By Divine Mugunga, Terror as a Tactic

Divine Mugunga

Global Terrorism

Prof. Mark Shirk

Feb 5, 2017

Terror As a Tactic 

            A vast majority of Americans have a distinct stereotype in mind of what a terrorist is. This description often entails someone of Arab decent. Of course the stereotype did not come out of thin air, it derived from the series of “terrorist” attacks that took place on September 11, 2001 by an Islamic group known as Al-Qaeda. Many Americans have been lead to believe that the only threat they face, when it comes to terrorism and terrorist, involves an individual wearing a hijab or a turban. Although this stereotype has a foundation, it is misleading. I believe that terror is merely a strategy. In this essay, I argue that terror does not have defining features but is merely a tactic that can be used by anyone to achieve a political goal, a terrorist is an individual who uses terror as a tactic, and finally terrorism is the use of that tactic (Tilly 2004 11-12). 

After 9/11 the term terrorism has gained severity in the United States and other European countries but mostly when associated with religious extremist such as ISIS.  These past few years Isis made the headlines multiple times due to the attacks in Paris and also in Brussels. Every news outlet was covering the events taking place with the word terrorist attack across the bottom of the screen. The media plays a significant role in informing the public, therefore when they only portray Islamic extremist groups committing terrorist act, they imply that only Muslims are terrorist.  With the whole world fixated on groups such as Isis, there is little to no media coverage on homegrown terrorism, terrorist attacks committed by citizens against their own people/country.  It’s not to say that there isn’t homegrown terrorism taking place from time to time, but we would rather label outsiders as terrorist and evildoers instead of our own citizens. As I mentioned before terror is a strategy that can me used by anyone in any circumstance, and this individual would be considered a terrorist. This then led me to think about whether terrorism has to involve a violent act. Although the media says other wise, I believe that terrorism doesn’t always have to involve a violent act. If an individual or groups use threats to instill terror as their strategy to achieve a political goal then this would be considered terrorism and they would be terrorist.                                                                           

There are numerous controversial definitions of the term terrorism. For example, according to the state department, terrorism is politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience (class notes 1/19). This definition includes three criteria’s that differentiate terrorism from other forms of violent acts. The first component of this definition is that terrorism is politically motivated, which excludes any other form of violence that is further ones criminal or personal goal such as kidnapping for ransom, bank robbery and so on. Second, the violent act has to be targeting “noncombatants”, who are people that don’t serve in the military nor military member who are not active. Therefore terrorism would be attacking civilians or anyone who is not ready to defend against a politically violence (site).  Finally, the last key component states that subnational groups or clandestine agents commit terrorist attacks. Meaning that subnational groups and clandestine agents are the only ones capable of committing terrorist attacks. I agree that first two criteria can be forms of terrorism but I disagree with the last one. I believe that states are also capable of committing terrorist acts depending on whether they specifically used terror as a tactic. For example, the 17^th century pirates were considered terrorist because they used terror to stop trade between colonial states, but I also consider the actions taken by the colonial states to punish pirates as a terrorist act. When a pirate was caught they were hung in public and their corpse was displayed for all to see for duration of five years. This strategy was intended to instill fear in sailors so that they would not join the pirates, thus because the colonial states used this tactic, they were terrorist as well. This last criteria of terrorism according the state department is what the American government used to justify the measures (war on terror) that were taken to retaliate against Al-Qaeda.

We often interpret terrorism as evil and irrational, and that “terrorists are pathological evildoers, beyond our comprehension (stampnizky, 3). As we examine terrorist and terrorism, it is clear that this statement is incorrect. Going back to the example of the 17^th century pirates, Marcus Rediker points out that usually before sailors joined pirate ships after working on merchant and naval ships where they suffered cramped quarters, brutal discipline, low wages, diseases, disabling accidents, and sometimes premature death (Rediker 2004, 9). This list above shows that pirates had legitimate grievances that lead them to pursuit piracy. The choice to join pirate ships was a rational decision because there were benefits that were associated with being a pirate such as ready money and equal distribution of resources. Therefore this notion that terrorist are evil and irrational is misleading considering that before the 1970’s the acts we now understand as terrorism were generally considered the work of rational, sometimes even honorable, actors (Stampnizky).

There are numerous definitions of the term terrorism but it is hard to combine them all and make one universal definition since the methods, targets and motives differ from case to case. Although there is not a single definition that is accepted by all, Tilly’s definition of terror, terrorist and terrorism works because it recognizes that every terrorist attack is unique. His definition focuses on the fact that terrorism is the use of terror as a strategy to achieve a political goal and thus whoever uses this tactic is a terrorist.

Bibliography

·       Rediker, M. (2004). Villains of all nations: Atlantic pirates in the golden age.” Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

·       Ruby, C (2002). The Definition of Terrorism, analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 2002, pp. 9–14

·       Stampntzky, L. (n.d.). Discipline of terror: How Experts Invented Terrorism. 3. Retrieved from https://stonehill.ares.atlas-sys.com/NonCAS/ares.dll?SessionID=Y050215887C&Action=10&Type=10&Value=11492.

·       Tilly, C. (2004). Terror, Terrorism, Terrorists. Sociological Theory, 22(1), 5-13. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3648955