Literature Terrorism and Counterterrorism
Week 1:
Bakker, Edwin. Terrorism and Counterterrorism Studies: Comparing Theory and
Practice, (Leiden University Press: 2015), Chapters 1 and 2.
1. Definition and nature of terrorism
Key points:
- Terrorism has a worldwide impact
- Although terrorism is a worldwide phenomenon, there are important regional
differences
- In many parts of the world is a low strategic threat. Oftentimes it is nonetheless
perceived as the primary threat to security
1.2 Terrorism is a highly complex, highly subjective and politically sensitive topic. Most
lethal and most “spectacular” attacks received not only national attention, but in many cases
made headlines across the world.
• London bombings 2005
• Terrorist organization Boko Haram in Nigeria
• Islamic State
The Global Terrorism Database (GTD) defined terrorism as: international acts of violence by
a non-state actor, and meeting two of the following criteria:
1) The violent act was aimed at attaining a political, economic, religious, or social goal;
2) The violent act included evidence of an intention to coerce, intimidate, or convoy
some other message to a larger audience (or audiences) other than the immediate
victims; and
3) The violent act was outside the precepts of International Humanitarian Law.
They concluded that there were 48,990 acts of terrorism.
Terrorism is a strategic threat – seriously challenging the existing political and social order –
in only a limited number of countries. Countries with extremely high number over the last
few years: Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, the Philippines, Thailand, Nigeria, Yemen,
Syria, Somalia & Egypt. The figures differ depending on the definition of terrorism and the
statistical approach selected. Along with those on Syria and Afghanistan, terrorist attacks
in Nigeria are among the bloodiest (+Pakistan). Parts of the world with much lower
numbers of fatalities and injured people include most Western countries.
The data of GTD give a good overview of the magnitude of the physical threat of terrorism,
but there are other ways to measure the seriousness of terrorism. By combining the data of
the GTD – the amount of fatalities and injuries – with the amount of property damage, the
Global Terrorism Index provides a broader picture of the consequences of terrorism. It
shows a number of hotspots of terrorism.
• Most parts of Southeast Asia, Middle East, the Russian Federation, Northern Africa
and the horn of Africa.
,They are most confronted by terrorist attacks and their consequences but also the
counterterrorism measures, including violence of the state which adds to terrorism-related
insecurity. Yet in the more fortunate parts like the US and Europe, terrorism is rightly or
wrongly often perceived as the primary threat to security.
1.3 A primary threat to security?
Key points:
- Terrorism is a worldwide phenomenon, but there are regional differences in terms of
the nature of both terrorism itself and counterterrorism strategies
- In most part of the world terrorism is not a daily threat, let alone a primary threat to
security
- Rightly or wrongly. Terrorism is considered one of the most important threats to
peace and security of our era
Terrorism is considered one of the most important and pressing security issues that requires
full attention of politicians and policy makers. In many countries, the public is also asked to
play a role – be vigilant, alert in the fight against terrorism. Also security measures at airports
increased significantly after the events on 9/11. Airline passenger data are collected, stored
and exchanged by the US, EU Member States and third countries.
• Many of these measures have received criticism linked to fundamental questions
about their legitimacy and proportionality (undermining civil liberties and
fundamental human rights).
Major terrorist attacks can thus lead to more and more far reaching counterterrorism
legislation. When looking at the cases of counterterrorism measures (PATRIOT act), we see a
trade-off between security and human rights. In order to try to achieve a certain level of
security, state actors are increasingly willing to compromise on fundamental rights.
While government’s worldwide stress the importance and necessity of the measures that are
implemented, NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have
expressed their concern about these policies in the context of counterterrorism. These groups
have placed priority on the question of protecting human rights in dealing with terrorism.
Resolution 1373 adapted by UNSC – obliges all UN member States to criminalize a number of
terrorism-related activities, such as providing financial support for terrorists or facilitating
terrorist actions.
United Nationals Counter-Terrorism Committee was established to monitor progress and
offer technical assistance with regard to resolution 1373 that aimed to widen the capacity of
member States to counter terrorist activities.
Some of the military interventions and operations like in Afghanistan (2001-), received a lot
of criticism from those that regard these measures to be disproportionate, leading to not
less but more terrorism, or lacking a legal mandate.
,1.4 The use of the term terrorism
Key points:
- The use of the word terrorism has changed throughout the course of history
- In history we have seen events that did not label as terrorism at the time but we would
now
- Yet the opposite has also happened: events and individuals we used to refer to as
terrorism and terrorist are now perceived differently
- Media are important actors with regard to the framing of specific events and actors
- Some, but definitely not all, contemporary media outlets have become more aware of
the subjectivity and impact of the use of the term “terrorism”
The words we use to describe attacks and define terrorism differ around the world depending
on political views, languages, cultures, etc.
By using emotional and denigrating labels, media are able to influence the perception of their
audiences and (partially) shape public opinion. Some but not all media outlets are becoming
more aware of the sensitivity of using the terms “terrorism” and “terrorist”, and some try to
avoid using them altogether.
While victims of an attack or hostage taking are likely to perceive this as an act of terrorism,
perpetrators often do consider their actions as justifiable within their own system of beliefs
and values, or as a part of (defensive) struggle against aggression or oppression (p. 30).
,1.5 Why is there no generally accepted definition?
Key points:
- Among legal and academic scholars there is disagreement with regard to a definition
that covers all aspects of terrorism.
- Terrorism is a contested concept: “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom
fighter”.
- It is difficult to come to a generally accepted definition because of (de-)legitimization
and criminalization of the phenomenon.
- Another complication factor is that there are many types of terrorism and hat it comes
in different forms and manifestations.
- Finally, the nature of terrorism has changed through the course of history which also
places limits on considering terrorism a unitary phenomenon.
Alex Schmid – why there is no generally accepted definition
1) Terrorism is a ‘contested concept’ and political, legal, social science and
popular notions of it are often diverging – it has a strong emotional and moral
undertone, which makes it difficult to apply to specific events or groups – a matter of
perspective → “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”
For example:
On the top row, from left to right, you see the face of Yasser Arafat, the leader or the former
leader of the PLO, the Palestinian Liberation Organization. Who has been considered a
terrorist by some, but who also holds a Nobel Peace prize. And in the middle, you see the face
of Abdullah Ocalan the leader of the Kurdish Workers Party, the PKK, from Turkey, who's
regarded an arch enemy by the Turkish authorities. He's in jail, but he's also considered a
hero by many people with a Kurdish background. A hero, a freedom fighter. And then, on the
right-hand side, you see the face of, Osama Bin Laden, the former leader of Al Qaeda.
2) The definition question is linked to (de-)legitimization and
criminalization
The definition question is linked to (de-)legitimization and criminalization of the individual
or group so labeled. Once an organization is listed on national or international lists, it is
considered to be a criminal organization. Hezbollah, military wing has been put on the EU
list of terrorist organizations.
UN, the US and EU has this kind of list. It has a wide range of groups. Repeatedly there's
pressure upon governments and international organizations. To put a certain group on a list
,or to delist another. Well the latter is much less frequent than the lobby of all kinds of groups
and politicians to add a certain group on a certain list.
3) There are many types of ‘terrorism’, with different forms and
manifestations
Europol defines 5 types of different ideological strands of terrorism:
4) The term has undergone changes of meaning in the more than 200 years
of existence
The term terrorism has changed its semantic focus several times. It was originally used to
describe the reign of terror by the authorities after the French Revolution and the term
Terrorist was not used in anti-government sense before the end of the 19th century and the
early 20th century.
, 1.6 The need for a definition
Key points:
- Although it has proven to be difficult to reach consensus on a definition of terrorism,
one would be of immense value
- A definition would improve international cooperation, as States agree on who and
what to fight
- A clear-cut definition would also limit the abuse of legal instruments by States under
the pretense of imposing counterterrorism measures
- An academic consensus definition of terrorism could improve the quality of research,
especially in the field of comparative studies.
The need to reach a common definition is manifest in three different areas:
1) The dimension of international cooperation – terrorism has become transnational
issue - most individual states do not have the instruments to track and deal with terrorism
outside of their domestic territory.
We need a definition if we want to arrive at successful international cooperation in the fight
against terrorism. Terrorism is a cross border phenomenon, and that means that we have to
be able to share data and that means that we have to have some level of agreement.
2) The legal dimension – a lack of a precise definition of terrorism is an invitation to
abuse, for government agencies to use the term the way it suits them. E.g. labeling
demonstrations as terrorism by authoritarian regimes to silence the opposition.
Also, from a legal perspective there's another reason why we need some agreement on what is
terrorism and what not, and to have quite precise definitions of terrorism. And that is what
many human rights organizations call the risk of abuse. A lack of a definition, or proper one,
is what they call an invitation to abuse.
3) The academic dimension – to solve the problem of f.e. the discrepancy in the number
of casualties of terrorism reported by different sources, because of the different definitions →
difficult to compare findings & make statements.
There's also a need for a proper or generally accepted definition of terrorism among
researchers. We are very often confronted with different definitions and try to make sense or
give a general picture about developments with regard to terrorism, trends in terrorism.
