Learner's Full Name
Assignment Title
Terrorism, terror attacks, terrorist, suspected terrorists- these are the words that can be found in news articles around the world. Although terrorism and terrorist attacks are nothing new and have been an instrument to cause fear and damage for ages, it has become ubiquitous since the 9/11 terror attacks in the US. However in spite of numerous articles, essays and reports having been written about terrorism, there is no one clear definition of the term that can be accepted by everyone. It could be that terrorism operates at so many different levels with various reasons, actors and places. It is also a power play between two actors, in which the most powerful could paint the other as a terrorist and become a legitimate actor that is allowed the use of force. To arrive at a definition, a consensual agreement at that has been difficult so far. Part of the problem lies in the fact that the definitions are either too vague or too specific. Vague would be to generalize the term and try to condense the complex actions of people, states and other causes into a simple sentence, while being specific would mean to concentrate on one specific nature of terrorism- either the group, their strategy or the space they operate in.
Defining terrorism would be easier and complete if it was considered to be part of the unrest and system-level conflicts that are already prevalent in the world. It is also a result of existing tensions between the different actors vying for power and wealth. Another difficulty in defining terrorism arises from the actors-broadly- state and non-state actors. The prevailing opinion (although not amongst everyone) is that terrorism is an act carried out by non-state actors- actors that do not have the legitimate use of exercising power. It is why acts of aggression such as fights between countries is called as either a war or a battle while an act of aggression by a non-state actor is called terrorism. Defining terrorism would be an easier task if it was just about collecting the existing definitions and finding the flaws with them and adding or correcting the existing definitions. A good definition would also be something that is easily understood by laymen as well as good enough to enable academic research.
There are a lot of problems that arise with an inconsistent definition of terrorism. Researchers find it difficult to study terrorism on a consistent basis as the term is used to define too many actions such as the innocent killing of civilians by both the state and non-state actors, actions of lone, disturbed gunmen and state sponsored killings. Normative definitions of terrorism are arrived at without looking at it as a part of political violence or related to it. Also it is not compared with other similar phenomenon that have a universally accepted definition. As a result, “the use of legal or a moral model may obscure important variables that influence the development of terrorist groups and terrorist actions (Ruby 2002:13).
Definitions of terrorism abound from a political, sociological, economic, religious as well as ideological standpoints. Some popular definitions of terrorism include it being a “premeditated use or threat of use of extranormal violence or brutality by subnational groups to obtain a political, religious, or ideological objective through intimidation of a huge audience, usually not directly involved with the policy making that the terrorists seek to influence (Enders & Sandler, 2002:145-146). Chomsky defines terrorism as “the use of coercive means aimed at populations in an effort to achieve political, religious, or other aims (Chomsky, 2001:19).”According to the US State Department, terrorism is a “politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience ( Ruby, 2002:10). Tilly says that terrorism is the “asymmetrical deployment of threats and violence against enemies using means that fall outside the forms of political struggle routinely operating within some current regime (Tilly, 2004:5).” With the exception of Chomsky all the other definitions of terrorism define it as an act that is carried out by non-state actors. In effect they define terrorism as an act of terror or intimidation in which the state is not to blame. This is not a consensually accepted definition as there are many who would associate violent acts of states (against its citizens or citizens of other countries) with terrorism. Chomsky’s definition on the other hand does not name a specific actor as being the perpetrator of terrorism and goes ahead to also mention the goals of a terrorist act- to achieve political, religious and other aims. This definition or theory of terrorism is apt as it is not too specific or too vague when it comes to categorizing terrorist groups and Organizations.
Chomsky’s definition gives an allowance and freedom for the researcher or a scholar to name any perpetrator of violence or coercive action aimed at causing damage to populations as a terrorist group or an act of terrorism. Thus, under this definition the terrorist actors could be both state and non-state actors. There arises no question about one actor having the legitimate use of power to hurt or cause damage to another actor or sections of people. Chomsky also mentions the goals of the terrorists- religious, political and so on Although this definition might seem to be too short or even vague, generalized or all encompassing, it is the closest that comes to a proper definition of the term without showing a bias. Thus for the purposes of this study, Chomsky’s definition of terrorism or his hypothesis is used to understand the different terrorist groups and actors.
Depending on their intentions, strategy, place of action, results, size and techniques used, terrorist groups and organizations can be classified into many categories. There are religious terrorist groups such as the Al-Qaeda or the state sponsored terrorism of Iran, Libya and Syria. There are nationalist terrorist groups such as the LTTE and there are ideological terrorist groups such as the Baader-Meinhof in Germany. Learning about these terrorist groups becomes easier when Chomsky’s hypothesis is applied to the study.
The LTTE-nationalist terrorist organization
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, commonly known as LTTE is a nationalist group that came into formation in Sri Lanka. The formation of LTTE was a result of many factors. Sri Lanka has two major ethnic, religious and linguistic groups- the Sinhalese and the Tamil. At the time of Independence from the British, the majority of people in Sri Lanka were the Sinhalese and mostly Buddhist. However the majority of the official positions and businesses were dominated and held by the Tamil minority. Independence brought with it simmering tensions between the two groups. The Sinhalese were loathe to be under the Tamil people and soon started persecuting them as the political power was vested in them. State sponsored violence and oppression for years led to a youth dominated movement, the LTTE. Although the LTTE was not overtly violent during its initial years, continued oppression by the state and the desire to form a separate state for themselves soon led to them using violent tactics against the government. Although the LTTE would eventually rule over an autonomous region in north-eastern Sri Lanka and have a bureaucracy and military of its own, it was more known for its guerilla warfare and suicide attacks on political opponents. The LTTE did not involve itself in making huge attacks and killing many civilians. Rather it targeted important politicians in the country and outside. Apart from killing a president, Ranasinghe Premadasa in the country and the prime ministerial candidate of India. Rajiv Gandhi, it also targeted military officials, installations and government property in Sri Lanka.
The initial success of the group was due to the support that it got from the Tamil people as well as the covert support lent to it by India. However with the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, the support from india dried up and with the assassination of moderate tamil leaders and the formation of other groups, the group slowly lost its power. With the final war in 2009, the LTTE was vanquished. By the end of the civil war between the Sri lankan government and the LTTE, millions were dead, thousands were homeless and billions of dollars lost in property. The economy suffered and the country was listed as unsafe for tourists. The interesting phenomenon about LTTE is that it was not listed as a terrorist group by many countries until the 9/11 attacks although it had carried out suicide attacks and killed many people. Also there was a huge number of people who saw it as a freedom movement and a nationalist group and not a terrorist group. Under Chomsky’s definition then, LTTE would be a group that used coercive means to achieve its aims-political in this case. Since there still remains a confusion about the nature of the group- terrorist vs a legitimate government, Chomsky’s definition comes handy. The group was an outcome of various political factors, actors and influences and there were one too many foreign countries against it or rooting for it. Since the Sri Lankan government has also been widely condemned for the human rights violations and the killing of innocents, in this case it is very difficult to name one actor as the terrorist. The group was created to form a separate state for the tamil population and was put down violently by the state. A common myth about the group was that it was solely a terrorist organization. However the group led an autonomous government in the northeastern region of Sri Lanka and engaged in all the functions of the state. The myth was largely created to bring an end to the group and turn world opinion against it in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks.
Al Qaeda-Religious terrorist group
The Al-Qaeda is a terrorist group with avowed religious leanings. Although it had carried out bombings of the US embassies in Sudan and targeted US interests in other places, it came into prominence and worldwide notoriety after it carried out the attacks on US soil on Sept 11, 2001. The leader of Al-Qaeda was Osama Bin Laden, the son of a rich Saudi industrialist and who was turned against the US government during the first Gulf war. The irony about the Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden is the fact that he was trained by the American forces during the Afghanistan war and Al-Qaeda had it base in it. America fought a proxy war against the soviet forces in Afghanistan and trained as well as supplied arms to Bin Laden and his supporters. Allies turned enemies when Bin Laden considered it an affront to his religion and Mohammed when American forces entered the holy cities in Saudi Arabia. Since then Osama has waged war against what he considers infidels. Apart from terrorist attacks in America, Al-Qaeda has been responsible for many other attacks in different parts of the world. Two major wars at the end of the last century were as a result of these terrorist attacks of 9/11- the Iraq war and the war on Afghanistan. Instead of being annihilated, the group only became stronger with more followers and supporters. There also were a lot of off-shoots from the group, them being more dangerous than the Al-Qaeda. They are a religious terrorist group as their main aim is to destroy the infidels and their way of life. Having said that, it must also be noted that the group has been accused of killing many innocent civilians, millions among them muslims. The modus-operandi of Al-Qaeda is to make every attack count. Thus their attacks are not only brutal but aimed at inflicting the maximum damage to the enemy. Suicide attacks and bombings are a common feature of their attacks against both state and non-state actors. Al-Qaeda is a non-state actor without a doubt as it acts across boundaries and can attack any country it considers its enemy. Whatever the means and its actions, its final aim is to create a nation of believers who rigidly follow Islam. Chomsky’s hypothesis and definition can be applied here as Al-Qaeda uses coercive force to fulfill its aim. Religion was the cornerstone of its formation and it continues to be the driving factor behind it even though Osama has been killed. Al-Qaeda was the result of political tensions and geopolitical reasons that had very little to do with the country of its origin.
A prevailing myth about the group is that its cause is always supportive of Islam. However in reality, the group is against anyone who does not follow its version of Islam. Hence many secular Islamic states are considered its enemies. Also it does not care much about civilian losses it it can get its name splashed across the papers.
Baader-Meinhof- Ideologist terrorist group
The Baader-Meinhof or the Red Army Faction was a marxist militant group that was active in West germany during the seventies. It was labelled by the German government as a terrorist groups after it carried out kidnappings, assassinations, shootings and bomb attacks in the country. The group's founding members were Andreas Baader, Gudrun Ensslin, Horst Mahler, and Ulrike Meinhof ( Wagner, 1998). The group was formed by young people who were disillusioned with the German government and the de-nazification process that was carried out after the war. Although the Nazi’s weretrid for their war crimes and no longer in power, the group believed that they still held important positions in the government. In fact they believed that the power still partially lay in their hands. The group was largely influenced by the Marxist ideals of equality and communism and the emerging state was an antithesis to their beliefs.
The communist party was also outlawed in the country since the late fifties and since their formation, the group was looked upon as being anti-establishment and anti-state. Also they were not in agreement with the capitalistic growth of the nation as it did not mean equal growth of all the citizens. The group’s main agenda was an ideological warfare against the state and in order to fund what it called the anti-imperialist struggle, the members involved in bank robberies, kidnappings for ransom and the killing of many people working for the government. Although the group was active for almost two decades it was never really a serious threat to the country owing to its small number of supporters. The decline of communism and the arrests of its members and the death of meinhof all contributed to its decline. Just as disillusionment led to the creation of the group, disillusionment was also the reason for ts dismantling. The new leaders who came after the original leaders were arrested were more interested in the release of their friends than in propagating their ideology. The dissolution of Soviet Union and the popularity of neo-liberalism across the world also contributed to the dismantling of the group. Similar to the many other terrorist groups, their formation too was influenced to an extent by outside players. They hated capitalism, was in support of communist states like Soviet Union and China and when the ideology in these countries slowly got corrupted and communism lost out to capitalism, the group had nothing much left in them to fight for. Lack of popular support and sympathetic nations also contributed to their decline and eventual dissolution.
Terrorism is a huge menace to the peace of the world and causes untold damages in life and property every single day. Terrorist attacks and terrorist groups should not seen as a separate entity but as a result of the political tension and unrest that had been a feature of countries and world politics for centuries. The underlying reasons for the formation of a terrorist group are often complex and involves various reasons such as religion, economics, politics and ethnic conflicts. Owing to the complex nature of the phenomenon and differing opinion among people as to who might be labelled a terrorist, it is difficult to theorize on the topic. However for the purposes of this study, Chomsky’s definition of terrorism has been taken as the hypothesis and different terrorist groups have been categorized based on their aims. What is common about these groups is their use of coercive force and killings. Also they have a concrete aim in mind and that enables them to be categorized into specific groups. Chomsky’s hypothesis or theory about terrorism is not too specific nor too vague and is thus useful in categorising terrorist groups. The categorization is not too specific as the actors are not rigidly labelled as state or non-state but as actors that cause terror among populations.
References
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. 9-11. New York: Seven Stories Press
Enders, Walter and Todd Sandler. 2002. "Patterns of Transnational Terrorism, 1970–1999: Alternative Time Series Estimates." International Studies Quarterly 46:145-165
Ruby, Charles L. 2002. "The Definition of Terrorism." Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 2:9-14.
Tilly, Charles. 1990. Coercion, capital, and European states AD 990-1992. Malden: Blackwell.
Wagner. C.Rolf. 1998. “ We Are Not Political Idiots!: Thoughts On The End Of The Red Army Faction.” Jungle World. Article 41910. Retrieved from: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/61/206.html.
