Terrorism & Conflict Resolution

Terrorism & Conflict Resolution

Defining Terrorism

When it comes to defining terrorism, there are numerous definitions and it varies from one school of thought to the other. The term terrorism is defined by different schools of thoughts like academics, international governmental organizations, law enforcement agencies, governmental organizations, legislatures, military organization as well as intelligence agencies. Basically, the definition of terrorism is steered by the parochialism and perception that each school of thought has in relation to experiences experienced. Professor Martha Crenshaw has reviewed the definition of terrorism from the academic perspective and defines it as the systematic and deliberate practice of violence or threat to coerce higher degree of changes when it comes to the political behaviour. It also entails symbolism in terms of acts when it comes to violence which is directed towards communication of a political message. In the process of refraining from pitfalls particularly when it comes to pejorative connotations, the conception directs us towards the crucial working definition of the topic of concern. There are many important elements that terrorism constitutes and they are:

Terrorism is systematic and purposeful and it cannot be termed as being mindless and sociopath or random.

Terrorism has a symbolic use to it and there is threat of violence involved. When it comes to terrorism the prerequisite for it is to establish is a threat but when it comes to violence it is highly implicit. On the other hand, Terrorism can also be termed as highly symbolic but not instrumental.

Terrorism has a political behaviour and is defined as a political act which is not an ordinary crime and neither is it economic. Terrorism is basically intended or directed towards alteration of the behaviour as well as communication. The target audiences is said to be beyond the actual victims of the act.

There is an opposition to the theory of terrorism when it comes to the political behaviour considering the fact that it is broad and any act of threat or violence can fall within the physical boundaries of the definition provided. Nevertheless, it is still crucial as it serves as a starting point. There have been many researches that have been conducted that have identified the premise behind the ambiguity which exists with respect to the definitional problem of terrorism. Laquer states that considering that there are many kinds of terrorism therefore, one definition cannot fit the different forms of terrorism. The common ground amidst the different definitions of terrorism is the usage of violence by a specific group to cater to the vested interests of different entities such as political entities against the government of a country due to refusal of compliance with the needs and wants of a specific entity. It is not necessary that the entities are against the government sometimes it can also be against a political movement, ethnic group, religion, race or class. Considering the definition, any attempt that is made for the definition to be more specific can fail considering that there are many forms of terrorism

It is ...