ultimate goal. The goals of a terrorist are normally political, ideological, or religious in nature.

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

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.

The term has expanded immensely during the twentieth century to include any type of political violence that an observer does not agree with; thus contributing to the confusion and the murkiness of the meaning of the word. The media and Politicians are quick to label any violent enemy as terrorist. Deeming any act of violence that one disagrees with as terrorism cause the term to lose its meaning and become a highly contextual and highly subjective. Some acts of violence are portrayed as terrorism by certain media outlets and this notion of legitimate is resisted by others. Confusion further depends by the fact that researchers and governments have more than one hundred working different definitions for the term terrorism. Critics believe that another contribution to the media’s confusion is the need to get the news first which can lead to inaccurate reporting and misrepresentations (Tuggle, & Huffman, 2007) or “blatantly false pretenses” (Greenwald,

Eliminating terrorism appears to be a futile goal being as conflict is a understandably normal part of society, so having a grasp on it seems to be the only option people have around the world. In order to do this, however, a definition for terrorism is important to develop because if there is not a concise definition of terrorism, terrorists can still “operate under the guise of legitimacy” (White, 2016) because without a definition that fully encompasses all kinds of aspects of terrorism, they can have access to loopholes that appear to be legal. A definition can be applied through understanding three key elements – the terrorists’ use of violence, the aim of the violence is political, and the targets of the violence are civilians (Ganor, 2002). Not only are these three key elements important to an all-inclusive definition, it must be clear in order to “avoid double standards, and it should encompass all forms of the act, irrespective of the perpetrator, actor, target, place or time” (Zeidan, 2003). There should be an agreement of this definition of terrorism between the state and federal levels of government within one nation, as well as an agreement of the definition between all nations so that a terrorist group cannot thrive and become

The challenges experienced at the international level with regard to arriving at a consensus about the definition of terrorism are based on the fact that the term raises political and emotional tensions. However, the international community through the United Nations has embraced various sectorial conventions that describe and criminalize several types of terrorist activities. Moreover, the general assembly of the UN has spoken against terrorist activities through diverse political definitions of terrorism. They have been described as criminal activities geared or measured

While these standards of comparison does not eliminate all the enigma, they enable us to answer some of the questions. Terrorism differs from ordinary crime in its political purpose and in its primary objective. The wide definition these philosophers adopt contain the word ‘violence’, which itself is a topic of endless debate. The crux of terrorism lies, however, in its motive and the modus operandi for their achievement.

Terrorism as warfare, terrorism as a crime, or terrorism as a disease. Whichever view is adopted is determined by the kinds of countermeasures countries will use in their efforts to deal with terrorism. Definitions of terrorism are diverse and commentators and scholars tend to disagree on which is the most accurate. This usually occurs because the different types of terrorism are so widespread, and some experts will include or exclude various groups depending on their preferences. Terrorism is a special form of violence, where a group aims to compel another’s actions through the use of fear with the aim of forcing it to modify its behaviours. This essay will develop and defend this particular definition of terrorism and look at the psychological tactics that terrorists use to spread fear through violence.

Over 100 scholarly or diplomatic definitions exist. The range of things that can be included under the umbrella of ‘terrorism’ using these definitions is impractically large. On top of this, the use of the word ‘terrorism’ has changed over time. When it was first used politically in the French Revolution, it was a word reserved for labeling those who used violence in the name of the state. In 1798 the word was first recorded in English dictionaries as meaning "systematic use of terror as a policy”. While there is still no internationally unified definition of terrorism, there are comprehensive definitions. One such definition is that used by the US State Department since 1983:

Terrorism, which has been around for as long as people can remember, has been on the rise for the past ten years. Terrorists usually use murdering, kidnapping, hi-jacking and bombings to achieve their political purpose. For instance, according to Wikipedia.com (2006), in 1985 816 deaths, then in 2003, more than 1,000 people died by terorist acts around the world. In recent years, terrorism seems to be at a new height and attacks are much more violent than in the past. Unfortunately, in spite of many anti-terror campaigns, projects and organizations are being created for prevention (to prevent) terrorism, the number of terrorists only is increasing. These days terrorism is all over the world.