Their Use Of Terrorism example essay topic

Terrorism is the threat or use of systematic terror and unpredictable violence by an individual or group for the attainment of political aims. Whether terrorism is utilized for or in opposition to an established governmental authority, it is intended to influence the attitudes and behaviors of a target group wider than the immediate casualties of those terrorist acts. Terrorism is employed by "political organizations with both rightist and leftist objectives, by nationalistic and ethnic groups, by revolutionaries, and by the armies and secret police of governments themselves" (Laquer 35). Despite contemporary opinions to the contrary, terrorism is not an advent of the 20th century.

It has been practiced throughout history all over the world. History is laden with examples of how monarchs utilized terrorist actions to oppress their citizens. The term terrorism itself originates from the Reign of Terror (1793-1794) of the French Revolution, which was a tumultuous time of anarchy. Encouraging the virtue of revolution, leaders like Robespierre advocated the mass murder of aristocrats and nobility. Similarly, the Spanish Inquisition used arbitrary arrest, torture, and execution to punish what it viewed as religious heresy. Furthermore, defiant Southerners formed a terrorist organization called the Ku Klux Klan after the American Civil War (1861-65) to intimidate supporters of Reconstruction.

Although it is much weaker today and can no longer lynch African-Americans like it used to, the Ku Klux Klan still attempts to terrorize minorities. In the latter half of the 19th century, adherents of anarchism adopted terrorism. At that stage of its evolution, terrorism, which consisted of assassinating persons in positions of power, was believed to be the best way to cause revolutionary political and social change (Wilkinson 49). One clear example is the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand by a Serbian revolutionary who wanted complete self-determination for the Serbs, instead of just the concessions Ferdinand was contemplating. In the 20th century, terrorism was adopted as an unacknowledged state policy of totalitarian regimes to crush resistance and maintain complete power. Some notorious examples are Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin, Uganda under Ida Amin, and Ethiopia under Mengistu Haile mariam.

Martha Crenshaw put it best when she wrote: In these states, arrest, imprisonment, torture, and execution were applied without legal guidance or restraints to create a climate of fear and to encourage adherence to the national ideology... and goals of the state. (94) An indication of the inhumanity these totalitarian governments ruled by is the fact that 11 million people (6 million of those Jews and the rest mostly gypsies) were exterminated in concentration camps despite never having committed any crime (N.B. unfortunately, this type of genocide is still occurring today in Burundi, Rwanda, and Bosnia). In the 1950's and 1960's, terrorism began to be associated with insurgencies in European and other colonies. After colonies developed sufficient political momentum for self-determination, independence movements succeeded, this resulted in colonies and their colonizers escalating their use of terrorism against each other (Lopez et al. 121). Some noteworthy examples are Algeria vs. France, Vietnam vs. France and United States, South Africa vs. United Kingdom.

Although modern day terrorism alone is unlikely to topple any government, it has proven useful as a part of extended conflicts for groups to secretive or weak to mount an open assault. The prevalent short-term goal of terrorism is to weaken the will and hold of the tenants of political power. Over the long-term, terrorists want to attain either the civic rights they have been denied or complete autonomy (Sederberg 228). Moreover, the 20th century witnessed great transformations in the use, practice, and form of terrorism. Technological innovations like automatic weapons and compact, electrically detonated explosives gave terrorists a new mobile, yet lethal, dimension. Consequently, terrorism became the hallmark for, and led to the proliferation of, political movements that could not have existed previously and are identified with terrorism today.

These terrorists are groups attempting to destabilize or overthrow existing political institutions in order to replace them with governments that have the same ideology as said terrorists (Kegley 1990). Generally, terrorists, believing violence is the best way to gain support and publicity for their objectives, attack people who either oppose their cause or symbolize such opposition. Modern day terrorism's effectiveness is political rather than military. Terrorism's most prevalent forms are: assassinations of prominent figures in society; seizing hostages to make demands on governments; and bombings of civilian targets (which are most common form of terrorism).

Bombings, which were popularized by the perpetual Arab-Israeli conflicts in the Middle East, constitute more than half of all terrorist acts. Similarly, Latin American revolutionary groups are infamous for their kidnappings of diplomats, business executives, and other symbols of foreign influence, which is attested by the recent hostage takeover of the Japanese embassy in Peru (Deutch 19). Hence, terrorism is limited in its destructiveness but high in psychological impact because it creates fear and shock. The predominant difference between modern terrorists and those from those of the past is that the victims of modern terrorism are usually innocent civilians who are selected randomly.

In addition, the technological revolution of the latter 20th century has advanced the terrorists' mobility and impact. The technological advancement of modern day aviation, the exponential increase in the number of international flights, and the ease with which terrorists can produce fake passports has made terrorists extremely mobile. Thus, the price for accessible traveling to the entire globe has been the proliferation of skyjacking of civilian aircraft (which is linked to Palestinian nationalists and other Islamic extremists). Equally important, the telecommunication revolution in the form of the Internet and increased media access to the world has magnified the impact of terrorist acts. Any act of violence can attract television and newspaper coverage, which brings the event directly into the homes of millions. This, in turn, exposes the world to the terrorists' demands, grievances, and political goals.

In dealing with terrorism, a democratic society must often choose between the maintenance of order and security on one hand and the democratic ideals that nation is based on the other. If liberal democracies are going to have a chance to significantly limit terrorism, they must abridge at least some of the civil liberties they epitomize. If democracies are not willing to curtail any civil liberties (like stringent airport security that includes search of all baggage), they will be unable to combat terrorism. However, to believe that it is worth discarding out individual rights and liberal values for the sake of eliminating terrorism is to resort to the terrorist's reasoning. Thus, democracies have to exercise temperance when battling terrorism and must ensure strong security measures without defying the democratic concept of due process. Unfortunately, governments usually do not exercise this type of prudence.

Conversely, governments, after insisting that terrorist campaigns will gain no concessions from such actions, employ those same methods in the name of counter-terrorism (Deutch 18). Due to the mobility of terrorist organizations, fighting and destroying them is a complex task. This task is made harder either by the fact that nations are extremely unwilling to relinquish their sovereignty or permit the extradition of terrorists from their countries. Moreover, without this type of unilateral action against international terrorism, it will be very difficult to combat.

As long as the anarchical, state-oriented global system persists in the future, state and non-state actors alike will employ terrorism. Without any doubt, the scourges of terrorism are morally reprehensible. In fact, international terrorism has declined steadily since the late 1980's, with 1996 representing a 25-year low of reported terrorist incidents (Deutch 14). In spite of that, predicting that terrorism will disappear in the near future is rash.

Since terrorists, as a whole, are not concerned with the liberal ideals of morality, diplomacy, and respect for life, terrorism will remain widespread for a long time to come. The main objective of non-state terrorist groups is autonomy and self-determination, at whatever the cost. Similarly, state terrorism is driven by an overwhelming need to remain in power through whatever means necessary. Consequently, utilizes of terrorism are modern day Machiavellian's (N.B. I am alluding to Niccolo Machiavelli who was an adviser to kings during the Renaissance who propounded that leaders should act ruthlessly to protect their own interests) that are oblivious to the innocent civilian casualties their tactics cause.

The aims terrorists embody, fight, and wreak havoc for causes them to recklessly use violence without feeling guilty about the consequences of their actions. One indication of the brutality of terrorism is their indiscriminate attacks on everything from churches to schools to abortion clinics. Because they maliciously target civilians who cannot defend themselves, instead of soldiers who can, terrorists are depicted and perceived as criminals. In contrast, terrorists believe themselves to be freedom fighters that have suffered so much injustice and oppression that any violence they wreak is more than justified. However, to those people who do not practice, and therefore, have no personal stake in, terrorism, the answer to the question "do the ends of terrorism justify the means" is a resounding no!

Bibliography

Deutch, John M. "Terrorism". Foreign Policy. Fall 1997: 10-21.
Kegley, Charles W., Jr., ed. International Terrorism: Characteristics, Causes, Controls. New York: St. Martin's, 1990.
Laquer, Walter. The Age of Terrorism. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1987.
Lopez, George A. and Michael Stohl. Government Violence and Repression: An Agenda for Research. New York: Greenwood Press, 1986.
Sederberg, Peter C. Terrorist Myths: Illusion, Rhetoric, and Reality. Englewood: Prentice Hall, 1989.
Stohl, Michael, ed. The Politics of Terrorism. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1974.
Wilkinson, Paul. Political Terrorism. Los Angeles: John Wily & Sons, 1974.