Terrorism State Definition

For our purposes, we will use the Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d), to define terrorism. It defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents” (Central Intelligence Agency, 2013). Examples of terrorism persist on a near daily basis around the world. Unstable countries, such as Afghanistan and Syria, deal with terrorist attacks on a constant basis. The common thread of these attacks is deliberate targeting of civilian populations in order to achieve political objectives. The best known and largest example are

Terrorism is an act of violence, usually done in the public sphere, which is used to incite fear in a population in order to coerce change in public opinion or a government’s position on an issue. In many parts of the world, groups wage war with their countries, either to separate from the government or to overthrow it entirely. Sometimes these people are treated unfairly by their government, and their struggles are justified. Other times, these groups use violence against both military and civilian targets, terrorizing innocent bystanders to get what they want—these groups are terrorists. Often, though, it is difficult to tell the difference.

They elucidate that terrorism is a “premeditated, politically motivated, violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups of clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience,” (National Institute of Justice).

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.

Presently, there is no conclusive definition of personal identity, but in this paper, I will focus on two notions that are frequently discussed – numerical and narrative identity. Numerical identity is the continuity of self over time, while narrative refers to the memories, experiences, etc. that answer “Who Am I?” (Lipsman and Glannon 2013). Another way of thinking about identity is in terms of core values that if changed, will also change that person’s identity (Witt, Kuhn and Timmermann 2013), I will include this view as part of narrative identity.

In light of Stohl and Lopez’s warning that state terrorism requires “investment in theory building and analysis”(), this paper will examine various state terrorist definitional models in order to apply a criteria to three different case studies. In this regard, the aim of this paper is twofold. After applying a definitional model of state terrorism to three different case studies, which show how some examples of state terrorism are clear examples, how others are not so clear examples and how some cases are not state terrorism, this paper will analyse the limitations of this model in order to reconcile the theory and practice of state terrorism. There are parameters to this paper. While there are numerous historical examples of state terrorism, this paper will only investigate ongoing cases of state terrorism since the end of the Cold War. This paper will begin by outlining various definitional models of state terrorism, before applying this model to three different case

When one is coming to understand terrorism and all of its components, a generally accepted definition is hard to come by because it tends to be described through the “subjective outlook of the definer” (Ganor, 2002). This idea has best been described as saying that “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” (Laqueur, 1987). For example, Osama Bin Laden, the man who is most known in the development of the plans for the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001, was most likely seen as a freedom fighter in the eyes of those in support of Al-Qaeda, while Americans and people all around the world viewed his actions as one of a terrorist. Terrorism is not this tangible object that can be defined as one thing and is applied

Terrorism, in a recent couple of years, has become an international problem and the international community has used a lot of resources in an effort to solve it and reduce its effect on people. The United Nations has carried out many conventions and resolutions have been adopted in the international arena. In the regional levels too, the European Union has had plenty of measures to handle this problem. Countries especially that have suffered extensive attacks such as the United States and England have strict measures to eliminate this trouble. Despite international, regional and individual countries efforts, terrorism still remains a huge problem which must be tackled. In this essay, I tackle a national and endemic terror group. I look at the

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Some will say this is a true statement another would say this is an ignorant statement. It is simply up to interpretation. But going deeper into the statement we must always remember that “words mean things.” So what does the word terrorist mean? Or better yet, what is the meaing of terrorism. If we can define terrorism then untimately we will define what is a terrorist.

Using data on over 600 groups Jones and Linicki find that majority of terrorist organizations end due to transitioning into the political process, or by effective local stick counterterrorism. After providing an overview of the field, the authors present several case studies and policy implications particularly for countering Al-Qa’ida.

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

“Terrorism involves the use of violence by an organization other than a national government to cause intimidation or fear among a target audience;” at least, this is how Pape (2003) defines terrorism in his article “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism” (343). The goal of this article by Pape is to discuss suicide terrorism and how it “follows a strategic logic, one specifically designed to coerce modern liberal democracies to make significant territorial concessions” (343). Similar to Pape, Bloom (2004) and Horowitz (2010) also delve into the exponential increase of suicide terrorism and why it occurs. Although Pape, Bloom, and Horowitz concur that suicide terrorism is increasing, they disagree why it is so prominent. While the

Terrorism can be defined as both a global and a regional phenomenon. Globally, terrorist activity has increased since the late 20th century and has emerged as one of the critical issues associated with early 21st century geopolitics. In a regional sense, specific terrorist groups emerge in particularly troubled corners of the globe in direct response to ongoing issues in those regions. And while terrorist groups are region-specific and often ethnically or politically aligned to a specific set of ideological tenants, they are also often funded and supported through international and transnational support networks. According to our readings and discussions this week, we have established that this transnational support for terrorist organizations

Alex P. Schmid (2011), ed “The Routledge Hand Book of Terrorism Research” is a compilation of the analytical findings and reference resources on terrorism and counterterrorism resources. This study is based on empirical research, such as compiling biographies of terrorist operatives in order to generate insights into what types of Individual become a terrorist. Another useful insight to terrorism is provided by “Critical terrorism studies” Richard Jackson, Lee Jarvis, Geroen Gunning and Marie Breen Smyth. In this textbook, the Counter Terrorism Studies scholars outline their critique of orthodox terrorism studies, by providing a counter narrative to the nature and dynamics of terrorism. Richard Jackson, Eamon Murphy and Scott Poynting (2010),

A large part of the literature review thus concentrated on the definition and characteristics of modern terrorism. However, since terrorist group’s present singularity and uniqueness in their characteristics, is it even possible to reach consensus on the definition and the meaning of the word? Globalization has affected the interpretation of the word terrorism by changing the face of these organizations. Quantitatively and qualitatively, changes occurred in terrorist organizations over the last decades, and one of them is the increasing involvement of women in their structures. From contextual pressure to individual motivations, the increase of female involved in terrorist organizations and activities result from a conjunction of several interrelated