Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Terrorism and its impact
Essay on defining terrorism
Global perspective of terrorism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction
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.
Challenges in Defining Terrorism
Finding a proper, well-accepted definition of what constitutes terror is extremely difficult. There are many challenges that confront scholars, experts, and everyday people when it comes to defining terrorism and terrorists. Differing backgrounds and cultures of those defining terror in addition to differing histories are just one of the many challenges facing those that wish to define terror. Furthermore, labeling a group or an individual as a terrorist could be considered offensive, especially in today’s politically correct environment, potentially damaging those in the political arena. However, on the flip side, labeling someone as a terrorist can also serve a political purpose as in the case of being propaganda towards a war effort, or to help define an enemy. Nevertheless, the main problem with not being able to have a widely accepted definition of terrorism is that “It is impossible to formulate or enforce international agreements against terrorism” (Ganor, 300).
The problem with the definitions that are out there is that they are so numerous and vary so widely, it’s difficult to determine which is more accurate. Each state, nation and government has their own definition. Acc...
... middle of paper ...
...s been offered by James Rinehart who feels that the “Definition must focus on the acts of terrorists, not simply labeling the actors and must have a “Political agenda: a specific set of grievances of demands that are of utmost importance to the actors willing to use terror” (14).
Finally, Ganz suggests that we limit the definition to include civilian noncombatants only, in accordance with the Geneva conventions. His definition is “Terrorism is the international use of, or threat to use, violence against civilians or against civilian targets in order to attain political aims” (294).
Conclusion
There will always be confusion with defining terror as long as there remains biases and stereotypes. As long we can step outside of the stereotypes and focus on real research, only then can we start to understand the full complexities of terror and what it involves.
The scholarly authority of the authors make this journal an interesting read on this topic. The authors are able to present the issues with an ease and understanding that every undergraduate student or layman will easily grasp. Considering that this is a legal topic with many laws reviews to the authors did a good job. By bringing in the legal framework of more than 2000 laws and enactments that have been established by the state and federal governments of the US, the authors make it
Categorical terrorism, according to Jeff Goodwin, is defined as “the strategic use of violence and threats of violence, usually intended to influence several audiences, by oppositional political groups against civilian or noncombatants who belong to a specific entity, religious or national group, social class or some other collectivity, without regard to their individual identities or roles.” More so, in terms of definition, according to a study done by Jeffrey Record in 2003, there was a count of over 109 definitions of terrorism, covering 22 different categorical elements. During the 70s and 80s, the United Nations struggled to define the term, finally coming up with the following definition: “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”
When an agency can choose between two or more alternatives that mean the agency has discretion. Arbitrariness can be cause by too much discretion; therefore it is best it is best if it is not too broad. On the other hand inflexible public administration can lead to too little discretion and this is just as bad. As it stands now the agencies are given too much discretion and are not being monitored enough. The framers protected civil rights through the federal constitution, stated constitutions and statutory law because they were concerned about the excessive and unchecked discretion which eventually led to arbitrary decision making. Americans show a cautious distrust if not anxiety of discretion. These rights act as restrictions on the discretion of lawmakers and law enforcers.
In the article “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?”, Lionel K. McPherson criticizes the dominant view that terrorism is absolutely and unconditionally wrong. He argues terrorism is not distinctively wrong compared to conventional war. However, I claim that terrorism is necessarily wrong.
outright defiance of the laws and law makers of the United States government in both
American political culture emphasizes the values of liberty, equality, and democracy. Most of America’s debating is not over whether these issues are important, but how to best go about achieving these ideas. American’s define liberty as freedom, but America believes that liberty should be contained on some levels so they can create a stable society. The definition of freedom is that we can do whatever we want, as long as we do not affect another person’s freedom. American’s want to be able to do what they want, while not affecting someone else. So some rules are set to protect people and create a stable society.
Over the past century, terrorism has advanced from random killings to enormous plans for terrorist groups. To understand terrorism, you must first define it. Terrorism as we all know it is hard to define and understand, and has many different definitions as it is used widely. The word "terrorism" stems from the word "terror", which means to instill fear in. People become terrorists when they take the actions towards instilling fear and terror upon people to prove a certain point or agenda.
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
The concept of terrorism is exceedingly difficult to define. Author Gerald Seymour first said in his book Harry’s Game that, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Each individual may view terrorism in a different light. Because of this, there is currently no universal definition of terrorism. However in recent years, it has become increasingly more important to form a definition of terrorism, especially while working in the media.
Nidal Hasan’s killing of 13 individuals as well as injuring over 30 more was egregious act, leaving many in both the military as well as civilian world in shock. Given Hasan’s background, one may immediately define his actions as terrorism. Proponents of this thinking would argue, if that is the case then every Muslim who commits a crime must be labeled a terrorist. While this is certainly not the case, the key differentiating factor lies in the motivation behind the individual. Hasan’s violent act was terrorism because he had a political and ideological reasoning as a driving factor rather than simply anger or insecurity.
Terrorism definitions are difficult to solidify mainly because of the overwhelming differences in perspectives. After review of 18 U.S. Code § 2331 certain dialect and shared commonalities have led to my own definition of terrorism which I define as; any activity that involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life that is a violation of criminal laws enacted by a sovereign region, for the purpose of policy change or gains through implementation of fear, directed towards non-participating entities. Tony Duheaume a critic and author which has spent over forty years following political and civil events in the Middle East, depicts events from his article, “Understanding Hezbollah’s history as a ‘proxy of Iran’” from the Al Arabiya English website concerning acts of terrorism which Hezbollah has claimed responsibility
Introduction The concept of “new terrorism” was first introduced in the academic world during the 1990’s. It wasn’t until after the devastating attacks of 9/11, however, that the idea of a “new” and fundamentally different kind of terrorist threat began to get more traction and started to have an influence on policy. After the unparalleled horrors of 9/11, and the views they inescapably provoked, the “new terrorism” idea quickly became part of predominant popular ideas and imagery. Ever since, the issue of “old” v. “new” terrorism has been the subject of very intense debate.
The compelling need for the international community to come up with a comprehensive definition of terrorism is so that all nations have the same understanding of what is and what is not terrorism. By having an internationally agreed upon definition by all nations, it will make it easier for the country that experiences acts of terrorism to prosecute the perpetrators of the terrorist acts. In doing this ‘people’ who are trying to achieves international notoriety by committing ‘illegal’ acts which they see as terrorist acts to gain recognition in the international community, would be less likely to commit these illegal acts. It would also not gain them the worldwide recognition they seek.
Terrorism is one of the most extensively discussed issues of our time and at the same time it is also one of the least understood. The term itself “terrorism” means many different things to different people, cultures, and races. As a result, trying to define or classify terrorism with one universal definition is nearly impossible. The definition of terrorism used in this research is a reflection of much of the Western and American way of defining it. The definition of terrorism is,
In this world there are many different topics of controversy. With every controversial topic comes different views and arguments explaining why people believe what they do. There are problems that can be just within one country or throughout the entire world. Terrorism affects everyone in the world, specifically us as Americans, which is why it is one of the biggest controversial topics. Of course with a topic as big as terrorism, there are emic and etic perspectives involved. With past history, there are specific countries and religions that we think of when we hear the word terrorism, specifically Afghanistan, located in the Middle East and the Muslim religion in that general area. Being part of the American