Exploring the Dynamics of Political Violence

The definition of political violence is ‘violence [that is] outside of state control that is political motivated’ (O’Neil 2011, par. 1). One way to study political violence is to interpret the way a group participates in collective action to solve political dilemmas, and why groups choose violence as a means to achieve their political goals. As P. Schmid Alex wrote, “conflict itself is not illegitimate but part of the human existence and can be a positive mechanism of social and political change” (Schmid 2004, 199). Another aspect of violence that is commonly debated and discussed within the political arena is terrorism. Specifically, how state actors and policy-makers distinguish terrorism from other forms of political violence.

Within this

As a result, propaganda campaigns has caused populations to regard terrorism as a substantial threat to national security, yet the likelihood of being targeted and harmed by terrorism is remote. According to an article published by The Economist, terrorism in the UK has only killed a handful of civilians, as the Madrid train attack in 2004 and the London tube and bus bombings had only caused ten deaths (The Economist 2015). Terrorism nonetheless is ranked as a high-security risk in the UK. As P. Alex Schmid wrote, “engaging in a well-orchestrated campaign, he might succeed in occupying our minds by creating a climate of fear, thereby manipulating target audiences” (Schmid 2004, 207). Ultimately, terrorism can be seen as a way to not only cause physical harm but more importantly cause psychological

However, it is challenging to distinguish between forms of political violence that are legal from forms that are illegal, like terrorism. Especially, when groups are claiming to achieve a common good for their communities thus a ‘terrorist without a cause is not a terrorist’ (Gupta 2008, 32). Targeting non-harming civilians, nonetheless, is illegitimate and hurts the legality of the movement. Nevertheless, it is imperative to understand the nature of the individual violent acts, the intention behind the acts, and the meaning of the act before labeling an act as terrorism (Bryan, Kelly and Templer 2011, 7). However, intentionally using noncombatants as a weapon to achieve political change is illegitimate under any