Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Terrorism and the Israeli conflict
Syrian civil war analysis
Terrorist motivation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Terrorism and the Israeli conflict
What are the various reasons for the use of terrorist tactics? Freedom is obviously a very strong motivation for using all means at their disposal for that freedom. A fight to recover what has been taken from them is often another great incentive for using unorthodox means if the group is not a traditional government. But what of those involved in a struggle simply to have access to power? In Afghanistan there are a large number of foreign fighters from many countries, operating under the guise of Al Qaeda. They are here to take control and impose its own style of oppression in the country. However, there are foreign fighters here from the international military side may have the same goal. Who is the terrorist? The need for absolute integrity …show more content…
If a government is imposed through the use of terrorism, which can be credible? And once installed as a recognized government, how do they approach terrorism? They should not forget where they came from. There are many cases where rebel fighters, terrorists, freedom fighters have become viable governments. One of the problems with identifying whether terrorist groups have "won" is that the definition of terrorism is so unclear. In some American revolutionaries definitions they could have been considered terrorists. In the American Revolution guerrilla tactics they were used against British forces, including snipers, sabotage and others. However in most traditional definitions they are not terrorists but freedom fighters or revolutionaries. As for other countries, is more a clear picture of the terrorists have won. Yassir Arafat of being a terrorist sought to become a respected or at least credible political player, Palestine came to have with the terrorist group Hamas won parliamentary elections in January 2006. He has won the terrorists? No. However, they have gained respectability. Ironically, Israel itself is most likely the result of terrorist organizations fighting for a piece of Palestine. Using terrorism, including bombings and assassinations, terrorist Jewish organizations Irgun and Stern Gang, pressed the British to relinquish its control over the territory. As for the Arabs in the territory, who were killed? David Ben …show more content…
It was a time when a number of colonies that fought on behalf of their colonizers, expects would be given the right to autonomy. Algeria and Cyprus were two of these nations that could become independent after bloody wars, terrorism. In Cyprus, General George Grivas developed his organization EOKA in small cells of about ten people each of the cities. His strategy was to tie the security forces in cities, while their other "troops" were able to take control of the rest of the country. His actions finally got the Cyprus issue has been on the international scene, because until then was considered an internal matter. Over time, Archbishop Makarios, leader of the political wing of EOKA, became president of Cyprus (Hoffman, 2006). The conflict against French rule in Algeria by the National Liberation Front (FLN) became a standard that looked at other freedom fighters as Yassir Arafat and Nelson Mandela. Once the FLN in Algiers focused its strategy, seeking to get the problems of Algeria on the international stage. After the death at the guillotine of two of its fighters, their leader Abane, unleashed a wave of terror against the city with the aim of places frequented by the French. Unfortunately for the French army, his brutal response only served to further alienate the population turned to support the FLN further. Although this campaign is not
In conclusion, despite being portrayed as the weaker side of the war, Algeria came out on top and got what it wanted from France. The film and Record article both present the idea of asymmetric war as a topic of significance. What the United States can learn about insurgency and counterinsurgency operations is to construct a military that is trained and skilled in things such as the language and culture of the country so that it has a logistical advantage over the enemy as well as to put less focus on the technological aspect. More time should be devoted into building the will to fight in our soldiers so that we don’t lose to the weak. Overall looking into the strategies of why the weak win as well as adapting these strategies to our military will help us be more successful in our wars.
In 1962 France met with the FLN and they all agreed that Algeria should decide their own rights. Although, Algeria’s formal independence day is recognized as 5 July 1962. When the French left Algeria did not have a leader, so they appointed Ahmed Ben Bella who became the republic's first president in 1963. Algerian government then took over businesses, farms, and banks. Ahmed Ben Bella then personally controlled the army and the government. Bella was overthrown shortly after he aligned Algeria with the soviet union. They replaced him with Houard Bournediene who focused on reforming Algeria by hiring skilled workers and restarting the economy (golbalEDGE), (The World
The beginning of colonization also marks the beginning of decolonization. From the day the colonists start exploiting the colonized people and belittling the colonized people for the colonists' self-aggrandizement, the colonized ones have been prepared to use violence at any moment to end the colonists' exploitation (Fanon, 3).Decolonization is violent, there is a necessity for violence. This is a point that is repeated again and again throughout The Battle of Algiers and The Wretched of the Earth. Here, the focus will be on The Battle of Algiers to discuss the violence of
For several months, France was at peace. The insurrection began on 1 November 1954. The insurrection precipitated the fall of the Fourth Republic. Charles de Gaulle, hero of the Second World War, became President of France in 1958, and was intent on securing a political solution to the insurrection, rather than one based on force. His efforts were largely successful in avoiding a civil war in France, and ending the insurgency - although it took four years to do so. It has been estimated that more than a million Algerians died in the insurrection.2
Algeria started as independent groups of natives under Ottoman control located in North Africa, East of Morocco. The people lived for years operating well under their own rules, culture, and pirating ways. The French were attracted by the Algerians' control of the Mediterranean Sea and the trading opportunities it had. Expanding on their empire, the French wanted to gain this influential power and ease of trading in the Mediterranean. After their successful conquest, France considered their newly obtained colony as an extension of their own country, and without consideration of the natives, they proceeded to change the daily lives of native Algerians forever. Through the process of colonization, the French drastically influenced the social, political and economic structures of Algeria by assimilating the native population.
aims. This is because in most cases, it is the only way they can be
In the second half of the twentieth century, started a process of decolonization, first in Asia and then in Africa. In 1949, India was one of the first country to gain its independence, followed by Burma, Malaysia, and Ceylon. In Africa the decolonization started a few years later, first in Libya and Egypt, and in the rest of the continent afterwards. The main colonists were the Great Britain and France. The history has shown that Great Britain succeeded to decolonize generally in peace while France had much more problems to give up its colonies, which led to numerous conflicts opposing the colonists and the colonized. It has been the case especially in Algeria where a murderous war lasted almost eight years. The philosopher Frantz Fanon has studied the outbreak of this conflict as he was working in Algeria and he spent some time working on the question of colonialism, drawing the conclusion that violence was the only way to get rid of colonists. This essay will analyse who was Fanon and why he came to such a conclusion along with the reasons why it could be said that he is right ,and finally, the arguments against his statement. Finally, it will aim to prove that even though Fanon had valid points, diplomacy could have been for efficient and less tragic rather than his support to violence.
Many analysts, researchers, and professors have tried to define the purpose of terrorism. Some believe that can only be achieved when we know how the mind of a terrorist works. The Encyclopedia Britannica describes terrorism as, “The systematic use of violence or threat of violence by organized groups to achieve specific goals. Terrorist activities may be directed against individuals, organizations or governments. Terrorism is employed by radical groups to obtain concessions from established governments, such as a change in policies unfavorable to them or the release of imprisoned members of their organizations…” (Encyclopedia Britannica. “Terrorism” 1987 T-169)
The Palestinians turned to terrorism because of the volatile surroundings palestine after first Intifada and because of how other governments had failed. Terrorism is so successful because people have the threat of bombings and attacks if they are not handled carefully and respectfully.
Terror management theory (TMT) asserts that human beings have natural tendency for self-preservation if there is threat to one’s well–being (Greenberg, Solomon, & Pyszczynski, 1997). It notes that we are the cultural animals that pose self-awareness on the concept of past and future, as well as the understanding that one day we will die. We concern about our life and death but aware that it is unexpected by everything. The worse matter is that we become aware of our vulnerability and helplessness when facing death-related thoughts and ultimate demise (Pyszczynski & Greenberg, 1992). The inevitable death awareness or mortality salience provides a ground for experiencing the existential terror, which is the overwhelming concern of people’s mortality and existence. In order to avoid the continued existence of threats, people need faith in a relatively affirmative and plausive cultural worldview and meaning of life (Greenberg, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1995). Cultural worldview is a perceptual construction in the society which explaining the origins of life and the existence of afterlife. We have to invest a set of cultural worldviews by ourselves that are able to provide meaning, stability and order to our lives and to offer the promise of death transcendence (Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 2004). On the other hand, we hold a belief that one is living up to the standards of value prescribed by that worldview and social norm shared by a group of people. This belief is derived by self-esteem of individual. We maintain the perception and confident that we are fulfilling the cultural prescriptions for value in the society and are thus eligible for some form of personal immortality (Landau & Greenberg, 2006). We Together with the assump...
The concept of state terrorism is highly debated. The main opposition to state-terrorism declares that states have legitimate monopoly over violence, therefore, state-violence cannot be considered terrorism (Lacquer). Furthermore, conceptualizing particular properties of state-terrorism has furthered complicated the debate. For instance, should state-terrorism constitute external conflict or internal conflict; also is the normative strength of non-state violence as compelling as
The word terror dates back to the French Revolution. “A terrorist was, in its original meaning, a Jacobin who ruled France during la Terruer” (Moeller 20). Terrorism has clearly become much broader in the years since its origination. Since the concept was first birthed in France it has been used for separatist, nationalistic, political and religious ends, etc. In the book “Packaging Terrorism”, author Susan Moeller states that, “the goal of terrorism is to send a message, not to defeat the enemy”.
The word terrorism was first used during the French Revolution from the reign of terror inflicted by the French from 1784-1804 ("International Affairs"). It was used to describe the violent acts perpetrated on the French that inflicted terror on the various peoples and instilled fear within them. However, at the time it had a more positive connotation than the term that instills fear today. During the French Revolution this was because it referred to state-sponsored terrorism in order to show the need of state instead of anarchy, sometimes promoted by other groups (Hoffman 2). Therefore, even though terrorism has taken a new nature, terrorism can refer to official governments or guerrilla groups operating outside national governments ("International Affairs"). In order to encompass terrorism’s various sectors and explain it to the public, in both positive and negative aspects, many analysts have tried to put it into a few words. Terrorism is a method used by tightly of loosely organized groups operation within states or international territories that are systematic in using deliberate acts of violence or threats in order to instill...
Political violence is the leading cause of wars today. Personal agendas have led to many of the political objectives that cause violence today this has caused many problems throughout the world and will continue to do so until a solution to this issue is found. Political objectives have been advanced involuntarily dependent upon the kind of government a nation exercises. For instance, in a democratic nation political groups must worry about convincing the majority in order to advance ethically. Those who try to influence the majority through acts of violence are considered today as “terror” organizations. Though perhaps if it were not because of the recent 9/11 terror attacks that maybe such warrants would not be seen as terror attacks, but instead the result of partisan advancement. Acts of terrorism have been around throughout the evolution of mankind. Terror attacks have even been traced back as far as the religious roots of an ancient middle east (Ross, Will Terrorism End?, 2006). However as man evolved, so did terrorism. Today’s extremism involves some of the main characteristics of ancient terrorism, but much more developed. Political advancement is no longer the root cause of terrorism acts. Instead influxes of “holy” wars have been appended the prior definition of terrorism. Mistakably modern terrorism has been confused for Political violence with political objectives, but research will establish that the nature of terrorism is fundamentally different from other forms of political violence.
Terrorist organizations have been committing atrocities against innocent civilians throughout the world for hundreds of years. Terrorism has evolved in many different forms and from various motivations such as religious protest movements, political revolts, and social uprisings. Regardless of the motives for terror, the problem is the financing of terrorism and terrorist organizations themselves. Recent global terrorist attacks using high technology and extensive networks have shown that money is essential to provide the means behind all terrorist activities. Individual terrorists plan terrorist operations and require resources to live, prepare, and implement their plans. The use of money laundering and financial support schemes are the root of the cause. If money laundering were curtailed or even eliminated, and financial supporters of terrorism were identified terrorism would decrease dramatically. To achieve these goals would take monumental efforts. The United States, United Nations and all sovereign nations would need to take cooperative action that has never been accomplished. Terrorism, its' history, concepts, reasoning, methods, and financial roots are object of this research.