Divine Mugunga
Global Terrorism
Prof. Shirk
April 27, 2017
Defining
Terrorism: Part 2
At the beginning
of this class, I argued 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). Although I formed this opinion at
the beginning of the semester, I still stand by this definition. Throughout the
semester, we discussed 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 allows states to commit terrorist
acts but because they state actors they are not considered terrorist. In this
essay I will use two cases, John Brown and the US War On Terror, to demonstrate
that individuals or groups and state actors are both capable of committing
terrorism, therefore making them terrorists.
In today’s modern
context John brown’s tactics to free slaves would be considered terrorism. His
strategies involved carefully choosing a target, which included individuals
that upheld slavery even if they alone did not own slaves. He did not
necessarily target people as much as he did their property. Brown also chose
his target for shock value and symbolic impact. For example, he would attack
popular landmarks or very well known individuals, which not only instilled fear
in the target but also in the people that witnessed it. Because of his noble
cause, many people do not want to label him as a terrorist. For instance, a
decade after John Brown, the Ku Klux Klan, an extremist group who wanted to
restore white supremacy in the South, used the same methods as John Brown used
in Kansas. These methods include assaults, murder, robbery, arson, and other
forms of intimidation to bring about change. People were quick to label the KKK
as a terrorist group, not because their tactics instilled fear in people, but
because their cause was merely evil. This is because we have fostered the false
notion that terrorists are irrational and evil, which is not always true.
What seems to be a
noble cause in one man's eyes might be considered terrorism in another’s. After
9/11 the United States waged war on terror to protect its citizens from further
attacks, but instead, they committed terrorist acts as means of
counterterrorism. First, the National Security used complex analysis of
electronic surveillance as the primary method to locate targets for lethal
drone strikes. This proved to be a very unreliable method because the agency
used metadata analysis and cell phones to identify targets, and order strikes
based on the activity and location of the cell phone that belong to the
suspect. They were targeting phones and not actual people, which resulted in
many deaths of innocent or unidentified people. Second, they tortured suspected
people for information by a process of suffocation by water, which involves
strapping the individual to a tilted board, with legs above their head, placing
a cloth over their face, covering their nose and mouth. Water is then poured
continuously over the cloth to prevent breathing, simulate drowning and induce
panic. Third, they captured and transported suspects to other countries with
less rigorous regulations for the humane treatment of prisoners. Last, the presence of drones 24/7 alone
terrorized the people, which gave rise to
Psychological trauma among civilian
communities. They felt a constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at
any moment; they were powerless in protecting themselves. It is important to
mention that these suspect were not yet proven guilty, and there was a chance
they were innocent.
Throughout the
semester I came across many controversial cases that could have impacted my
definition of terrorism, but I still stand by my original definition of
terrorism, which is the use of terror as a tactic by an individual or a group
(including state or non-state actors) to gain a political goal. Terrorism is
then the use of terror, and a terrorist is an individual or group that uses
terror as a tactic. Most terrorists we studied in this course had numerous
reasons to justify their actions, some included of these include, religion, in
the case of John Brown and most of the Muslim groups. The United States, on the
other hand, used their definition of the term terrorism, which excludes state
actors from being considered terrorist (for their terroristic actions), to
justify the war on terror. Regardless of the intent, the noble cause, the
religious reasons, anyone who uses terror as a tactic to gain political
achievements is a terrorist.
References:
- Tilly, C. (2004). Terror, Terrorism, Terrorists. Sociological Theory, 22(1), 5-13. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3648955
- Stanford/NYU Report, Exec Summary, p.v-x.
- Scahill, Jeremy, and Glenn Greenwald. “The NSA’s Secret Role in the U.S. Assassination Program.” https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/02/10/the-nsas-secret-role/
No comments:
Post a Comment