essay on terrorism a great evil with outline

Essay on Terrorism with Outlines and Quotes

Essay on terrorism with outline and quotations for students of class 12, 2nd year, b.a and bsc.

Hereunder is the Essay on Terrorism with Outline and Quotations for the students of different classes. This Terrorism Essay with Quotes is very important with the point of view of Exams. Students can write the same essay under the title Terrorism Essay, Essay on Terrorism in Pakistan and Essay on How to Combat Terrorism . This essay is taken from local educational notes. You can visit English Essays Category for more English Essays.

Terrorism Essay with Quotes and Outline

Terrorism has become one of the most dangerous forms of crime.
The main causes of terrorism.
Islam is the most misunderstood religion in the west.
The Muslim concept of Islamic Fundamentalism.
Terrorism is different from political or liberation movement.
It must be fought against at all levels.

Terrorism has become one of the most dangerous forms of international crime. Terrorism means the threat or uses of force against civilians or armed forces for political or personal interest. Terrorists attack the civilian population to create terror or general harassment in society. They resort to bombing, killing, hijacking and large scale of destruction of property. A large number of innocent civilians have been killed in these savage attacks. A wave of terror and insecurity has traveled around the globe. People are wonder-struck and terrified at the cruel activities of terrorists in spite of great measures of security and defense.

Narrow-mindedness, fanaticism, fundamentalism, intolerance and religious extremism are considered the main cause of terrorism. Political and religious extremists do not tolerate their opponents and try to eliminate them. Some culprits do it for temptations of money. They are blind agents of other forces. It is also a fact that some intelligence agencies cause terrorism in enemy countries to destabilize them.

“Fanaticism obliterates the feelings of humanity. “

Recent of the hijacking of American passenger airlines and crashing them against the towers of the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington is probably the worst incident of terrorism in the world. Americal wants to punish some individuals and countries whom they blame for terrorist activities in various parts of the world. Usama bin Ladin and some Muslim countries are their specific targets.

Islam is the most misunderstood and misinterpreted religion in the West. A religion that stands for peace and justice has been misrepresented as a religion of war and fanaticism. The Muslims are depicted by the western media as extremists, fanatics, terrorists, backward and devoid of disciplines, On religious issues, They are emotional and intolerance. Fundamentalists believe that they are the right people and all the rest are heretics.

“It is better to understand a little

Than to misunderstand a lot.”

On the other hand, there is no organized Muslim media anywhere in the Muslim World that can refute this western disinformation and give an accurate picture of what is really going on. The west, in fact, is under the psychological pressure of the glorious past of the Muslims. Soon after the demise of communism in the Soviet Union, Islam was perceived as the ideological force to overcome the whole world.

The Muslim concept of Islamic fundamentalism is strict adherence to the age of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). It is an effort to implement the Islamic principles of the Golden age of the world of today for the revival of Islam. Jihad is a totally different act from terrorism. Jihad means the exertion, striving and endeavor for the cause of God. Its object is to bring an end to oppression and aggression against Islam. Its object is not to propagate Islam by use of the sword. It is not anti-wast bigotry and the revival of the ancient Islamic concept of expansionism.

The Quran has emphasized Jihad for a noble cause: “Fight against those who treat helpless men, women and children cruelly”. Jihad stands for noble deeds for elevating the moral character and for seeking refinement to attain nearness to Allah.

“Religion is nothing else but love to God and man.”

Terrorism is also different from political or liberation movement. The Kashmir liberation movement against India, the Palestine movement against Israel and Chechen liberation movement against Russia cannot be regarded as the terrorist movement. They are engaged in an armed struggle to get freedom from cruel rules. They are fighting against aggression.

“If we like them, they’re freedom fighters,

If we don’t like them, they’re terrorists” (Carl Sagan)

Terrorism is evil. It must be fought against at all levels. Governments and nations must join hands to crush this evil and its agents. At the same time, the United Nations must take steps to remove the germs of dissatisfaction, deprivation, and injustice from various religions of the world.

“Mankind must evolve for all human conflict a method

Which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation?

The foundation of such a method is love.” (Martin Luther King)

You may also like Essay on Democracy in Pakistan with Quotations .

More In English Essays

Essay Writing 101: The Basics That Every Writer Should Know

Students and Social Service Essay with Quotations

load Shedding Essay, Essay on Load Shedding in Pakistan, Energy Crisis Essay

Load Shedding in Pakistan Essay – 1200 Words

Terrorism Essay in English [100, 150, 200-250, 300 Words]

Terrorism Essay in English: Terrorism is the use of indiscriminate violence for political ends. In this article, you are going to learn how to write an essay on Terrorism. Here we’ve provided 4 short and long essays (100, 150, 200-250, and 300 words). These essays will be helpful for the students from class 1 to class 12. So, let’s begin.

Table of Contents

Terrorism Essay: 100 Words

Terrorism is the result of widespread discontentment that has gone deeper into the minds of the poor and exploited class of people. Being instigated by some power-hungry politicians, these people take up arms against the establishment to voice their protest. When the language of protest violence and cause takes the shape of immense damages to mankind, it becomes terrorism.

Poor, ordinary people remain helpless at the hands of terrorists who want to exercise their authority against the government. Explosions and other terrorist attacks make the country unsafe and take away the peace of common people. The government has taken many steps to curb terrorist attacks, yet the menace of terrorism is still rocking the foundation of a stable country like India.

Essay on Terrorism: 150 Words

Terrorism is the use of violence to attain one’s political ends. Every day there are reports of sensational and shocking terrorist activities. A worldwide phenomenon, today it has struck terror in the hearts of the people. Terrorism includes kidnapping of eminent personalities, bombing of civilian territories, blowing of buses, trains, aeroplanes and killing innocent people all with a view to spreading fear among the masses. It is a kind of proxy war against the existing elected government.

The evils of terrorism are obvious and the world has become very familiar with its acts. It is a crime against humanity Terrorism must be curbed with a heavy hand. A group of senseless people cannot be allowed to hold the country to ransom. Law and order enforcement agencies should be made more effective to combat the terror campaign and prevent the creation of fear. The root causes should be analyzed to eradicate terrorism. If that is done people all over the world can live in peace and prosperity.

Terrorism Essay in English: 200-250 Words

Terrorism becomes now a days a great problem all over the world. It is also a great threat to mankind. It is the use of terror or violence. A certain group of people adopt it as tactics for a purpose. This group is said to be the terrorists. The purpose is a gain, Most gains are political. Sometimes there may be a personal gain. The criminals operate violence to fulfill their wishes or demands. They have various modes of operation.

Sometimes it is in the form of kidnapping or hijacking. Sometimes it is a kind of blasting bombs in a crowded train or bus. In some cases, they release their hostage on a big ransom. At times their terms and conditions are hard to accept and impossible to fulfil. On most occasions, a dateline is fixed. If they are refused or dishonoured, they turn hostile. The criminals kill their captives. It is a matter of great regret that some countries harbour the militants.

Terrorism creates social unrest. It intends to damage the national progress. Even a government falls victim to their wishes. Such a group hijacked an Indian Boeing from Nepal on the 24th December, 1999. They released it when India freed their leader Masood Azhar from the jail. The militants skyjacked American planes and crashed them into World Trade Centre. It was destroyed completely. The massacres in our Parliament and the American Embassy are the glaring examples in the recent times. We can combat and perish it from the face of the earth. But we must keep it in mind: United we stand, divided we fall.

Terrorism in India Essay: 300 Words

Communal disharmony is one of the causes of terrorism in India. People here are belonging to the different ethnic groups. Prejudiced, some of them show their commitment to their own minority. And this kind of conservative attitude is the genesis of terrorism in India.

Since 1947 India and Pakistan are regarded as two different free countries, although they were undivided India during the reign of the British colonialists. The British left India by conferring freedom on both India and Pakistan, but the relationship remained unfriendly. Although it is not right to say that Pakistan directly gave shelter to the terrorists, there is little doubt that the terrorists have to some extent nourished by Pakistan.

The terrorists threatened the peace in Jammu and Kashmir. Even the terrorists often attacked India between these two countries by way of causing explosions in large cities like Mumbai, Delhi, and Hyderabad. Some Tamil terrorists have also been constantly threatening the peace of India. The most crucial problem that India has now been facing is the activities of the Maoists in West Bengal.

Indians are now uneasy because of the price hike, corruptions in a large scale, and the problem of unemployment. At this time terrorist activities are obligatory to the progress of the nation. All of the political leaders and the Government should be aware of the fact that communal disharmony causes this terrorism. Thus, the liberalism of Indians and proper development of the country, and above all, good administration are very necessary to stop this evil of terrorism.

If it continues, the nation will soon lose its integrity and become the most disgraceful country in the world. Unfortunately, political leaders do politics for the sake of politics only, not for the sake of the making of their country. Every Indian should be conscious of the curse of terrorism and should do well in order to restore the peace of India.

Read More: 1. Essay on Mobile Phone 2. Essay on Television 3. Wonder of Science Essay in English 4. Essay on Newspaper in English 5. Essay on Teachers Day 6. Blood Donation Essay in English

Apj abdul kalam essay in english | 100, 200, 300, 500 words, blood donation essay in english | 150, 200, 300 words, my mother essay in english 10 lines [5 sets], essay on mother teresa in english for students [300 words], leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Terrorism Essay for Students and Teacher

500+ words essay on terrorism essay.

Terrorism is an act, which aims to create fear among ordinary people by illegal means. It is a threat to humanity. It includes person or group spreading violence, riots, burglaries, rapes, kidnappings, fighting, bombings, etc. Terrorism is an act of cowardice. Also, terrorism has nothing to do with religion. A terrorist is only a terrorist, not a Hindu or a Muslim.

Types of Terrorism

Terrorism is of two kinds, one is political terrorism which creates panic on a large scale and another one is criminal terrorism which deals in kidnapping to take ransom money. Political terrorism is much more crucial than criminal terrorism because it is done by well-trained persons. It thus becomes difficult for law enforcing agencies to arrest them in time.

Terrorism spread at the national level as well as at international level. Regional terrorism is the most violent among all. Because the terrorists think that dying as a terrorist is sacred and holy, and thus they are willing to do anything. All these terrorist groups are made with different purposes.

Causes of Terrorism

There are some main causes of terrorism development or production of large quantities of machine guns, atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs, nuclear weapons, missiles, etc. rapid population growth, Politics, Social, Economic problems, dissatisfaction of people with the country’s system, lack of education, corruption, racism, economic inequality, linguistic differences, all these are the major elements of terrorism, and terrorism flourishes after them. People use terrorism as a weapon to prove and justify their point of view. The riots among Hindus and Muslims are the most famous but there is a difference between caste and terrorism.

The Effects Of Terrorism

Terrorism spreads fear in people, people living in the country feel insecure because of terrorism. Due to terrorist attacks, millions of goods are destroyed, the lives of thousands of innocent people are lost, animals are also killed. Disbelief in humanity raises after seeing a terrorist activity, this gives birth to another terrorist. There exist different types of terrorism in different parts of the country and abroad.

Today, terrorism is not only the problem of India, but in our neighboring country also, and governments across the world are making a lot of effort to deal with it. Attack on world trade center on September 11, 2001, is considered the largest terrorist attack in the world. Osama bin Laden attacked the tallest building in the world’s most powerful country, causing millions of casualties and death of thousands of people.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Terrorist Attacks in India

India has suffered several terrorist attacks which created fear among the public and caused huge destruction. Here are some of the major terrorist attacks that hit India in the last few years: 1991 – Punjab Killings, 1993 – Bombay Bomb Blasts, RSS Bombing in Chennai, 2000 – Church Bombing, Red Fort Terrorist Attack,2001- Indian Parliament Attack, 2002 – Mumbai Bus Bombing, Attack on Akshardham Temple, 2003 – Mumbai Bombing, 2004 – Dhemaji School Bombing in Assam,2005 – Delhi Bombings, Indian Institute of Science Shooting, 2006 – Varanasi Bombings, Mumbai Train Bombings, Malegaon Bombings, 2007 – Samjhauta Express Bombings, Mecca Masjid Bombing, Hyderabad Bombing, Ajmer Dargah Bombing, 2008 – Jaipur Bombings, Bangalore Serial Blasts, Ahmedabad Bombings, Delhi Bombings, Mumbai Attacks, 2010 – Pune Bombing, Varanasi Bombing.

The recent ones include 2011 – Mumbai Bombing, Delhi Bombing, 2012 – Pune Bombing, 2013 – Hyderabad Blasts, Srinagar Attack, Bodh Gaya Bombings, Patna Bombings, 2014 – Chhattisgarh Attack, Jharkhand Blast, Chennai Train Bombing, Assam Violence, Church Street Bomb Blast, Bangalore, 2015 – Jammu Attack, Gurdaspur Attack, Pathankot Attack, 2016 – Uri Attack, Baramulla Attack, 2017 – Bhopal Ujjain Passenger Train Bombing, Amarnath Yatra Attack, 2018 Sukma Attack, 2019- Pulwama attack.

Agencies fighting Terrorism in India

Many police, intelligence and military organizations in India have formed special agencies to fight terrorism in the country. Major agencies which fight against terrorism in India are Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), National Investigation Agency (NIA).

Terrorism has become a global threat which needs to be controlled from the initial level. Terrorism cannot be controlled by the law enforcing agencies alone. The people in the world will also have to unite in order to face this growing threat of terrorism.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

Travelling Essay
Picnic Essay
Our Country Essay
My Parents Essay
Essay on Favourite Personality
Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
Essay on Knowledge is Power
Essay on Gurpurab
Essay on My Favourite Season
Essay on Types of Sports

Download the App

CBSE Class 10th
CBSE Class 12th
UP Board 10th
UP Board 12th
Bihar Board 10th
Bihar Board 12th
Top Schools in India
Top Schools in Delhi
Top Schools in Mumbai
Top Schools in Chennai
Top Schools in Hyderabad
Top Schools in Kolkata
Top Schools in Pune
Top Schools in Bangalore

Products & Resources

JEE Main Knockout April
Free Sample Papers
Free Ebooks
NCERT Notes
NCERT Syllabus
NCERT Books
RD Sharma Solutions
Navodaya Vidyalaya Admission 2024-25
NCERT Solutions
NCERT Solutions for Class 12
NCERT Solutions for Class 11
NCERT solutions for Class 10
NCERT solutions for Class 9
NCERT solutions for Class 8
NCERT Solutions for Class 7
JEE Main 2024
MHT CET 2024
JEE Advanced 2024
BITSAT 2024
View All Engineering Exams
Colleges Accepting B.Tech Applications
Top Engineering Colleges in India
Engineering Colleges in India
Engineering Colleges in Tamil Nadu
Engineering Colleges Accepting JEE Main
Top IITs in India
Top NITs in India
Top IIITs in India
JEE Main College Predictor
JEE Main Rank Predictor
MHT CET College Predictor
AP EAMCET College Predictor
GATE College Predictor
KCET College Predictor
JEE Advanced College Predictor
View All College Predictors
JEE Advanced Cutoff
JEE Main Cutoff
JEE Advanced Answer Key
JEE Advanced Result
Download E-Books and Sample Papers
Compare Colleges
B.Tech College Applications
KCET Result
MAH MBA CET Exam
View All Management Exams

Colleges & Courses

MBA College Admissions
MBA Colleges in India
Top IIMs Colleges in India
Top Online MBA Colleges in India
MBA Colleges Accepting XAT Score
BBA Colleges in India
XAT College Predictor 2024
SNAP College Predictor
NMAT College Predictor
MAT College Predictor 2024
CMAT College Predictor 2024
CAT Percentile Predictor 2023
CAT 2023 College Predictor
CMAT 2024 Answer Key
TS ICET 2024 Hall Ticket
CMAT Result 2024
MAH MBA CET Cutoff 2024
Download Helpful Ebooks
List of Popular Branches
QnA - Get answers to your doubts
IIM Fees Structure
AIIMS Nursing
Top Medical Colleges in India
Top Medical Colleges in India accepting NEET Score
Medical Colleges accepting NEET
List of Medical Colleges in India
List of AIIMS Colleges In India
Medical Colleges in Maharashtra
Medical Colleges in India Accepting NEET PG
NEET College Predictor
NEET PG College Predictor
NEET MDS College Predictor
NEET Rank Predictor
DNB PDCET College Predictor
NEET Result 2024
NEET Asnwer Key 2024
NEET Cut off
NEET Online Preparation
Download Helpful E-books
Colleges Accepting Admissions
Top Law Colleges in India
Law College Accepting CLAT Score
List of Law Colleges in India
Top Law Colleges in Delhi
Top NLUs Colleges in India
Top Law Colleges in Chandigarh
Top Law Collages in Lucknow

Predictors & E-Books

CLAT College Predictor
MHCET Law ( 5 Year L.L.B) College Predictor
AILET College Predictor
Sample Papers
Compare Law Collages
Careers360 Youtube Channel
CLAT Syllabus 2025
CLAT Previous Year Question Paper
NID DAT Exam
Pearl Academy Exam

Predictors & Articles

NIFT College Predictor
UCEED College Predictor
NID DAT College Predictor
NID DAT Syllabus 2025
NID DAT 2025
Design Colleges in India
Top NIFT Colleges in India
Fashion Design Colleges in India
Top Interior Design Colleges in India
Top Graphic Designing Colleges in India
Fashion Design Colleges in Delhi
Fashion Design Colleges in Mumbai
Top Interior Design Colleges in Bangalore
NIFT Result 2024
NIFT Fees Structure
NIFT Syllabus 2025
Free Design E-books
List of Branches
Careers360 Youtube channel
IPU CET BJMC
JMI Mass Communication Entrance Exam
IIMC Entrance Exam
Media & Journalism colleges in Delhi
Media & Journalism colleges in Bangalore
Media & Journalism colleges in Mumbai
List of Media & Journalism Colleges in India
CA Intermediate
CA Foundation
CS Executive
CS Professional
Difference between CA and CS
Difference between CA and CMA
CA Full form
CMA Full form
CS Full form
CA Salary In India

Top Courses & Careers

Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com)
Master of Commerce (M.Com)
Company Secretary
Cost Accountant
Charted Accountant
Credit Manager
Financial Advisor
Top Commerce Colleges in India
Top Government Commerce Colleges in India
Top Private Commerce Colleges in India
Top M.Com Colleges in Mumbai
Top B.Com Colleges in India
IT Colleges in Tamil Nadu
IT Colleges in Uttar Pradesh
MCA Colleges in India
BCA Colleges in India

Diploma Colleges

Top Diploma Colleges in Maharashtra
UPSC IAS 2024
SSC CGL 2024
IBPS RRB 2024
Previous Year Sample Papers
Free Competition E-books
Sarkari Result
QnA- Get your doubts answered
UPSC Previous Year Sample Papers
CTET Previous Year Sample Papers
SBI Clerk Previous Year Sample Papers
NDA Previous Year Sample Papers

Upcoming Events

NDA Application Form 2024
UPSC IAS Application Form 2024
CDS Application Form 2024
CTET Admit card 2024
HP TET Result 2023
SSC GD Constable Admit Card 2024
UPTET Notification 2024
SBI Clerk Result 2024

Other Exams

SSC CHSL 2024
UP PCS 2024
UGC NET 2024
RRB NTPC 2024
IBPS PO 2024
IBPS Clerk 2024
IBPS SO 2024
Top University in USA
Top University in Canada
Top University in Ireland
Top Universities in UK
Top Universities in Australia
Best MBA Colleges in Abroad
Business Management Studies Colleges

Top Countries

Study in USA
Study in UK
Study in Canada
Study in Australia
Study in Ireland
Study in Germany
Study in China
Study in Europe

Student Visas

Student Visa Canada
Student Visa UK
Student Visa USA
Student Visa Australia
Student Visa Germany
Student Visa New Zealand
Student Visa Ireland
CUET PG 2024
IGNOU B.Ed Admission 2024
DU Admission 2024
UP B.Ed JEE 2024
LPU NEST 2024
IIT JAM 2024
IGNOU Online Admission 2024
Universities in India
Top Universities in India 2024
Top Colleges in India
Top Universities in Uttar Pradesh 2024
Top Universities in Bihar
Top Universities in Madhya Pradesh 2024
Top Universities in Tamil Nadu 2024
Central Universities in India
CUET DU Cut off 2024
IGNOU Date Sheet
CUET DU CSAS Portal 2024
CUET Response Sheet 2024
CUET Result 2024
CUET Participating Universities 2024
CUET Previous Year Question Paper
CUET Syllabus 2024 for Science Students
E-Books and Sample Papers
CUET Exam Pattern 2024
CUET Exam Date 2024
CUET Cut Off 2024
CUET Exam Analysis 2024
IGNOU Exam Form 2024
CUET PG Counselling 2024
CUET Answer Key 2024

Engineering Preparation

Knockout JEE Main 2024
Test Series JEE Main 2024
JEE Main 2024 Rank Booster

Medical Preparation

Knockout NEET 2024
Test Series NEET 2024
Rank Booster NEET 2024

Online Courses

JEE Main One Month Course
NEET One Month Course
IBSAT Free Mock Tests
IIT JEE Foundation Course
Knockout BITSAT 2024
Career Guidance Tool

Top Streams

IT & Software Certification Courses
Engineering and Architecture Certification Courses
Programming And Development Certification Courses
Business and Management Certification Courses
Marketing Certification Courses
Health and Fitness Certification Courses
Design Certification Courses

Specializations

Digital Marketing Certification Courses
Cyber Security Certification Courses
Artificial Intelligence Certification Courses
Business Analytics Certification Courses
Data Science Certification Courses
Cloud Computing Certification Courses
Machine Learning Certification Courses
View All Certification Courses
UG Degree Courses
PG Degree Courses
Short Term Courses
Free Courses
Online Degrees and Diplomas
Compare Courses

Top Providers

Coursera Courses
Udemy Courses
Edx Courses
Swayam Courses
upGrad Courses
Simplilearn Courses
Great Learning Courses

Essay on Terrorism

India has a lengthy history of terrorism. It is a cowardly act by terrorist organisations that want to sabotage the nation's tranquillity. It seeks to instil fear among the population. They seek to maintain a permanent climate of dread among the populace to prevent the nation from prospering. Here are a few sample essays on Terrorism .

100 Words Essay on Terrorism

Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political and personal aims. It is a global phenomenon that has affected countries worldwide, causing harm to innocent civilians, damaging economies, and destabilizing governments. The causes of terrorism are complex and can include religious extremism, political oppression, and economic inequality.

Terrorist groups use a variety of tactics, including bombings, kidnappings, and hijackings, to achieve their goals. They often target symbols of government and military power, as well as civilians in crowded public spaces. The impact of terrorism on society is devastating, leading to loss of life, injury, and psychological trauma.

Combating terrorism requires a multifaceted approach, including intelligence gathering, law enforcement, and military action. Additionally, addressing underlying issues such as poverty and political marginalization is crucial in preventing the radicalization of individuals and the emergence of terrorist groups.

200 Words Essay on Terrorism

Terrorism is a complex and ever-evolving threat that affects countries and communities around the world. It involves the use of violence and intimidation to achieve political or ideological goals. The causes of terrorism can vary, but often include religious extremism, political oppression, and economic inequality.

To truly understand the impact of terrorism, it's important to consider not only the physical harm caused by terrorist attacks but also the emotional and psychological toll it takes on individuals and communities. The loss of life and injury caused to innocent civilians is devastating and can leave families and communities reeling for years to come. In addition, terrorism can cause physical damage to infrastructure and buildings, as well as economic disruption, leading to decreased tourism and investment.

To effectively combat terrorism, it's important to take a holistic approach that addresses not only the immediate threat of terrorist attacks but also the underlying issues that can lead to radicalization and the emergence of terrorist groups. This can include addressing poverty and economic inequality, promoting political and religious tolerance, and providing support and resources to individuals and communities at risk of radicalization.

It's also important to remember that the fight against terrorism is not just the responsibility of governments and law enforcement agencies, but also of individuals and communities. By promoting understanding and compassion, and by standing up against hate and extremism, we can all play a role in preventing terrorism and creating a more peaceful world.

500 Words Essay on Terrorism

According to a United Nations Security Council report from November 2004, terrorism is any act that is "intended to result in the death or serious bodily harm of civilians or non-combatants to intimidate the population or to compel the government or an international organisation to do or abstain from doing any act."

The Origins of Terrorism

The development or production of massive numbers of machine guns, atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs, nuclear weapons, missiles, and other weapons fuels terrorism. Rapid population growth, political, social, and economic problems, widespread discontent with the political system, a lack of education, racism, economic inequality, and linguistic discrepancies are all important contributors to the emergence of terrorism. Sometimes one uses terrorism to take a position and stick with it.

The Effects Of Terrorism

People become afraid of terrorism and feel unsafe in their nation. Terrorist attacks result in the destruction of millions of items, the death of thousands of innocent people, and the slaughter of animals. After seeing a terrorist incident, people become less inclined to believe in humanity, which breeds more terrorists.

Different forms of terrorism can be found both domestically and overseas. Today, governments worldwide are working hard to combat terrorism, which is an issue in India and our neighbouring nations. The 9/11 World Trade Centre attack is considered the worst terrorist act ever. Osama bin Laden attacked the tallest building in the world’s most powerful country, causing millions of casualties and the death of thousands of people.

The major incidents of the terrorist attack in India are—

12 March 1993 - A series of 13 bombs go off, killing 257

14 March 2003 - A bomb goes off in a train in Mulund, killing 10

29 October 2005 Delhi bombings

2005 Ram Janmabhoomi attack in Ayodhya

2006 Varanasi bombings

11 July 2006 - A series of seven bombs go off in trains, killing

26 November 2008 to 29 November 2008 - A series of coordinated attacks killed at least 170.

According to this data, India has experienced an upsurge in terrorist activity since 1980. India has fought four wars against terrorism , losing more than 6000 persons in total. Already, we have lost around 70000 citizens. Furthermore, we lost over 9000 security staff. In this country, about 6 lakh individuals have undergone.

Agencies In India Fighting Terrorism

There are numerous organisations working to rid our nation of terrorism. These organizations operate continuously, from the municipal to the national levels. To stop local terrorist activity, police forces have various divisions.

The police departments have a specialized intelligence and anti-terrorism division that is in charge of eliminating Naxalites and other terrorist organizations. The military is in charge of bombing terrorist targets outside of our country. These departments engage in counterinsurgency and other similar operations to dismantle various terrorist organisations.

There are numerous organisations that work to prevent terrorism. Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) , National Investigation Agency (NIA) , and Research and Analysis Wing are a few of the top organizations (RAW) . These are some of the main organizations working to rid India of terrorism.

Applications for Admissions are open.

Aakash iACST Scholarship Test 2024

Get up to 90% scholarship on NEET, JEE & Foundation courses

ALLEN Digital Scholarship Admission Test (ADSAT)

JEE Main Important Physics formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Physics formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

PW JEE Coaching

Enrol in PW Vidyapeeth center for JEE coaching

PW NEET Coaching

Enrol in PW Vidyapeeth center for NEET coaching

JEE Main Important Chemistry formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Chemistry formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

Download Careers360 App's

Regular exam updates, QnA, Predictors, College Applications & E-books now on your Mobile

Certifications

We Appeared in

Essay on Terrorism

Students are often asked to write an essay on Terrorism in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Terrorism

Understanding terrorism.

Terrorism refers to the use of violence, often against civilians, to achieve political goals. It’s a form of fear-based manipulation, aiming to create panic and disrupt peace.

Impacts of Terrorism

Terrorism harms societies both physically and psychologically. It leads to loss of lives, property, and can cause trauma. It also hampers economic growth and societal harmony.

Countering Terrorism

Countering terrorism requires global cooperation. Nations must share intelligence, enforce strict laws, and promote education and understanding to prevent radicalization. Remember, peace and unity are our best defenses against terrorism.

Also check:

Paragraph on Terrorism
Speech on Terrorism

250 Words Essay on Terrorism

Terrorism, a term that sends chills down the spine, is an act of violence primarily intended to create fear, disrupt societal structures, and promote political or ideological agendas. It is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, which has been escalating in frequency and intensity worldwide.

The Root Causes

The root causes of terrorism are multifarious. It can be triggered by political instability, socio-economic disparities, religious fanaticism, or ethnic tensions. Often, it is a combination of these factors, creating a fertile breeding ground for extremist ideologies.

The Impact of Terrorism

The impacts of terrorism are far-reaching and devastating. Beyond the immediate human toll, it disrupts economic stability, social harmony, and political structures. It instills fear, leading to changes in behavior and attitudes, and can even alter the course of history.

Counter-Terrorism Strategies

Counter-terrorism strategies are as diverse as the causes of terrorism. They range from military interventions to intelligence operations, from diplomatic negotiations to socio-economic reforms. However, the most effective strategies are those that address the root causes of terrorism, rather than merely responding to its symptoms.

Terrorism, a grave threat to global peace and security, requires a comprehensive and holistic approach to be effectively countered. By understanding its root causes and impacts, we can devise strategies to combat it, ensuring a safer world for future generations.

500 Words Essay on Terrorism

Introduction to terrorism.

Terrorism, a term that sends chills down the spine of many, is a complex phenomenon that has been the subject of extensive study and debate. It is characterized by acts of violence or threats aimed at creating fear, disrupting societal order, and advancing political, religious, or ideological goals.

The Evolution of Terrorism

Historically, terrorism was primarily a tool of the weak against the strong, a way to destabilize oppressive regimes or draw attention to a cause. However, the advent of the 21st century has seen its evolution into a more global menace, with the rise of transnational terrorist networks like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. The digital age has made it easier for these groups to recruit, radicalize, and coordinate attacks, making terrorism a borderless problem.

The Psychology of Terrorism

Understanding the psychology of terrorism is crucial in tackling it. Many terrorists are not psychopaths or inherently evil people, but individuals manipulated into believing that their violent actions are justified. Factors such as social exclusion, economic deprivation, political oppression, and religious indoctrination can contribute to this mindset. This underscores the importance of addressing root causes to prevent terrorism.

Terrorism’s impacts are multifaceted. The immediate effect is loss of life and property, but the ripple effects are far-reaching. It instills fear and insecurity, disrupts economic activity, and can lead to restrictive security measures that infringe on civil liberties. Moreover, it can exacerbate social divisions and fuel cycles of violence and retaliation.

Counter-terrorism strategies must be as multifaceted as the problem they aim to solve. Military and law enforcement responses are necessary to protect citizens and bring perpetrators to justice. However, these approaches should be paired with efforts to address the underlying social, economic, and political conditions that breed terrorism.

Preventive measures include promoting social inclusion, economic development, and political reforms. Moreover, countering extremist narratives online and offline is crucial to prevent radicalization. International cooperation is also essential given the transnational nature of modern terrorism.

Conclusion: The Future of Counter-Terrorism

The future of counter-terrorism lies in a balanced approach that combines hard and soft power. While military and law enforcement measures are necessary, they are not sufficient on their own. The fight against terrorism must also be a fight for hearts and minds, addressing the root causes of terrorism, and building inclusive societies where extremist narratives find no fertile ground.

In conclusion, terrorism is a complex problem that requires a nuanced understanding and multifaceted response. It is not just a security issue, but a social, economic, and political one. By addressing it in this holistic manner, we can hope to make progress in the ongoing struggle against this global menace.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Essay on Our Culture is Our Pride
Essay on My Life My Health
Essay on Banyan Tree

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Introduction

International terrorism as a global challenge, discussion and conclusion.

The damaging effect of terrorism on modern society was brought to the world’s attention following the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington in September 2001. This acts by the Al-Qaeda terror network demonstrated that international terrorism has the power to disrupt social life even in the world’s super power.

Since then, a wide-ranging debate has developed about the level of threat that international terrorism poses to the global community. While some people regard international terrorism as a marginal threat, others see it as an existential threat to society.

This paper will argue that international terrorism is the main challenge facing the world in the context of international security and therefore, measures should be taken to address this issue and safeguard global security.

International terrorism has become the greatest danger to world security, overtaking the threats of military confrontations from rival great powers. Stewart (2006) observes that the international security threat posed by military confrontations between rival great powers has reduced dramatically since the Second World War.

Most Western nations have formed alliances such as NATO, which makes it almost impossible for them to engage in aggressive military confrontation against each other. The possession of nuclear weapons by the major powers such as Russia and China acts as a deterrence from any major confrontation (Lutz & Brenda 2004).

Nations are therefore more likely to resort to diplomacy instead of risk military confrontation with each other. However, international terrorists attack nations without fear of retaliation since they do not have a well established base or economic resources that they hope to protect.

The activities of international terrorist organization have made the world unsafe. Terror activities have not been limited to US targets and the rest of the world has suffered from the actions of terrorists. The international terror organization, Al Qaeda did not limit its attacks to US targets and on March 11, 2004, it carried out the Madrid train bombings.

London also experienced terrorist attacks in July 2005 when the London Underground was bombed by Islamist extremists (UK Defence and Security Report 2010). Indonesia experienced terrorist attacks in 2002 that killed 202 people while a hotel in Jakarta was bombed in 2003 killing 12 people.

Thieux (2004) asserts that these attacks prove that international terrorism is a serious and potential threat not only for the United States but also for EU member states and the rest of the world.

International terrorism presents the most significant risk to global nuclear non-proliferation efforts. Presently, all functioning Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) including nuclear weapons are in the hands of legitimate governments.

However, intelligence reports indicate that terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda have made efforts to obtain WMDs especially from weak states such as Pakistan. Bowen and Cottee (2012) state that if international terrorists obtain WMDs, they will be able to inflict major damages to targets all over the world.

International terrorism has increased the vulnerability of nations to attacks from their own citizens. Thieux (2004) documents that in addition to the Islamic radicals who joined the Al Qaeda network in the past, this terror organization now attracts members who are well integrated in the society.

International terrorist organizations are able to radicalize citizens of a country leading to the development of home-grown terrorists. For example, individuals can access jihadi websites and obtain information on suicide bombing (The UK Defence & Security Report 2010). Tackling this threat has proved to be a major challenge for most nations.

Thieux (2004) notes that international terrorism has led to a blurring between foreign and domestic affairs as nations have to deal with issues such as home-grown terrorists and sleeper cells. The difficulty of identifying terrorists increases the risk that these elements pose to the global community.

International terrorists are spread all over the world and it is difficult for law enforcement agencies to correctly identify all potential suspects. Stewart (2006) notes that unlike in a conventional war where the enemy combatants are easy to identify, the diverse pool of individuals involved in international terrorism makes the threat hard to identify.

International terrorism presents a major challenge since these actors do not follow any international laws of combat. There are well-established rules that can be used by nations when dealing with traditional security threats. These laws include rules of engagement that forbid soldiers from attacking unarmed civilians.

Diplomacy can also be used to resolve the differences between nations without resorting to armed confrontation. With international terrorism, there are no rules of engagement and terror organizations target civilians in order to spread fear (Engene 2004). The traditional tools of military deterrence and diplomacy are not effective in dealing with the threat of international terrorism.

International terrorism has led to the development of poor relationships between Western countries and the Arab world. Since most international terrorist organizations are operated by radical Islamists, the policies adopted by countries such as the US to counter them focus on these radical elements. The fight against terrorism has therefore focused on tackling the issue of Islamic extremism (Victoroff 2005).

This has proved to be problematic since terrorism organizations are not disparate and therefore cannot be handled using a uniform policy response. Hammond (2008) asserts that the overemphasis on Islamic extremism has led to the strengthening of the misperception especially in the Middle East that “the anti-terror campaign is actually a war on Islam” (p.220).

This situation has threatened to divide the world on religious basis. Hammond (2008) suggests that the division based on religious differences fostered by international terrorism is proving to be the greatest threat to international unity since the cold war.

International terrorism has contributed to the unpopularity of the US in many countries all over the world and the subsequent inclination of terrorists to attack US targets. Meyer (2009) states that terrorism threatens global security by disrupting the “peace of mind” of citizens and prompting aggressive retaliation by individual states.

Hammond (2008) reveals that following the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration engaged in controversial security policies and effectively declared that America was at war with international terrorists. Due to the Bush policies, the US carried out military activities against terrorists and their affiliates and used economic means to influence the behaviours or interests of nations that harbour terrorists.

Terrorism threatens to disrupt international relations among traditional allies. Due to globalization, the movement of people from country to country has increased. Many international companies have established themselves in foreign countries and global trade is at a high level. International terrorists target Western citizens in foreign countries leading to immense political and psychological impact.

Tan (2007) documents that in 2002, the Al Qaeda affiliated network in South East Asia, Jemmah Islamiah, planned to carry out a terror attack against American targets in Singapore. If this attack had succeeded, it would have deteriorated the good relationship between the US and Singapore and greatly contributed to the growth of insecurity in the region.

The relationship between Pakistan and the UK has suffered due to international terrorism. The UK has accused Pakistan of not doing enough to prevent terrorism. In 2009, the UK arrested 12 Pakistani students in UK on suspicion of involvement in terrorism (UK Defence and Security Report 2010).

International terrorism undermines the good relationships between nations, and without this amicable relationship, global peace and security cannot be achieved.

The global community considers terrorism to be a significant threat to international peace. Following the events of 9/11, most nations, led by the US, have made a public declaration of war against international terrorism. The potential damages that international terrorists can cause, especially if they acquire WMD has led to arguments that terrorism is an “existential threat” for modern society (Meyer 2009).

With this realization, Western nations have tried to come up with a common and coordinated way of dealing with the threat of international terrorism. However, Thieux (2004) notes that the efforts have not been adequate and terrorism is still a major international threat.

This paper set out to demonstrate that international terrorism is the greatest threat to international security that the global community faces today. It begun by nothing that the global security threat posed by conventional military confrontations between nations is very low. However, the threat presented by international terrorism to global security is on the rise.

This threat has led to the deterioration of relationships especially between the West and Arab countries. The influence of terrorists has spread into many countries all over the world and various attacks have been carried out. For this reason, many countries view international terrorism as a threat to their security. Fighting global terrorism should therefore be a key priority for all nations.

Bowen, W & Cottee, M 2012, ‘Multilateral cooperation and the prevention of nuclear terrorism: pragmatism over idealism’, International Affairs , vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 349–368.

Engene, O 2004, Terrorism in Western Europe: Explaining The Trends Since 1950, Edward Elgar Publishing, NY.

Hammond, A 2008, ‘Two countries divided by a common threat? International perceptions of US and UK counter-terrorism and homeland security responses to the post-September 2001 threat environment’, Place Branding and Public Diplomacy , vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 218–239.

Lutz, J & Brenda, J 2004, Global Terrorism , Routledge, NY. Print.

Meyer, C 2009, ‘International terrorism as a force of homogenization? A constructivist approach to understanding cross-national threat perceptions and responses’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs , vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 647-666.

Stewart, P 2006, ‘Weak States and Global Threats: Fact or Fiction?’, Washington Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 27-53.

Tan, A 2007, ‘Singapore’s Cooperation with the Trilateral Security Dialogue Partners in the War Against Global Terrorism’, Defence Studies , vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 193-207.

Thieux, L 2004, ‘European Security and Global Terrorism: the Strategic Aftermath of the Madrid Bombing’, Central European Review of International Affairs , vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 59-74.

UK Defence and Security Report 2010, Domestic Security Overview , Business Monitor International Ltd, London.

Victoroff, J 2005, ‘The Mind of the Terrorist: A Review and Critique of Psychological Approaches’, The Journal of Conflict Resolution vol. 49, no.1, pp. 3-42.

The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission
Role of Engineer in Global Challenges
Definitions of Diplomacy Analysis
Background and Root Causes: the 1987 Palestinian Intifada
United States – China Relations During World War II
Mine Ban Treaty: The Campaign to Ban Landmines
Landmines: An Inhumane Weapon
Has The Image Of The United States Become Negative?
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, June 3). International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security. https://ivypanda.com/essays/international-terrorism-the-challenge-to-global-security/

"International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security." IvyPanda , 3 June 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/international-terrorism-the-challenge-to-global-security/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security'. 3 June.

IvyPanda . 2019. "International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security." June 3, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/international-terrorism-the-challenge-to-global-security/.

1. IvyPanda . "International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security." June 3, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/international-terrorism-the-challenge-to-global-security/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security." June 3, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/international-terrorism-the-challenge-to-global-security/.

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Before the terrorist attacks in the United States on 11 September 2001, the subject of terrorism did not loom large in philosophical discussion. Philosophical literature in English amounted to a few monographs and a single collection of papers devoted solely, or largely, to questions to do with terrorism. Articles on the subject in philosophy journals were few and far between; neither of the two major philosophy encyclopedias had an entry. The attacks of September 11 and their aftermath put terrorism on the philosophical agenda: it is now the topic of numerous books, journal articles, special journal issues, and conferences.

While social sciences study the causes, main varieties, and consequences of terrorism and history traces and attempts to explain the way terrorism has evolved over time, philosophy focuses on two fundamental—and related—questions. The first is conceptual: What is terrorism? The second is moral: Can terrorism ever be morally justified?

Philosophers have offered a range of positions on both questions. With regard to the problem of defining terrorism, the dominant approach seeks to acknowledge the core meaning “terrorism” has in common use. Terrorism is understood as a type of violence. Many definitions highlight the experience of terror or fear as the proximate aim of that violence. Neither violence nor terror is inflicted for its own sake, but rather for the sake of a further aim such as coercion, or some more specific political objective. But there are also definitions that sever the conceptual connection of terrorism with violence or with terror. With regard to the moral standing of terrorism, philosophers differ both on how that is to be determined and what the determination is. Consequentialists propose to judge terrorism, like everything else, in light of its consequences. Nonconsequentialists argue that its moral status is not simply a matter of what consequences, on balance, terrorism has, but is rather determined, whether solely or largely, by what it is. Positions on the morality of terrorism range from justification when its consequences on balance are good, or when some deontological moral requirements are satisfied, to its absolute, or almost absolute, rejection.

Philosophers working in applied philosophy have also sought to complement the discussions of terrorism in general with case studies—studies of the role and rights and wrongs of terrorism in particular conflicts, such as “the Troubles” in Northern Ireland (George 2000; Simpson 2004; Shanahan 2009), the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (Ashmore 1997; Gordon and Lopez 2000; Primoratz 2006; Kapitan 2008; Law (ed.) 2008), and the bombing of German cities in World War II (Grayling 2006; Primoratz 2010).

1.1.1 The reign of terror

1.1.2 propaganda by the deed, 1.1.3 the state as terrorist, 1.1.4 terrorists and freedom fighters, 1.2.1 violence and terror, 1.2.2 wide and narrow definitions, 1.2.3 some idiosyncratic definitions, 2.1 complicity of the victims, 2.2.1 terrorism justified, 2.2.2 terrorism unjustified, 2.3.1 basic human rights and distributive justice, 2.3.2 supreme emergency and moral disaster, 2.3.3 terrorism absolutely wrong, books, book chapters, and articles, special journal issues, other internet resources, related entries, 1. the conceptual issue.

The history of terrorism is probably coextensive with the history of political violence. The term “terrorism”, however, is relatively recent: it has been in use since late 18th century. Its use has repeatedly shifted in some significant respects. Moreover, in contemporary political discourse the word is often employed as a polemical term whose strong emotional charge occludes its somewhat vague descriptive meaning. All this tends to get in the way of sustained rational discussion of the nature and moral standing of terrorism and the best ways of coping with it.

1.1 “Terrorism” from the French Revolution to the early 21st century

When it first entered public discourse in the West, the word “terrorism” meant the reign of terror the Jacobins imposed in France from the fall of 1793 to the summer of 1794. Its ultimate aim was the reshaping of both society and human nature. That was to be achieved by destroying the old regime, suppressing all enemies of the revolutionary government, and inculcating and enforcing civic virtue. A central role in attaining these objectives was accorded to revolutionary tribunals which had wide authority, were constrained by very few rules of procedure, and saw their task as carrying out revolutionary policy rather than meting out legal justice of the more conventional sort. They went after “enemies of the people”, actual or potential, proven or suspected; the law on the basis of which they were operating “enumerated just who the enemies of the people might be in terms so ambiguous as to exclude no one” (Carter 1989: 142). The standard punishment was death. Trials and executions were meant to strike terror in the hearts of all who lacked civic virtue; the Jacobins believed that was a necessary means of consolidating the new regime. This necessity provided both the rationale of the reign of terror and its moral justification. As Robespierre put it, terror was but “an emanation of virtue”; without it, virtue remained impotent. Accordingly, the Jacobins applied the term to their own actions and policies quite unabashedly, without any negative connotations.

Yet the term “terrorism” and its cognates soon took on very strong negative connotations. Critics of the excesses of the French Revolution had watched its reign with horror from the start. Terrorism came to be associated with drastic abuse of power and related to the notion of tyranny as rule based on fear, a recurring theme in political philosophy.

In the second half of the 19th century, there was a shift in both descriptive and evaluative meaning of the term. Disillusioned with other methods of political struggle, some anarchist and other revolutionary organizations, and subsequently some nationalist groups too, took to political violence. They had come to the conclusion that words were not enough, and what was called for were deeds: extreme, dramatic deeds that would strike at the heart of the unjust, oppressive social and political order, generate fear and despair among its supporters, demonstrate its vulnerability to the oppressed, and ultimately force political and social change. This was “propaganda by the deed”, and the deed was for the most part assassination of royalty or highly placed government officials. Unlike the Jacobins’ reign of terror, which operated in a virtually indiscriminate way, this type of terrorism—as both advocates and critics called it—was largely employed in a highly discriminate manner. This was especially true of Russian revolutionary organizations such as People’s Will or Socialist Revolutionary Party (SR): they held that it was morally justified to assassinate a government official only if his complicity in the oppressive regime was significant enough for him to deserve to die, and the assassination would make an important contribution to the struggle. Their violence steered clear of other, uninvolved or insufficiently involved persons. Some instances of “propaganda by the deed” carried out by French and Spanish anarchists in the 1880s and 1890s were indiscriminate killings of common citizens; but that was an exception, rather than the rule. The perpetrators and some of those sympathetic to their cause claimed those acts were nevertheless morally legitimate, whether as retribution (exacted on the assumption that no member of the ruling class was innocent) or as a means necessary for the overthrow of the unjust order. Accordingly, in their parlance, too, the term “terrorism” implied no censure. When used by others, it conveyed a strong condemnation of the practice.

The terrorism employed by both sides in the Russian Revolution and Civil War was in important respects a throwback to that of the Jacobins. The government set up in Russia by the victorious Bolsheviks was totalitarian. So was the Nazi rule in Germany. Both sought to impose total political control on society. Such a radical aim could only be pursued by a similarly radical method: by terrorism directed by an extremely powerful political police at an atomized and defenseless population. Its success was due largely to its arbitrary character—to the unpredictability of its choice of victims. In both countries, the regime first suppressed all opposition; when it no longer had any opposition to speak of, political police took to persecuting “potential” and “objective opponents”. In the Soviet Union, it was eventually unleashed on victims chosen at random. Totalitarian terrorism is the most extreme and sustained type of state terrorism. As Hannah Arendt put it, “terror is the essence of totalitarian domination”, and the concentration camp is “the true central institution of totalitarian organizational power” (Arendt 1958: 464, 438). While students of totalitarianism talked of terrorism as its method of rule, representatives of totalitarian regimes, sensitive to the pejorative connotation of the word, portrayed the practice as defense of the state from internal enemies.

However, state terrorism is not the preserve of totalitarian regimes. Some non-totalitarian states have resorted to terrorism against enemy civilians as a method of warfare, most notably when the RAF and USAAF bombed German and Japanese cities in World War II (see Lackey 2004). Those who designed and oversaw these campaigns never publicly described them as “terror bombing”, but that was how they often referred to them in internal communications.

After the heyday of totalitarian terrorism in the 1930s and 1940s, internal state terrorism continued to be practiced by military dictatorships in many parts of the world, albeit in a less sustained and pervasive way. But the type of terrorism that came to the fore in the second half of the 20th century and in early 21st century is that employed by insurgent organizations. Many movements for national liberation from colonial rule resorted to it, either as the main method of struggle or as a tactic complementing guerrilla warfare. So did some separatist movements. Some organizations driven by extreme ideologies, in particular on the left, took to terrorism as the way of trying to destroy what they considered an unjust, oppressive economic, social and political system. This type of terrorism is, by and large, indiscriminate in its choice of target: it attacks men and women of whatever political (or apolitical) views, social class, and walk of life; young and old, adults and children. It shoots at people, or blows them up by planting bombs, in office buildings, markets, cafes, cinemas, places of religious worship, on buses or planes, or in other vulnerable public places. It also takes people hostage, by hijacking planes and in other ways.

As “terrorism” has by now acquired a very strong pejorative meaning, no-one applies the word to their own actions or to actions and campaigns of those they sympathize with. Insurgents practicing terrorism portray their actions as struggle for liberation and seek to be considered and treated as soldiers rather than terrorists or criminals. They often depict their enemy—the alien government, or the agencies of the social, political and economic system—as the “true terrorists”. For them, the test of terrorism is not what is done , but rather what the ultimate aim of doing it is. If the ultimate aim is liberation or justice, the violence used in order to attain it is not terrorism, whereas the violence aiming at maintaining oppression or injustice, or some of the “structural violence” embodying it, is. On the other hand, governments tend to paint all insurgent violence with the brush of “terrorism”. Government spokespersons and pro-government media typically assume that terrorism is by definition something done by non-state agents, and that a state can never be guilty of terrorism (although it can sponsor terrorist organizations). For them, the test of terrorism is not what is done , but who does it. When a state agency uses violence, it is an act of war, or reprisal, or defense of the security of the state and its citizens; when an insurgent group does the same, it is terrorism. Under these circumstances, one person’s terrorist is indeed another’s freedom fighter, and public debate about terrorism is largely conducted at cross purposes and to little effect. Attempts of the United Nations to propose a definition of “terrorism” that could be accepted by all states and embedded in international law so far have been frustrated by the same sort of relativism. Islamic countries would accept no definition that allowed national liberation movements in the Middle East and Kashmir to be portrayed as terrorist, whereas Western countries would accept no definition that allowed for state agencies to be guilty of terrorism.

1.2 Two core traits of terrorism and two types of definition

The evaluative meaning of “terrorism” has shifted considerably more than once. So has its descriptive meaning, but to a lesser degree. Whatever else the word may have meant, its ordinary use over more than two centuries has typically indicated two things: violence and intimidation (the causing of great fear or terror, terrorizing). The dominant approach to the conceptual question in philosophical literature reflects this. Terrorism is usually understood as a type of violence. This violence is not blind or sadistic, but rather aims at intimidation and at some further political, social, or religious goal or, more broadly, at coercion.

That is how (political) “terrorism” is defined by Per Bauhn in the first philosophical book-length study in English:

The performance of violent acts, directed against one or more persons, intended by the performing agent to intimidate one or more persons and thereby to bring about one or more of the agent’s political goals (Bauhn 1989: 28).

Another good example of a mainstream definition is provided in C.A.J. Coady’s article on terrorism in the Encyclopedia of Ethics :

The tactic of intentionally targeting non-combatants [or non-combatant property, when significantly related to life and security] with lethal or severe violence … meant to produce political results via the creation of fear (Coady 2001: 1697).

Yet another example is the definition proposed by Igor Primoratz:

The deliberate use of violence, or threat of its use, against innocent people, with the aim of intimidating some other people into a course of action they otherwise would not take (Primoratz 2013: 24).

These definitions put aside both the question of who the actor is and the question of what their ultimate objectives are, and focus on what is done and what the proximate aim of doing it is. They present terrorism as a way of acting that could be adopted by different agents and serve various ultimate objectives (most, but perhaps not all of them, political). It can be employed by states or by non-state agents, and may promote national liberation or oppression, revolutionary or conservative causes (and possibly pursue some nonpolitical aims as well). One can be a terrorist and a freedom fighter; terrorism is not the monopoly of enemies of freedom. One can hold high government or military office and design or implement a terrorist campaign; terrorism is not the preserve of insurgents. In this way much of the relativism concerning who is and who is not a terrorist that has plagued contemporary public debate (see 1.1.4 above) can be overcome.

Beyond concurring that violence and intimidation constitute the core of terrorism, the definitions quoted above differ in several respects. Does only actual violence count, or do threats of violence also qualify? Must terrorist violence be directed against life and limb, or does violence against (some) property also count? Does terrorism always seek to attain some political goal, or can there be non-political (e.g. criminal) terrorism? All these points are minor. There is also one major difference: while Coady and Primoratz define terrorism as violence against non-combatants or innocent people, respectively, Bauhn’s definition includes no such restriction. Definitions of the former type can be termed “narrow”, and those of the latter sort “wide”. Philosophical literature on terrorism abounds in instances of both types.

Should we adopt a wide or a narrow definition? A wide definition encompasses the entire history of “terrorism” from the Jacobins to the present, and is more in accord with current ordinary use. A narrow definition departs from much ordinary use by restricting terrorist violence to that directed at non-combatants or innocent persons. Thus it leaves out most of 19th century “propaganda by the deed” and political violence perpetrated by Russian revolutionaries which they themselves and the public called terrorist.

For these reasons, historians of terrorism normally work with a wide definition, and social scientists do so much of the time. But philosophers may well prefer a narrow definition. They focus on the moral standing of terrorism and need a definition that is particularly helpful in moral discourse. Morally speaking, surely there is a difference—for some, a world of difference—between planting a bomb in a government building and killing a number of highly placed officials of (what one considers) an unjust and oppressive government, and planting a bomb in a tea shop and killing a random collection of common citizens, including children. While both acts raise serious moral issues, these issues are not identical, and running them together under the same heading of “terrorism” will likely hamper, rather than help, discerning moral assessment.

Narrow definitions are revisionary, but (unlike those discussed in the next section) not implausibly so. They focus on the traits of terrorism that cause most of us to view the practice with deep moral repugnance: (i) violence (ii) against non-combatants (or, alternatively, against innocent people) for the sake of (iii) intimidation (and, on some definitions, (iv) coercion). In highlighting (ii), they relate the issue of terrorism to the ethics of war and one of the fundamental principles of just war theory, that of non-combatant immunity. They help distinguish terrorism from acts of war proper and political assassination, which do not target non-combatants or common citizens. It does not matter very much whether the victims of terrorism are described as “non-combatants” or “innocent people”, as each term is used in a technical sense, and both refer to those who have not lost their immunity against lethal or other extreme violence by being directly involved in, or highly responsible for, (what terrorists consider) insufferable injustice or oppression. In war, these are innocent civilians; in a violent conflict that falls short of war, these are common citizens.

Talk of involvement of individuals and groups in injustice or oppression raises the question: is the injustice or oppression at issue, and thus the standing of those implicated in it, to be determined by some objective criteria, or from the point of view of those who resort to violence? Coady chooses the former option. He approaches terrorism from the standpoint of just war theory and its principle of noncombatant immunity. “Combatants” is a technical term designating agents of aggression or, more broadly, “dangerous wrongdoers” or “agents of harm”; they are legitimate targets of potentially lethal violence. All others are noncombatants, and enjoy immunity from such violence (Coady 2004). This approach may not be difficult to apply in war, where the wrong or harm at issue is either aggression that needs to be repelled, or systematic and large-scale violations of human rights that provide the ground for humanitarian intervention. Issues of injustice or oppression that arise in an internal conflict that falls short of war, however, tend to be highly contentious: what some consider an imperfect, but basically morally legitimate political and social order, others may see as the epitome of injustice and oppression that must be overthrown, if need be by violence. Under such circumstances, when a highly placed political official is killed by insurgents, that may be characterized (and condemned) by many as an act of terrorism, while the insurgents and those sympathetic to their struggle may reject this characterization and portray (and justify) the killing as political assassination.

In order to avoid this kind of relativism, Primoratz puts forward a view that in one important respect takes on board the standpoint of the terrorist. The direct victims of terrorism are innocent in the sense of not being responsible, on any credible understanding of responsibility and liability, for the injustice or oppression the terrorists fight against—not responsible at all, or at least not responsible to the degree that makes them liable to be killed or maimed on that account. The injustice or oppression at issue need not be real; it may be merely alleged (by the terrorists). Being responsible for a merely alleged great injustice or oppression is enough for losing one’s immunity against violence, as far as the type of immunity and innocence relevant to defining terrorism is concerned. According to the traditional version of just war theory one does not lose immunity against acts of war only by fighting in an unjust war, but by fighting in any war. Similarly, one does not lose immunity against political violence only by holding office in or implementing policies of a gravely unjust government, but by holding office in or implementing policies of any government: as King Umberto I of Italy said after surviving an assassination attempt, such risk comes with the job. Members of these two classes are not considered innocent and morally protected against violence by those attacking them; the latter view their acts as acts of war proper or of political assassination, respectively. If the terrorists subscribe to a credible view of responsibility and liability, then, when they attack common citizens, they attack people innocent from their own point of view, i.e., innocent even if we grant the terrorists their assessment of the policies at issue. (This is not to say that those who consider a government to be gravely unjust have a moral license to kill its officials, but only that if they do so, that will not be terrorism, but rather political assassination. We can still condemn their actions if we reject their judgment of the policies at issue, or if we accept that judgment, but believe that they should have opposed those policies by nonviolent means. But we will not be condemning their actions qua terrorism.)

On this account, not only real, but also merely alleged injustice or oppression counts in determining the innocence of the victims and deciding which acts are acts of terrorism; thus such decisions are not hostage to endless debates about the moral status of contested policies. Nevertheless, a residue of relativity remains. The account presupposes a certain understanding of responsibility and liability: a person is responsible for a state of affairs only by virtue of that person’s voluntary, i.e., informed and free, act or omission that has a sufficiently strong connection with that state of affairs, and thereby becomes liable to some proportionately unfavorable response. Provided the terrorists accept some such understanding of responsibility and liability, they kill and maim people they themselves must admit to be innocent. To be sure, some militant organizations resort to violence which we perceive as terrorist, yet object to the label. They profess a view of responsibility and liability based on extremely far-fetched connections between states of affairs and human choices and actions, and argue that entire social classes or nations are responsible for certain policies and practices and all their members are liable to be attacked by deadly violence (for more on this, see 2.1 below). Such arguments can only be regarded as preposterous. We should insist on viewing their actions as terrorist, although they reject this description. It is not clear how this residue of relativity could be removed (Primoratz 2013: 16–21).

Some object to defining “terrorism” as violence against non-combatants or innocent persons. They argue that doing so runs together the question of the nature of terrorism and that of its moral status, and begs the moral issue by making terrorism unjustified by definition. We should rather keep these questions separate, and take care not to prejudge the latter by giving a wrong answer to the former. What is needed is a morally neutral definition of terrorism, and that means a wide one (Corlett 2003: 114–20, 134–35; Young 2004: 57). But it is doubtful that “terrorism” can be defined in some morally untainted way. The wide definitions these philosophers adopt contain the word “violence”, which is itself morally loaded. A narrow definition is not completely morally neutral, as violence against the innocent is clearly morally wrong. But what is clear is that such violence is prima facie wrong. The definition implies a general presumption against terrorism, not its sweeping moral condemnation in each and every instance, whatever the circumstances and whatever the consequences of desisting from it. The definition does not rule out that in certain circumstances it might not be wrong, all things considered. Ethical investigation is not preempted: a particular case of terrorism still needs to be judged on its merits.

Another way of settling the issue of wide vs. narrow definition is offered by Georg Meggle. He adopts a wide definition of terrorism, and goes on to distinguish two different types: terrorism in the strong sense, which deliberately, recklessly, or negligently harms innocent people, and terrorism in the weak sense, which does not. Obviously, the moral assessment of the two types of terrorism is going to be significantly different (Meggle 2005).

The vast majority of cases almost anyone without an ax to grind would want to classify as “terrorism” exhibit the two traits implied in ordinary use and highlighted by mainstream philosophical definitions such as those quoted above: violence and intimidation. But philosophical literature also offers definitions that leave out one or the other core component.

Some seek to sever the connection between terrorism and violence. Carl Wellman defines terrorism as “the use or attempted use of terror as a means of coercion”. Terrorism is often associated with violence, but that is because violence is a very effective means of intimidation. Yet “violence is not essential to terrorism and, in fact, most acts of terrorism are nonviolent” (Wellman 1979: 250–51). The last claim seems false on any non-circular interpretation. There may be many acts generally considered terrorist that do not involve actual violence, but are meant to intimidate by threatening it; but that is not enough to support the notion of “non-violent terrorism”, which seems odd. So does Wellman’s example of “classroom terrorism”: a professor threatens to fail students who submit their essays after the due date, causes panic in class, and thereby engages in terrorism.

Robert E. Goodin offers a similar account, emphasizing the political role of terrorism: terrorism is “a political tactic, involving the deliberate frightening of people for political advantage” (Goodin 2006: 49). This, he claims, is the distinctive wrong terrorists commit. Whereas on Wellman’s account one can commit an act of terrorism without either engaging in or threatening violence, merely by making a threat in order to intimidate, on Goodin’s account one need not even make a threat: one acts as a terrorist by merely issuing a warning about the acts of others that is meant to intimidate. This, too, seems arbitrary, although it makes sense as a step in an argument meant to show that “ if (or insofar as ) Western political leaders are intending to frighten people for their own political advantage, then (to that extent ) they are committing the same core wrong that is distinctively associated with terrorism” (Goodin 2006: 2).

It has also been suggested that terrorism need not be understood as inducing terror or fear. According to Ted Honderich, terrorism is best defined as “violence, short of war, political, illegal and prima facie wrong” (Honderich 2006: 88). This definition might be thought problematic on several counts, but the idea of “terrorism” without “terror” seems especially odd. The two are connected etymologically and historically, and this connection is deeply entrenched in current ordinary use. Intimidation is not the morally salient trait of terrorism ( pace Goodin), but it is one of its core traits that cause most of us to condemn the practice. We might consider severing the connection if Honderich offered a good reason for doing so. But he supports his highly revisionary definition by the puzzling claim that to define terrorism as violence meant to intimidate is to imply that terrorism is particularly abhorrent and thereby “in effect … invite a kind of prima facie approval or tolerance of war” (Honderich 2006: 93).

2. The moral issue

Can terrorism be morally justified? There is no single answer to this question, as there is no single conception of what terrorism is. If we put aside definitions that depart too much, and for no compelling reason, from the core meaning of “terrorism” (such as those cited in 1.2.3), we still need to decide whether the question assumes a wide or a narrow understanding of terrorism. A narrow conception of terrorism seems to be better suited to ethical investigation (1.2.2). Moreover, philosophers who work with a wide definition typically hold that terrorism that targets non-combatants or innocent persons is much more difficult to justify than “selective” terrorism which attacks only those who cannot plausibly claim innocence of the injustice or oppression at issue (and which accordingly does not count as “terrorism” on a narrow definition of the term). The present discussion therefore focuses on terrorism understood as violence against innocent civilians or common citizens, intended to intimidate and thereby to achieve some further (political) objective or, more broadly, to coerce.

One might try to justify some acts or campaigns of violence of this kind in two ways. One could argue that the victims may be non-combatants or common citizens, but nevertheless are not innocent of the wrongs the terrorists are fighting against. Alternatively, one could concede the innocence of the victims and argue that attacks on them are nevertheless justified, either by their consequences on balance, or by some deontological considerations.

If the former line of argument is successful, will it prove too much? In showing that an instance of violence was justified because those targeted were not really innocent, we will have shown that the act or campaign of violence at issue was actually not a case of terrorism. This may be merely a matter of semantics. There is a much more damaging objection. A terrorist act is characteristically the killing or injuring of a random collection of people who happen to be in a certain place at a certain time. Arguments to the effect that those people are not innocent of the wrongs the terrorist fights against will therefore have a very wide reach, and accordingly will be based on some simplistic conception of collective responsibility. These arguments will be of the sort offered, for example, by the 19th century anarchist Emile Henry. He planted a bomb at the office of a mining company which, if it had exploded, would have killed or injured a number of people who did not work for the company, but lived in the same building. He also planted a bomb in a café that did go off, injuring twenty people, one of whom later died of his injuries. At his trial, Henry explained: “What about the innocent victims? […] The building where the Carmeaux Company had its offices was inhabited only by the bourgeois; hence there would be no innocent victims. The whole of the bourgeoisie lives by the exploitation of the unfortunate, and should expiate its crimes together” (Henry 1977: 193). When commenting on the second attack, he said:

Those good bourgeois who hold no office but who reap their dividends and live idly on the profits of the workers’ toil, they also must take their share in the reprisals. And not only they, but all those who are satisfied with the existing order, who applaud the acts of the government and so become its accomplices … in other words, the daily clientele of Terminus and other great cafés! (Henry 1977: 195)

This is an utterly implausible view of responsibility and liability. It claims that all members of a social class—men and women, young and old, adults and children—are liable to be killed or maimed: some for operating the system of exploitation, others for supporting it, and still others for benefiting from it. Even if, for the sake of argument, we grant the anarchist’s harsh moral condemnation of capitalist society, not every type and degree of involvement with it can justify the use of extreme violence. Giving the system political support, or benefiting from it, may be morally objectionable, but is surely not enough to make one liable to be blown to pieces.

Another, more recent example, is provided by Osama Bin Laden. In an interview in the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, 2001 he said:

The American people should remember that they pay taxes to their government and that they voted for their president. Their government makes weapons and provides them to Israel, which they use to kill Palestinian Muslims. Given that the American Congress is a committee that represents the people, the fact that it agrees with the actions of the American government proves that America in its entirety is responsible for the atrocities that it is committing against Muslims (Bin Laden 2005: 140–141).

This, too, is a preposterous understanding of responsibility and liability. For it claims that all Americans are eligible to be killed or maimed: some for devising and implementing America’s policies, others for participating in the political process, still others for paying taxes. Even if, for the sake of argument, we grant Bin Laden’s severe condemnation of those policies, not every type and degree of involvement with them can justify the use of lethal violence. Surely voting in elections or paying taxes is not enough to make one fair game.

Attempts at justification of terrorism that concede that its victims are innocent seem more promising. They fall into two groups, depending on the type of ethical theory on which they are based.

2.2 Consequentialism

Adherents of consequentialism judge terrorism, like every other practice, solely by its consequences. Terrorism is not considered wrong in itself, but only if it has bad consequences on balance. The innocence of the victims does not change that. This is an instance of a general trait of consequentialism often highlighted by its critics, for example in the debate about the moral justification of legal punishment. A standard objection to the consequentialist approach to punishment has been that it implies that punishment of the innocent is justified, when its consequences are good on balance. This objection can only get off the ground because consequentialism denies that in such matters a person’s innocence is morally significant in itself.

Those who consider terrorism from a consequentialist point of view differ in their assessment of its morality. Their judgment on terrorism depends on their view of the good to be promoted by its use and on their assessment of the utility of terrorism as a means of promoting it. There is room for disagreement on both issues.

Kai Nielsen approaches questions to do with political violence in general and terrorism in particular as a consequentialist in ethics and a socialist in politics. The use of neither can be ruled out categorically; it all depends on their utility as a method for attaining morally and politically worthwhile objectives such as “a truly socialist society” or liberation from colonial rule. “When and where [either] should be employed is a tactical question that must be decided … on a case-by-case basis … like the choice of weapon in a war” (Nielsen 1981: 435). Nielsen has a wide definition of terrorism, but his examples show that the innocence of the victims of terrorism makes no difference to its justification—that is, that his conclusions apply to terrorism in both the wide and narrow sense. In his view,

terrorist acts must be justified by their political effects and their moral consequences. They are justified (1) when they are politically effective weapons in the revolutionary struggle and (2) when, everything considered, there are sound reasons for believing that, by the use of that type of violence rather than no violence at all or violence of some other type, there will be less injustice, suffering and degradation in the world than would otherwise have been the case (Nielsen 1981: 446).

Historical experience, in Nielsen’s view, tells us that terrorism on a small scale, used as the sole method of struggle in order to provoke the masses into revolutionary action, is ineffective and often counterproductive. On the other hand, terrorism employed in conjunction with guerrilla warfare in a protracted war of liberation may well prove useful and therefore also justified, as it did in Algeria and South Vietnam. (For an earlier statement of the same view, see Trotsky 1961: 48–59, 62–65.)

Nicholas Fotion also uses a wide definition of terrorism. He, too, is a consequentialist (although some of his remarks concerning the innocence of many victims of terrorism might be more at home in nonconsequentialist ethics). But he finds standard consequentialist assessments of terrorism such as Nielsen’s too permissive. If some types of terrorism are justifiable under certain circumstances, such circumstances will be extremely rare. Terrorists and their apologists do not perform the requisite calculations properly. One problem is the “higher good” to be promoted by terrorism: more often than not, it is defined in ideological terms, rather than derived from settled preferences or interests of actual people. But for the most part Fotion discusses the issue of means. If a terrorist act or campaign is to be justified instrumentally, it must be shown (1) that the end sought is good enough to justify the means, (2) that the end will indeed be achieved by means of terrorism, and (3) that the end cannot be achieved in any other way that is morally and otherwise less costly. Terrorists not only, as a matter of fact, fail to discharge this burden; Fotion argues that, with regard to terrorism that victimizes innocent people, it cannot be discharged. All direct victims of terrorism are treated as objects to be used—indeed, used up—by the terrorist. But

in being treated as an object, the innocent victim is worse off than the (alleged) guilty victim. Insofar as the latter is judged to have done a wrong, he is thought of as a human. […] For the terrorist the innocent victim is neither a human in this judgmental sense nor a human in the sense of simply having value as a human being. Of course the terrorist needs to pick a human being as a victim … because [that] brings about more terror … But this does not involve treating them as humans. Rather, they are victimized and thereby treated as objects because they are humans (Fotion 1981: 464).

In reply, terrorists can claim that they advisedly sacrifice valued human beings for a higher good. But for this claim to carry any conviction, they would have to show that they have no alternative. Yet, Fotion argues, they always have the alternative of taking on the opponent’s military establishment, and often also have the option of going after government officials responsible for the wrongs they object to, instead of attacking innocent persons. That kind of terrorism may sometimes be justified, whereas terrorism that targets innocent people never is.

2.3 Nonconsequentialism

Within a nonconsequentialist approach to morality, terrorism is considered wrong in itself, because of what it is, rather than only because (and insofar as) its consequences are bad on balance. But this is not to say that this approach leaves no room whatever for morally justifying certain acts or campaigns of terrorism. Indeed, nonconsequentialist discussions of terrorism also present a range of positions and arguments.

A nonconsequentialist might try to justify an act or campaign of terrorism in one of two ways. One might invoke some deontological considerations, such as justice or rights, in favor of resorting to terrorism under certain circumstances. Alternatively, one might argue that the obvious, and obviously very weighty, considerations of rights (of the victims of terrorism) and justice (which demands respect for those rights) may sometimes be overridden by extremely weighty considerations of consequences—an extremely high price that would be paid for not resorting to terrorism. For the rejection of consequentialism is of course not tantamount to denying that consequences of our actions, policies, and practices matter in their moral assessment; what is denied is the consequentialists’ claim that only consequences matter.

Virginia Held operates with a broad notion of terrorism, but her justification of terrorism is meant to apply to terrorism that targets common citizens. Her discussion of the subject focuses on the issue of rights. When rights of a person or group are not respected, what may we do in order to ensure that they are? On one view, known as consequentialism of rights, if the only way to ensure respect of a certain right of A and B is to infringe the same right of C , we shall be justified in doing so. Held does not hold that such trade-offs in rights with the aim of maximizing their respect in a society are appropriate. Yet rights sometimes come into conflict, whether directly or indirectly (as in the above example). When that happens, there is no way we can avoid comparing the rights involved as more or less stringent and making certain choices between them. That applies to the case of terrorism too. Terrorism obviously violates some human rights of its victims. But its advocates claim that in some circumstances a limited use of terrorism is the only way of bringing about a society where human rights of all will be respected.

Even when this claim is true, that is not enough to make resort to terrorism justified. But it will be justified if an additional condition is met: that of distributive justice. If there is a society where the human rights of a part of the population are respected, while the same rights of another part of the population are being violated; if the only way of changing that and ensuring that human rights of all are respected is a limited use of terrorism; finally, if terrorism is directed against members of the first group, which up to now has been privileged as far as respect of human rights is concerned—then terrorism will be morally justified. This is a justification in terms of distributive justice, applied to the problem of violations of human rights. It is more just to equalize the violations of human rights in a stage of transition to a society where the rights of all are respected, than to allow that the group which has already suffered large-scale violations of human rights suffer even more such violations (assuming that in both cases we are dealing with violations of the same, or equally stringent, human rights). The human rights of many are going to be violated in any case; it is more just, and therefore morally preferable, that their violations should be distributed in a more equitable way (Held 2008).

It might be objected that in calling for sacrificing such basic human rights as the right to life and to bodily security of individual victims of terrorism for the sake of a more just distribution of violations of the same rights within a group in the course of transition to a stage where these rights will be respected throughout that group, Held offends against the principles of separateness of persons and respect for persons (Primoratz 1997: 230–31). In response, Held argues that

to fail to achieve a more just distribution of violations of rights (through the use of terrorism if that is the only means available) is to fail to recognize that those whose rights are already not fairly respected are individuals in their own right, not merely members of a group … whose rights can be ignored.

An argument for achieving a just distribution of rights violations is not necessarily about groups; it can be an argument about the rights of individuals to fairness (Held 2008: 89–90). (For further objections to Held’s argument, see Steinhoff 2007: 125–30; Brooks 2010; Nath 2011.)

In Held’s justification of terrorism, it is justice that requires that inescapable violations of human rights be more evenly distributed. There is a different way of allowing for the use of terrorism under certain circumstances within a nonconsequentialist approach to the ethics of violence. It could be argued that, as far as justice and rights are concerned, terrorism (or, in Held’s terminology, the kind of terrorism that targets the innocent) is never justified. Furthermore, considerations of justice and rights carry much greater weight than considerations of good and bad consequences, and therefore normally trump the latter in cases of conflict. However, in exceptional circumstances considerations concerning consequences—the price of not resorting to terrorism—may be so extremely weighty as to override those of justice and rights.

Michael Walzer offers an argument along these lines in his discussion of “terror bombing” of German cities in World War II. In early 1942, it seemed that Britain would be defeated by Germany and that its military could not prevail while fighting in accordance with the rules of war. Britain was the only remaining obstacle to the subjugation of most of Europe by the Nazis. That was “an ultimate threat to everything decent in our lives, an ideology and a practice of domination so murderous, so degrading even to those who might survive, that the consequences of its final victory were literally beyond calculation, immeasurably awful” (Walzer 2000: 253). Thus Britain was facing a “supreme emergency”: an (a) imminent threat of (b) something utterly unthinkable from a moral point of view. In such an emergency—a case of the “dirty hands” predicament that so often plagues political action (see Walzer 1973)—one may breach a basic and weighty moral principle such as civilian immunity, if that is the only hope of fending off the threat. So for more than three years, the RAF, later joined by the USAAF, deliberately devastated many German cities, killed about 600,000 civilians and seriously injured another 800,000 in an attempt to terrorize the German people into forcing their leadership to halt the war and surrender unconditionally. By early 1943 it was clear that Germany was not going to win the war, and all subsequent terror bombing lacked moral justification. But in its first year, in Walzer’s view, the terror bombing of Germany was morally justified as a response to the supreme emergency Britain was facing. Walzer then expands the notion of supreme emergency to apply to a single political community facing the threat of extermination or enslavement, and eventually to a single political community whose “survival and freedom” are at stake. For “the survival and freedom of political communities—whose members share a way of life, developed by their ancestors, to be passed on to their children—are the highest values of international society” (Walzer 2000: 254).

Here we have two different conceptions of supreme emergency. The threat is imminent in both, but the nature of the threat differs: it is one thing to suffer the fate the Nazis had in store for peoples they considered racially inferior, and another to have one’s polity dismantled. By moving back and forth between these two types of supreme emergency under the ambiguous heading of threat to “the survival and freedom of a political community”, Walzer seeks to extend to the latter the moral response that might be appropriate to the former. Yet whereas genocide, expulsion, or enslavement of an entire people might be thought a moral disaster that may be fended off by any means, its loss of political independence is, at most, a political disaster. If a polity to be dismantled lacks moral legitimacy, its demise may well be a moral improvement. But even if a polity does have moral legitimacy, a threat to its “survival and freedom” falls short of “an ultimate threat to everything decent in our lives”. If so, its military cannot be justified in waging war on enemy civilians in order to defend it. (On supreme emergencies see, for instance, Statman 2006; Kaplan 2011.)

There is another, less permissive position constructed along similar lines, but based on a more austere view of what counts as a moral disaster that might justify resort to terrorism. Contrary to what many fighters against social or economic oppression, colonial rule, or foreign occupation believe, evils of such magnitude that they can justify indiscriminate killing and maiming of innocent people are extremely rare. Not every case of oppression, foreign rule, or occupation, however morally indefensible, amounts to a moral disaster in the relevant sense. Nor does every imminent threat to “the survival and freedom of a political community” qualify, contrary to what Walzer has argued. However, if an entire people is subjected to extermination, or to an attempt at “ethnically cleansing” it from its land, then it is facing a true moral disaster and may properly consider terrorism as a method of struggle against such a fate. In view of their enormity and finality, extermination and “ethnic cleansing” of an entire people constitute a category apart. To be sure, resorting to terrorism in such a case will be morally justified only if there are very good grounds for believing that terrorism will succeed where nothing else will: in preventing imminent extermination or “ethnic cleansing”, or stopping it if it is already under way. Cases where both conditions are met will be extremely rare. Indeed, history may not offer a single example. But that does not mean that no act or campaign of terrorism could ever satisfy these conditions and thus turn out to be justified. Accordingly, terrorism is almost absolutely wrong (Primoratz 2013: chapter 6).

Both the “supreme emergency” and the “moral disaster” view will justify a resort to terrorism only when that is the only way to deal with the emergency, or to prevent the disaster, respectively. Just how certain must we be that terrorism will indeed achieve the goal, while no other method will? One might argue that when in extremis , we cannot apply stringent epistemic standards in deciding how to cope—indeed, if we cannot really know what will work, we must take our chances with what might. This is Walzer’s view: in such a predicament, we must “wager” the crime of terrorism against the evil that is otherwise in store for us. “There is no option; the risk otherwise is too great” (Walzer 2000: 259–260). It may be objected that this position highlights the enormity of the threat, while failing to give due weight to the enormity of the means proposed for fending off the threat—the enormity of terrorism, of deliberately killing and maiming innocent people. When that is taken into account, the conclusion may rather be that even in extremis , if terrorism is to be justified, the reasons for believing that it will work and that nothing else will must be very strong indeed.

Some hold that terrorism is absolutely wrong. This position, too, comes in different versions. Some philosophers work with a wide definition of terrorism, and argue that under certain circumstances “selective” terrorism that targets only those seriously implicated in the wrongs at issue may be justified (Corlett 2003, Young 2004). This seems to suggest that terrorism which is not selective in this way—that is, terrorism in the narrow sense—is never justified. Yet this does not follow: there is still room for arguing that terrorism of the latter type can be justified by further considerations, such as those of “supreme emergency” or “moral disaster”.

Per Bauhn does not leave it at that. He attempts to show that terrorism that targets non-combatants or common citizens can never be justified by deploying a slightly amended version of Alan Gewirth’s ethical theory. Freedom and safety are fundamental prerequisites of action and therefore must be accorded paramount weight. The need to protect them generates a range of rights; the right pertinent here is “an absolute right not to be made the intended victims of a homicidal project” all innocent persons have (Gewirth 1981: 16). When the absolute status of this right is challenged by invoking supreme emergency or moral disaster, Bauhn argues that there is a moral difference between what we are positively and directly causally responsible for, and what we are causally responsible for only indirectly, by failing to prevent other persons from intentionally bringing it about. We are morally responsible for the former, but (except in certain special circumstances) not for the latter. If we refuse to resort to terrorism in order not to target innocent persons, and thus fail to prevent some other persons from perpetrating atrocities, it is only the perpetrators who will be morally responsible for those atrocities. Therefore we must refuse (Bauhn 1989: chapter 5).

Some philosophers base their absolute rejection of terrorism on the slippery slope argument, and argue that “the appeal to supreme emergency is too dangerous to be allowed as a publicly available vindication for terrorism, no matter how rare the circumstances are meant to be” (Coady 2021: 143–44).

Stephen Nathanson seeks to ground the absolute immunity of civilians or common citizens and the absolute prohibition of terrorism which it entails in a rule-consequentialist ethical theory (Nathanson 2010: 191–208). Adopting civilian immunity, rather than adopting any other rule regulating the matter or having no rule at all, is the best way to reduce the killing and destruction in armed conflict. Moreover, the best consequences will be achieved by adopting it as an absolute rule, rather than as a rule allowing for exceptions in supreme emergencies. The idea of supreme emergency is vague. The criteria for proffering supreme emergency exemptions are liable to be applied in arbitrary and subjective ways. Finally, there is the slippery slope argument: “permitting [departures from the rule of civilian immunity, including terrorism] even under the direst circumstances will lower the bar for justifying such acts … broadcast the message that such behavior may sometimes be justified and … thus lend its weight to increasing the use of such methods” (Nathanson 2010: 207).

However, one can adopt rule-consequentialism as one’s ethical theory and yet view the immunity of civilians or common citizens and the attendant prohibition of terrorism as very stringent, but not absolute moral rules. Thus Richard B. Brandt and Brad Hooker do not view this immunity as absolute. They argue that a set of moral rules selected because of the good consequences of their adoption should include a rule that allows and indeed requires one to prevent disaster even if that means breaking some other moral rule. Even such a stringent moral rule as the prohibition of deliberate use of violence against innocent people may be overridden, if the disaster that cannot be prevented in any other way is grave enough. (See Brandt 1992: 87–88, 150–51, 156–57; Hooker 2000: 98–99, 127–36). There is thus some convergence at the level of practical conclusions between their understanding of the immunity of civilians or common citizens and the “moral disaster” position outlined above (2.3.2).

Allhoff, Fritz, 2012, Terrorism, Ticking Time-Bombs, and Torture: A Philosophical Analysis , New York: Columbia University Press; see part I.
Arendt, Hannah, 1958, The Origins of Totalitarianism , 2 nd edn., Cleveland: The World Publishing Co.; see chapters 12,13.
Ashmore, Robert B., 1997, “State Terrorism and Its Sponsors”, in Tomis Kapitan (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict , Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 105–133.
Bauhn, Per, 1989, Ethical Aspects of Political Terrorism: The Sacrificing of the Innocent , Lund: Lund University Press.
Bin Laden, Osama, 2005, “The Example of Vietnam”, Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama Bin Laden , Bruce Lawrence (ed.), James Howarth (trans.), London and New York: Verso, 139–144.
Brandt, Richard B., 1992, Morality, Utilitarianism, and Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brooks, Thom, 2010, “Justifying Terrorism”, Public Affairs Quarterly , 24: 189–96.
Carter, Michael Philip, 1989, “The French Revolution: ‘Jacobin Terror’”, in Rapoport and Alexander (eds.) 1989, 133–51.
Card, Claudia, 2010, Confronting Evils: Terrorism, Torture, Genocide , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; see chapters 5, 6.
Coady, C.A.J., 1985, “The Morality of Terrorism”, Philosophy , 60: 47–69.
–––, 2001, “Terrorism”, in Lawrence C. Becker and Charlotte B. Becker (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ethics , 2 nd edn., New York and London: Routledge, vol. 3, 1696–99.
–––, 2004, “Terrorism and Innocence”, Journal of Ethics , 8: 37–58.
–––, 2021, The Meaning of Terrorism , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corlett, J. Angelo, 2003, Terrorism: A Philosophical Analysis , Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Dardis, Tony, 1992, “Primoratz on Terrorism”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 9: 93–97.
Donahue, Thomas J., 2013, “Terrorism, Moral Conceptions, and Moral Innocence”, The Philosophical Forum , 44: 413–35.
Elshtain, Jean Bethke, 2003, Just War against Terror: The Burden of American Power in a Violent World , New York: Basic Books.
Finlay, Christopher J., 2015, Terrorism and the Right to Resist: A Theory of Just Revolutionary War , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; see chapter 9.
Fotion, Nicholas, 1981, “The Burdens of Terrorism”, in Burton M. Leiser (ed.), Values in Conflict , New York: Macmillan, 463–70.
Frey, R.G. and Christopher W. Morris (eds.), 1991, Violence, Terrorism, and Justice , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fullinwider, Robert K., 1988, “Understanding Terrorism”, in Steven Luper-Foy (ed.), Problems of International Justice , Boulder: Westview Press, 249–59.
George, David A., 2000, “The Ethics of IRA Terrorism”, in Andrew Valls (ed.), Ethics in International Affairs: Theories and Cases , Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 81–97.
Gewirth, Alan, 1981, “Are There Any Absolute Rights?”, The Philosophical Quarterly , 31: 1–16.
Gilbert, Paul, 1994, Terrorism, Security and Nationality: An Introductory Study in Applied Political Philosophy , London and New York: Routledge.
Goodin, Robert E., 2006, What’s Wrong with Terrorism? Oxford: Polity.
Goppel, Anna, 2013, Killing Terrorists: A Moral and Legal Analysis , Berlin: de Gruyter.
Gordon, Neve, and George A. Lopez, 2000, “Terrorism in the Arab-Israeli Conflict”, in Andrew Valls (ed.), Ethics in International Affairs: Theories and Cases , Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 99–113.
Govier, Trudy, 2002, A Delicate Balance: What Philosophy Can Tell Us about Terrorism , Cambridge, Mass.: Westview Press.
Grayling, A.C., 2006, Among the Dead Cities: Was the Allied Bombing of Civilians in WWII a Necessity or a Crime? , London: Bloomsbury.
Held, Virginia, 2008, How Terrorism Is Wrong: Morality and Political Violence . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Henry, Emile, 1977, “A Terrorist’s Defence”, in George Woodcock (ed.), The Anarchist Reader , Hassocks: Harvester Press, 189–96.
Honderich, Ted, 2003, After the Terror , 2 nd edn., Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
–––, 2006, Humanity, Terrorism, Terrorist War , London and New York: Continuum.
Hooker, Brad, 2000, Ideal Code, Real World: A Rule-consequentialist Theory of Morality , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hughes, Martin, 1982, “Terrorism and National Security”, Philosophy , 57: 5–25.
Jaggar, Alison M., 2005, “What Is Terrorism, Why Is It Wrong, and Could It Ever Be Morally Permissible?”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 36: 202–17.
Jollimore, Troy, 2007, “Terrorism, War, and the Killing of the Innocent”, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10: 353–72.
Kamm, F.M., 2013, Ethics for Enemies: Terror, Torture and War , Oxford: Oxford University Press; see chapter 2.
Kapitan, Tomis, 2008, “Terrorism”, in Raja Halwani and Tomis Kapitan, The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Philosophical Essays on Self-Determination, Terrorism and the One-State Solution , Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 132–97.
Kaplan, Shawn, 2008, “A Typology of Terrorism”, Review Journal of Political Philosophy , 6: 1–38.
–––, 2011, “Unraveling Emergency Justifications and Excuses for Terrorism”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 42: 219–38.
Kautsky, Karl, 1973 [1919], Terrorism and Communism: A Contribution to the Natural History of Revolution , trans. W.H. Kerridge, Westport, Conn.: Hyperion Press.
Khatchadourian, Haig, 1998, The Morality of Terrorism , New York: Peter Lang.
Lackey, Douglas, 2004, “The Evolution of the Modern Terrorist State: Area Bombing and Nuclear Deterrence”, in Primoratz (ed.) 2004, 128–38.
Laqueur, Walter (ed.), 1987, The Terrorism Reader: A Historical Anthology , 2 nd edn., New York: New American Library.
Law, Stephen (ed.), 2008, Israel, Palestine and Terror , London: Continuum.
Luban, David, 2003, “The War on Terrorism and the End of Human Rights”, in Verna V. Gehring (ed.), War after September 11 , Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 51–65.
McMahan, Jeff, 2006, “Intention, Permissibility, Terrorism, and War”, Philosophical Perspectives , 23: 345–72.
–––, 2009, “War, Terrorism, and the War on Terror”, in Chris Miller (ed.), War on Terror: The Oxford Amnesty Lectures 2006 , Manchester: Manchester University Press, 159–84.
McPherson, Lionel K., 2007, “Is Terrorism Distinctively Wrong?” Ethics 111: 524–46.
Medina, Vicente, 2015, Terrorism Unjustified: The Use and Misuse of Political Violence , Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Meggle, Georg, 2005, “Terror and Counter-Terror: Initial Ethical Reflections”, in Meggle (ed.) 2005, 161–75.
Meggle, Georg (ed.), 2005, Ethics of Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism , Frankfurt/M.: Ontos Verlag.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice, 1969, Humanism and Terror: An Essay on the Communist Problem , trans. John O’Neill, Boston: Beacon Press.
Miller, Richard W., 2005, “Terrorism and Legitimacy: A Response to Virginia Held”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 36: 194–201.
Miller, Seumas, 2009, Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Ethics and Liberal Democracy , Oxford: Blackwell.
Mills, Claudia, 1995, “The Distinctive Wrong of Terrorism”, International Journal of Applied Philosophy , 10: 57–60.
Nath, Rekha, 2011, “Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right: A Critique of Virginia Held’s Deontological Justification of Terrorism”, Social Theory and Practice 37: 679–96.
Nathanson, Stephen, 2010, Terrorism and the Ethics of War , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nielsen, Kai, 1981, “Violence and Terrorism: Its Uses and Abuses”, in Burton M. Leiser (ed.), Values in Conflict , New York: Macmillan, 435–49.
Primoratz, Igor, 1997, “The Morality of Terrorism”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 14: 221–33.
–––, 2006, “Terrorism in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Case Study in Applied Ethics”, Iyyun: The Jerusalem Philosophical Quarterly 55: 27–48.
–––, 2010, “Can the Bombing Be Morally Justified?” in Igor Primoratz (ed.), Terror from the Sky: The Bombing of German Cities in World War II , New York: Berghahn Books, 113–33.
–––, 2013, Terrorism: A Philosophical Investigation , Cambridge: Polity Press.
––– (ed.), 2004, Terrorism: The Philosophical Issues , Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rapoport, David C., and Yonah Alexander (eds.), 1989, The Morality of Terrorism: Religious and Secular Justifications , 2 nd edn., New York: Columbia University Press.
Reiff, Mark K., 2008, “Terrorism, Retribution, and Collective Responsibility”, Social Theory and Practice 34: 209–42.
Reitan, Eric, 2010, “Defining Terrorism for Public Policy Purposes: The Group–Target Definition”, Journal of Moral Philosophy 7: 253–78.
Rigstad, Mark, 2008, “The Senses of Terrorism”, Review Journal of Political Philosophy , 6: 75–102.
Scheffler, Samuel, 2006, “Is Terrorism Morally Distinctive?” Journal of Political Philosophy , 14: 1–17.
Schwenkenbecher, Anne, 2012, Terrorism: A Philosophical Enquiry , Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shanahan, Timothy (ed.), 2005, Philosophy 9/11: Thinking about the War on Terrorism , Chicago: Open Court.
–––, 2009, The Provisional Irish Republican Army and the Morality of Terrorism , Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Simpson, Peter, 2004, “Violence and Terrorism in Northern Ireland”, in Primoratz (ed.) 2004, 161–74.
Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter, 1991, “On Primoratz’s Definition of Terrorism”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 8: 115–20.
Smith, Matthew Noah, 2007, “Terrorism, Shared Rules and Trust”, Journal of Political Philosophy , 16: 201–19.
Statman, Daniel, 2006, “Supreme Emergencies Revisited”, Ethics , 117: 58–79.
Steinhoff, Uwe, 2007, On the Ethics of War and Terrorism , Oxford: Oxford University Press; see chapter 5.
Sterba, James P. (ed.), 2003, Terrorism and International Justice , New York: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, Isaac, 2018, The Ethics of Counterterrorism , London: Routledge.
Trotsky, Leon, 1961 [1920], Terrorism and Communism: A Reply to Karl Kautsky , Ann Arbor, Mich.: The University of Michigan Press.
Uniacke, Suzanne, 2014, “Opportunistic Terrorism”, Journal of Moral Philosophy 11: 395–410.
Valls, Andrew, 2000, “Can Terrorism Be Justified?”, in Andrew Valls (ed.), Ethics in International Affairs: Theories and Cases , Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 65–79.
Waldron, Jeremy, 2010, Torture, Terror, and Trade–Offs: Philosophy for the White House , Oxford: Oxford University Press; see chapters 3, 4.
Wallace, Gerry, 1989, “Area Bombing, Terrorism and the Death of Innocents”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 6: 3–16.
–––, 1991, “Terrorism and the Argument from Analogy”, International Journal of Moral and Social Studies , 6: 149–60.
Walzer, Michael, 1973, “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands”, Philosophy and Public Affairs , 2: 160–80.
–––, 2000, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations , 3 rd edn., New York: Basic Books; see chapters 12, 16.
–––, 2004, Arguing about War , Ithaca, N.Y.: Yale University Press; see chapters 4, 10.
–––, 2006, “Terrorism and Just War”, Philosophia , 34: 3–12.
Wellman, Carl, 1979, “On Terrorism Itself”, Journal of Value Inquiry , 13: 250–58.
Wellmer, Albrecht, 1984, “Terrorism and the Critique of Society”, in Jürgen Habermas (ed.), Observations on “The Spiritual Situation of the Age” , trans. Andrew Buchwalter, Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 283–307.
Wilkins, Burleigh Taylor, 1992, Terrorism and Collective Responsibility , London and New York: Routledge.
Young, Robert, 1977, “Revolutionary Terrorism, Crime and Morality”, Social Theory and Practice , 4: 287–302.
–––, 2004, “Political Terrorism as a Weapon of the Politically Powerless”, in Primoratz (ed.), 2004, 55–64.
Ethics , 114/4, 2004: Terrorism, War, and Justice.
Iyyun: The Jerusalem Philosophical Quarterly , 55/1, 2006: Terrorism and Counterterrorism.
The Journal of Ethics , 8/1, 2004: Terrorism.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

Just War Theory : annotated aid to research and instruction in philosophical studies of warfare, maintained by Mark Rigstad (Philosophy, Oakland University)

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Andrew Alexandra, Tony Coady, and Thomas Pogge for helpful comments on a draft of this article.

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

How it works
Latest orders
Our writers

How to Write an Essay on Terrorism: Complete Guide

Terrorism became a global problem as soon as we decided to make it a global problem. Terrorist acts have always been a part of the history of conflicts between countries, nations, religions, and ideologies. It became global when we started sharing these horror stories and broadcasting them around the globe. This topic is current and complex: there is a good chance that you’ll have to write a terrorism essay at least once in your life.

We want you to be ready. We’ve prepared this guide to simplify the writing process as much as possible. Tips, terrorism research paper topics, reliable sources – everything is here.

How to Make Your Terrorism Essay Better: 10 Tips

We’re sure that you know how to write an essay on terrorism – the same way as any other essay. But we want to remind you of a few things that can simplify the writing process and entail a better result and a higher grade. So, be attentive:

1. Pick a narrow topic.

You won’t be able to develop a broad topic in your terrorism essay properly. You’ll only have two or three pages, so don’t try to bite more than you can chew. You can pick one of the topics that we’ve gathered for you in this guide below.

2. Conduct thorough research.

You don’t have to spend days at the library digging through ancient dusty scrolls to find necessary information. A few hours of surfing the internet is usually enough to find many sources and pick important quotes that might enforce your arguments.

3. Choose reliable sources.

And speaking of sources, you should be very picky at this point. The internet is full of garbage: fake news, unverified facts, and “expert” opinions of bloggers. Don’t fall in this trap! Use only trustworthy sources: online encyclopedias (not Wikipedia), scientific journals, non-fiction books, reputable newspapers, etc.

4. Make an outline.

This is an obvious tip, but a really helpful one. An outline will establish the structure of your essay about terrorism and help you organize your thoughts. We also recommend you to include keywords if you don’t want to forget about the essential details.

5. Compose your thesis statement.

The thesis statement is the starting point of your essay. It won’t let you get off your writing track. Imagine that you have to explain the main points of your essay in one sentence – this would be the perfect thesis statement.

6. Find an original point of view.

Don’t be afraid of expressing your personal opinion. Of course, the topic of terrorism is debatable and painful, but you have to be honest with yourself and your readers. Writing a terrorism essay can be quite challenging, but you have this guide and your logical thinking, so it’s not that bad.

7. Use strong arguments.

Let’s define a strong argument first. A strong argument is a piece of evidence that proves your point in such a way that your readers are persuaded to believe you. We suggest you to use real-life examples, quotations from reliable sources, statistical data, and verified facts as your arguments. Avoid logical fallacies, as attentive readers will notice them, and you’ll lose their trust.

8. Stick to an academic writing style.

No matter what type of essay you’ll choose, you have to use an academic writing style. No jargon, no contractions, and no exclamation marks! If you’re new to academic standards, you should read about the requirements in your college code.

9. Format your terrorism essay properly.

Using the proper formatting style is another peculiarity when it comes to writing essays. MLA, APA, Chicago, and Harvard are the most common formats. Your instructor will specify the required style in his or her task. Sticking to the proper formatting style influences your general grade.

10. Use online tools.

Online services make students’ lives much easier. These tools can check your writing and make it free of mistakes. If you don’t have much time to write your essay, you can always rely on one of these writing services – for example, EssayBulls.

Tips – DONE! You know how to write an essay on terrorism, and we’ve shown you how to make it better. Now, let’s focus on what topics you can analyze in your essay. We’ll start with the types of terrorism.

7 Types of Terrorism to Write About in Your Terrorism Essay

The types of terrorism differ in their causes, purposes, and methods. We hope that you’ll learn more about this global problem from the section below:

Religious terrorism

Also known to be non-political, religious terrorism is aimed at religious purposes and is motivated by the reasons of a predominantly religious character.

Dissent terrorism

Dissent terrorists want to overthrow the existing government or to change the state policy drastically using terrorist attacks as a political tool.

Political terrorism

This type of terrorism is used by political parties and organizations against other political factions. Civilians are the most frequent victims of such attacks.

State-sponsored terrorism

Such terrorist acts are initiated by the government, often secretly, to achieve a specific goal. This method is frequently used in conflicts with other countries.

Quasi-terrorism

A quasi-terrorist is a person who acts like a real terrorist and uses the same methods but doesn’t have the same motivation. They’re often criminals who take hostages and threaten their lives to achieve a particular goal.

Civil disorder

Civil disorders are a form of violent protests that frequently cause the destruction of private property and injury to civilians. As a rule, the participants want to demonstrate their resentment against the government.

As you see, terrorism is a complex and multifaceted concept. You can describe and analyze any type in your terrorism essays. If you don’t feel inspired enough, we also offer a list of terrorism research paper topics below.

30 Unique Terrorism Research Paper Topics for Your Writing

Compare and contrast a few acts of terrorism during the Civil War and in the 21st century.
How does terrorism influence US immigration laws?
Is there any connection between terrorist acts and immigration laws in Europe?
Is terrorism the most important problem in our society?
Why do people become suicide bombers?
Is terrorism a more significant problem for the USA or for the Middle East?
How do terrorists use technologies for their attacks?
Is religion the main cause of terrorism in the 21st century?
Is cyberterrorism the most dangerous form of terrorist attack?
How have the September 11 attacks changed the image of terrorism?
Are immoral methods justified when it comes to fighting terrorism?
Will the GWOT (Global War on Terrorism) ever end?
Can the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki be considered terrorist acts?
How can be the internet be used to further terrorists’ goals?
What is Al Qaeda? What are the main purposes of this organization?
Define the term “Jihad.” Why is its literal meaning not well known?
What factors shape public opinion toward terrorism?
Can terrorism be considered a political tool?
Is the death penalty an effective method to fight terrorism?
Compare and contrast dynamic and economic models of terrorism.
Why has the level of domestic terrorism increased recently?
Define the term “selective terrorism.”
Terrorists: criminals or combatants?
How does terrorism affect the global economy?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a soft-line approach to terrorism?
How does terrorism affect the perception of Arabs in society?
How has the stereotypical image of a terrorist changed over the last 50 years?
How can individuals fight terrorism?
Does Islam approve of terrorist acts?
What makes terrorism so frightening in comparison to other global problems?

Well, have you found something special? We hope so. You have the instruction, and you have the topic. Now, you need to pick a range of sources to use for your writing. We have some suggestions for you right here.

Helpful Resources for Your Terrorism Essay: Articles and Books

You don’t have to use these sources if they aren’t appropriate for your essay. Your instructor may have recommended you particular sources. But if you have any difficulties in gathering information, don’t hesitate to check these lists.

12 Articles to Quote in Your Essay on Terrorism

Annette Schaefer. Inside the Terrorist Mind. Scientific American Mind.
Katarina Jonev. Terrorist Influence on Children in Cyberspace. The Market for Ideas.
Jasper Jackson. Police Urge Public to Help Counter UK’s Complex Terror Threat. The Guardian.
Douglas Pratt. Terrorism and Religious Fundamentalism: Prospects for a Predictive Paradigm. Research Gate.
Max Abrahms. Why Terrorism Does Not Work. Quarterly Journal: International Security.
Scott Atran. Genesis of Suicide Terrorism. Science.
CNN Library. US Terrorist Attacks Fast Facts.
Steven E. Miller. After the 9/11 Disaster: Washington’s Struggle to Improve Homeland Security. Axess.
Peter Bergen. Why Do Terrorists Commit Terrorism? The New York Times.
Mario Arturo Ruiz Estrada. The Economic Impact of Terrorism: A New Model and Its Application to Pakistan. Journal of Policy Modeling.
Zulaika, Joseba, and Imanol Murua. How Terrorism Ends – and Does Not End: The Basque Case. Critical Studies on Terrorism.
Parag Khanna. Terrorism As War. Hoover Institution.

20 Books to Quote in Your Essay on Terrorism

Jonathan R. White. “Terrorism and Homeland Security.”
Clifford E. Simonsen and Jeremy R. Spindlove. “Terrorism Today: The Past, the Players, the Future.”
Yael Danieli. “The Trauma of Terrorism: Sharing Knowledge and Shared Care, an International Handbook.”
Jonathan Matusitz. “Terrorism and Communication: A Critical Introduction.”
Laura Scaife. “Social Networks As the New Frontier of Terrorism: #Terror.”
Louise Richardson. “What Terrorists Want: Understanding the Enemy, Containing the Threat.”
Bruce Hoffman. “Inside Terrorism.”
Stephen Vertigans. “ The Sociology of Terrorism: People, Places and Processes.”
Anna Geifman. “Thou Shalt Kill: Revolutionary Terrorism in Russia, 1894-1917.”
Dilip Hiro. “War Without End: The Rise of Islamist Terrorism and Global Response.”
Dawson, M., & Omar, M. “New Threats and Countermeasures in Digital Crime and Cyber Terrorism.”
Gabriel Weimann. “Terrorism in Cyberspace: The Next Generation.”
Igor Primoratz. “Terrorism: A Philosophical Investigation.”
Richard Jackson. “Writing the War on Terrorism.”
Walter Laqueur. “A History of Terrorism.”
John R. Liederbach et al. “Digital Crime and Digital Terrorism.”
Cynthia C. Combs. “Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century.”
Vincenzo Ruggiero. “Understanding Political Violence.”
Patrick Sookhdeo. “Understanding Islamist Terrorism: The Islamic Doctrine of War.”
Brigitte L. Nacos. “Mass-Mediated Terrorism: The Central Role of the Media in Terrorism and Counterterrorism.”

That’s enough for today. You’re tired, and we’re tired. Still, we believe that you have enough energy to write your terrorism essay. No? Maybe you have enough energy to fill in an ordering form? We promise that it won’t take more than five minutes. And you’ll get an excellent essay on terrorism provided by a professional writer at an affordable price. Imagine how good some rest can be… Pay for college essay and see for yourself!

essay on terrorism a great evil with outline

Bibliography

Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Religion
Music and Media
Music and Culture
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Politics
Law and Society
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Neuroanaesthesia
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Toxicology
Medical Oncology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Clinical Neuroscience
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Medical Ethics
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Security
Computer Games
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business Strategy
Business Ethics
Business History
Business and Government
Business and Technology
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic Systems
Economic History
Economic Methodology
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
Ethnic Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
International Political Economy
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Theory
Politics and Law
Politics of Development
Public Administration
Public Policy
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

The Oxford Handbook of the History of Terrorism

Introduction: Writing the History of Terrorism

Carola Dietze is a professor of modern history (Chair) at Friedrich Schiller University in Jena, Germany. Her research focuses on the history of violence, security, and the media as well as on migration and the history of ideas, universities, and historiography in Europe, Russia, and the United States during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Her publications include The Invention of Terrorism in Europe, Russia, and the United States (2021, published in German in 2016 and in Russian in 2021), and “Legitimacy and Security in Historical Perspective: A Case Study in the History of Terrorism,” in Conceptualizing Power in Dynamics of Securitization: Beyond State and International System edited by Regina Kreide and Andreas Langenohl (Baden-Baden, 2019). She is a member of the editorial board of Studies in Conflict and Terrorism. In 2006 Dietze was awarded the German Historical Association’s prize for the best doctoral thesis in the field of history, i.e., from prehistory to contemporary history. The thesis was published in German as Nachgeholtes Leben: Helmuth Plessner, 1892–1985, as well as in Dutch and French translations.

Published: 14 April 2021
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter analyzes the most important trends in the writing of the history of terrorism since the beginning of terrorism research in the late nineteenth century up to today. It presents the origins of terrorism studies in Western social sciences and international relations, and it contextualizes the standard narrative of the history of terrorism put forward by the political scientists David C. Rapoport and Walter Laqueur. The chapter traces major developments in the history of terrorism in professional historiography in the Soviet Union or Russia as well as Europe and the United States during and after the Cold War, and especially since the attacks on September 11, 2001, and it outlines the results and effects of that historiography. On the basis of the evaluation of the scholarship available to date, the article maps out the rationale and the contours of the new global history of terrorism pursued in The Oxford Handbook of the History of Terrorism .

Terrorism and its history have been the topic of considerable public, political, literary, artistic, and academic attention, since this specific tactic of violence was invented concurrently with the advent of modernity. 1 It therefore can come as no surprise that the first academic treatises on terrorism as a subject of inquiry began to appear in the nineteenth century. 2 They were a reaction to the series of assassination attempts in Russia and to the “‘golden age’ of anarchist terrorism, 1880–1914,” 3 when an astounding number of monarchs, prime ministers, presidents, governors, and other members of governments and the wider population were attacked especially in Europe, Russia, and the United States, but also in other countries, such as Argentina and China. 4

It was not until the 1970s, however, that in the Western world systematic research on the phenomenon of terrorist violence and its origins began. In the post–World War II era, terrorism had mainly been employed in the struggles over decolonization in Africa and Asia and drew the attention of few researchers in Western academia. 5 In the 1970s terrorist tactics began to be adopted in Western Europe, the United States, and Japan by groups such as the Red Army Faction (Rote Armee Fraktion; RAF), the Red Brigades (Brigate Rosse; BR), the Provisional Irish Republican Army, the Weather Underground, and the Japanese Red Army (Nippon Sekigun [JRA]). 6 Reactions to these manifestations of terrorist violence in highly industrialized nations were manifold: intense police work was accompanied by prominent and often severely contested legal and executive measures. 7 Moreover, there were also academic endeavors to analyze and thereby help contain terrorist violence.

Researchers from different disciplines in Western academia turned to the systematic inquiry of the phenomenon and different types of political violence in general and to the study of terrorist attacks specifically. Most of these researchers were social scientists, mainly political scientists and scholars in the field of international relations. They strove to better understand and explain the causes, types, effects, and functioning of terrorism and in this way find possibilities to prevent terrorist violence. 8 As for the history of terrorism, many of these social scientists perceived it as an indispensable part of their work to give an overview of important examples of terrorist violence in the past. The historical perspective, with its developmental narrative and its comparative approach to terrorism in different cultural, historical, and religious settings, enabled them to situate, characterize, analyze, and even theorize the then current phenomena of terrorist violence. 9 For reasons such as these, the history of terrorism often occupies a crucial place in publications and entire oeuvres of the social scientist pioneers in the field of terrorism studies.

The expertise acquired by the pioneer researchers of terrorism in the social sciences was in high demand right away. A considerable number of these researchers would therefore receive positions in think tanks and serve as consultants to governments on counterterrorist policy strategies. They would also often comment on the recurring attacks in the national news media. Moreover, they developed university courses and study programs, or founded journals and research institutions, focused on terrorism and counterterrorism. For example, in 1969 David C. Rapoport taught what was probably the first course on terrorism in the United States, at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). 10 The two most important journals in the field, Terrorism —now Studies in Conflict and Terrorism —and Terrorism and Political Violence were launched in 1977 and 1989, respectively. 11 In 1985 Paul Wilkinson set up the Terrorism Research Unit in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Aberdeen, and in 1994 he and Bruce Hoffman went on to establish the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence (CSTPV) at the University of St. Andrews School of International Relations—the first research center for the study of terrorism in Europe. 12 Last but not least, the social-science pioneers and their students published books and anthologies that have become standard reference works for anybody interested in studying terrorism, regardless of disciplinary affiliation. 13 In this way, these pioneers and their students successfully established terrorism studies as a specific academic field, and they gained the privilege and power of interpreting terrorist violence for influential policy makers as well as for broad national and international audiences.

Historians and the History of Terrorism Up to the Year 2000

In the newly defined field of terrorism studies, professional historians were few and far between. This observation is in need of explanation, especially since the writing of history from its very beginnings in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War —as far as the Western tradition is concerned—typically focuses intently on individual and collective political violence. Recounting, analyzing, and explaining manifestations of political violence—assassinations, coups d’état, rebellions, revolutions, terror, civil wars, and wars between empires and states—have belonged and still belong to the noblest (and often also best-selling) task of the historian. Many historians are therefore indeed experts on political violence of the past, and if political violence follows certain patterns they can, moreover, contribute important insights to the analysis of violent phenomena in the present.

Yet, professional historians have typically shunned the topic of terrorism. 14 The reasons for their reticence are not evident and, with few exceptions, can only be conjectured. One of the few historians to have indicated why he is hesitant to tackle the topic is the highly distinguished military historian and strategic studies expert Sir Michael Eliot Howard. He once wrote in a book review: “[Terrorism is a] huge and ill-defined subject [that] has probably been responsible for more incompetent and unnecessary books than any other outside the field of sociology. It attracts phonies and amateurs as a candle attracts moths.” 15 Howard perceives terrorism as an unpleasant, even obnoxious research topic that is messy in more than one way. To take this observation one step further, historians’ reluctance to deal with the topic of terrorism perhaps was (and to some extent still is) attributable to the fact that they fear researching the history of terrorism might entangle them in contemporary politics and leave them without the distance they require to examine the subject objectively.

Other, more structural reasons for historians’ reservations about terrorism research may be found in the history of historiography. Since its beginnings in the nineteenth century, academic historiography has tended to focus primarily on large structures and processes of national interest, such as the state, domestic or foreign policy, nation building, the church, industrialization, and social movements. When historians did choose to do biographical research on individuals, they usually focused on prominent and important individuals in government and politics, in the economy and society, or in literature and the arts. Terrorists usually do not belong to these categories or fields of investigation and may therefore have seemed tangential or irrelevant to the research questions generated by an emphasis on structures, processes, and personalities. 16 As a result, even though political violence in general is a rich field of study in academic historiography, there has been very little research on terrorism. 17

The observation that professional historical research has been scarce until recently holds true even though professional historians had already begun to study terrorist perpetrators, incidents, and movements in the nineteenth century. 18 And it holds true even though there is one important exception to this rule: the historiography on prerevolutionary Russia, where terrorism obviously influenced the course of history. In 1866 a student named Dmitrii Vladimirovich Karakozov tried to shoot Tsar Alexander II. The tsar was not hurt, but in the wake of the attempt he abandoned the liberal reform policies he had promoted since the beginning of his reign. In response, a group calling itself Narodnaia Volia (People’s Will) was founded in 1879. Its members carried out a number of spectacular assassination attempts on the tsar, finally killing him on March 13 [March 1], 1881 using terrorist tactics. In the face of events such as these, experts in nineteenth-century Russian history have found it necessary to treat the history of terrorism.

In Russia, methodical inquiry into terrorism and its history began soon after the Revolution of 1905. 19 The revolution liberated Narodnaia Volia’s members from prison, and many of them used their unexpected freedom to describe their experiences in their memoirs. 20 Moreover, the Revolution of 1905 achieved some liberalization of the tsarist autocracy and its censorship. Historians could now begin to describe and analyze in independent, source-based studies the assassination attempts on Tsar Alexander II and other representatives of the state. 21 In 1917 the February Revolution and the October Revolution led to the opening of the state archives. As a result, research into the history of terrorism intensified, reaching its first peak in 1929 in connection with the fiftieth anniversary of the foundation of Narodnaia Volia. 22

Soviet scholarship was not allowed to continue uninterrupted, however: it came to a halt in the mid-1930s, because by that time the prevailing opinion in Soviet academia was that Narodnaia Volia and the Socialist Revolutionary Party (Partiia sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov; PSR) were bourgeois associations striving for a liberal society. Therefore, these terrorist movements were regarded not as predecessors of the revolutionary transformation of Russia, but as enemies of Marxism. For about three decades research on terrorism and its history was nearly impossible. 23 It was not until the 1960s that professional historians in the Soviet Union returned to researching the history of terrorism. After Stalin’s death, the First Secretary of the Communist Party, Nikita Khrushchev, pursued a policy of de-Stalinization and in this context announced a new cultural policy in 1956. It paved the way for a number of new studies on non-Bolshevik revolutionary movements in tsarist Russia that had used terrorist tactics. 24 In sum, by the end of the 1960s a considerable body of Russian-language source editions and studies on nineteenth-century terrorism in tsarist Russia had been published.

By the end of the 1960s, a number of prominent historians in Western countries had also taken up the topic. Initially, most were specialists in the study of Eastern Europe and Russia. They built on the Russian-language research, contributed to it, and wrote their own interpretations of events for their Western reading public. 25 Moreover, in the 1970s, following the lead of social scientists, a few historians open to social-scientific methods in the study of history also turned to the history of terrorism. These Western historians presented broad, comparative studies on a number of cases of political violence, protest, and resistance in the past, 26 as well as in-depth research on significant movements, parties, and groups in prerevolutionary Russia that had used terrorism, placing them in their respective historical contexts and analyzing the causes and effects of their violence. 27 The role of women in the revolutionary movement became a topic of special inquiry. 28 The insights and implications of some of these historians’ work reach far beyond the cases investigated. For instance, in his study The Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party before the First World War , the Eastern European historian Manfred Hildermeier ultimately reflects on the emergence and role of political violence in agrarian societies that undergo processes of modernization, a topic of current and continuing relevance in societies around the world.

In 1991, after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russian and Ukrainian interest in reassessing the non-Bolshevik revolutionary movements without the necessity of taking Soviet ideology into account led to another surge in history writing on this topic. 29 Concurrently, a new generation of Eastern European historians in the West also turned to the history of Russian terrorist movements. 30 Toward the end of the millennium, few professional historians had decided to devote themselves to the study of terrorism, and those historians in both the East and the West who did, focused primarily on the terrorist movements in prerevolutionary Russia. Thus it was that a corpus of systematic research on questions related to the history of terrorism existed mainly for prerevolutionary Russia, and not for other states.

By contrast, in the twentieth century the history of terrorism in the United States did not play much of a role in the country’s national historiography. This was due not least to the fact that terrorism was not seen as homegrown in the United States, but as foreign. 31 There are several reasons for this perception. For one, the terrorist attacks that occurred in the United States were rarely labeled as such. Instead, they were called “acts of resistance” against the politics of Reconstruction following the Civil War, or “labor unrest,” or “mass shootings” perpetrated by “lone gunmen.” 32 In the historiography on left-wing radicalism, scholars often carefully avoided using the term “terrorism” in order to prevent stereotyping. Moreover, if the term was applied to people and groups, from the actions of outlaw Jesse James and of Confederate guerrillas during the Civil War to the bombings of Chicago’s Haymarket Square and the buildings of the Los Angeles Times and Wall Street, in the majority of these studies the terrorist aspect remained peripheral. Thus, although numerous studies on class conflict in the United States, on American anarchism, and on the Ku Klux Klan have been produced by historians since the beginning of the twentieth century and particularly since the 1970s, 33 the primary focus in these studies has not been on the violence involved. The American historian Beverly Gage concluded that although, at the end of the twentieth century, Americans had “ histories of terrorism,” what “did not exist was a coherent historiography of terrorism, a definable way to think about the role such violence has (or has not) played in the American past.” 34 And similarly, for Western Europe there were a number of studies dedicated to certain people, groups, or prominent attacks, 35 but no systematic, in-depth research on the phenomenon of political violence comparable to that found in the historiography of Russia.

Reviewing the entire body of literature taken into account here, we see that the time frame covered by historians in both the East and the West was fairly broad. Collectively and in some cases individually as well, these scholars scrutinized the early-modern and modern eras. Owing to the specific methods and requirements of their discipline, however, they rarely addressed developments and events that took place after the end of World War II. The explanation for this hesitancy to choose more recent topics is straightforward: professional historians rely on archival sources and other written documents or documented oral material. Not surprisingly, in the 1970s such material was rarely available for the then active clandestine terrorist groups, as well as for the then ongoing counterterrorist policies and security measures. 36 Historians therefore had (and in many cases still have) to wait for such documents to become accessible. Their opportunity to research the topic would come with their access to the material.

For these reasons, in the 1970s contributions to the study of terrorism by professional historians could not be useful and readily applicable in the same way as the contributions of the social-scientist pioneers of terrorism studies. This explains why historians working on the topic of terrorist violence had to settle for a relatively marginal position in the attention of policy makers and broad audiences as well as in the emerging field of terrorism studies. None of the professional historians active in terrorism research gained the privilege and power of interpretation comparable to that of the early social scienctists. 37 This became even more obvious after 9/11.

Writing the History of Terrorism in the New Millennium

Since the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, on September 11, 2001, terrorism, terrorism studies, and the history of terrorism have attracted more and more attention. This is why, in the wake of 9/11 and subsequent terrorist attacks across the world, innumerable new works on these topics have appeared in academia. 38 Some of the authors of this literature are the pioneers of terrorism studies; 39 others represent a new generation of experts; 40 some authors were political scientists who were now turning to the topic; 41 and some were journalists or literary writers dealing with the subject for the first time. 42 Whatever their background, all these authors usually intended to introduce students and the wider public to the phenomenon of terrorism, giving interpretations of terrorist violence and its place in the twenty-first century and striving to explain its global surge. Certainly, books belonging to this genre of literature vary considerably in substance, focus, and perspective, but whatever their exact content, and just like the classic introductions to the field written by the pioneers of terrorism studies since the 1970s, in their writings the authors of most of these new interpretations of terrorism addressed historical questions—either explicitly by including a chapter dedicated to the history of terrorism or by pointing to what they regarded as incidences of terrorism in world history, or implicitly by interpreting the past through the present.

As was the social-scientific terrorism literature of the 1970s, the interpretations of the history of terrorism written right at the beginning of the twenty-first century were overwhelmingly rereadings of familiar historical events based on the available literature, rather than investigations into new archival and other primary sources. They also tended to place past events of terrorism and their periodization into the framework of the standard narrative of terrorism studies and influential metanarratives in the social sciences (such as the sequence of the premodern, modern, and postmodern eras), rather than into the frame of specific national and international historical contexts and developments. This is hardly surprising: with few exceptions, most of the authors were, again, academics who had been trained as social scientists. Philosophers, journalists, and pundits also presented prominent and thought-provoking interpretations of 9/11 and subsequent terrorist attacks that were in many respects different and even contradictory, but all of them interesting and influential. 43 And again, taken together, these introductory chapters, narratives, and interpretations explicitly or implicitly suggested ways of reading the history of terrorism.

Certainly, there were also historians who reacted to the attacks on September 11, 2001. But because historical research typically is laborious and time-consuming, their contributions began to appear only toward the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century. Their initial contributions roughly fall into four categories: first, there are monographs and anthologies giving large overviews of terrorism and its history since antiquity; 44 secondly, there are books and special issues of journals covering terrorism since the beginning of the modern era up until today; 45 thirdly, there are publications on the history of specific types of terrorism, such as car bombings or hijackings; 46 and fourthly, there are contributions dealing with prominent cases, such as the book on Karakozov’s attempt to assassinate Tsar Alexander II in 1866 by the historian of modern Russia Claudia Verhoeven, the study on Vera Zasulich’s murder of General Fedor Trepov in St. Petersburg in 1878 by the Russian and Eastern European historian Ana Siljak, the monograph on Émile Henry’s attacks in fin de siecle Paris by the French and European historian John Merriman, and the analysis of the Wall Street bombing in 1920 by the American historian Beverly Gage. 47 The authors of these books, anthologies, and special issues mostly based their studies on published and in some cases also on archival sources including works of art and fiction, as well as on scholarly historical research and writing.

At the same time, toward the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century, historical research appeared on the terrorism and counterterrorism carried out during the 1970s. Around the year 2000—thirty years after their formation as prescribed by the respective public records acts in many Western countries—state archives began to declassify certain files associated with national efforts to fight terrorist groups, making these files available for research. Moreover, some victims’ family members as well as a few former members of terrorist organizations began to speak and write about their experiences and memories. Contemporary historians were now able to start researching terrorist groups, such as the Red Army Faction in West Germany and the Weathermen in the United States. 48 Among the most frequently treated research topics were the terrorists’ political ideas, communication policies, media reception, and public debates on attacks, as well as the states’ reactions more generally. 49 Ulrich Herbert used a generational approach to analyze the perspectives of the “generation of 68” toward state, society, and violence; 50 and Jeremy Veron and Petra Terhoeven, as well as the authors of the volume An International History of Terrorism , applied comparative and transnational approaches to investigate the connections and interrelations of terrorist groups and their audiences in Western Europe, the United States, and beyond. 51 Still, historical research on terrorism and counterterrorism in the 1970s has only just begun, and many important questions remain to be investigated.

The social-scientist perspective on the history of terrorism can also be seen in these texts. Either most of the contributions by historians published toward the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century use the framework of the history of terrorism established by the social-scientific pioneers of terrorism studies, or they still fit into this frame even if they do not refer to it explicitly. Usually, the authors of these historical publications did not aim at questioning or challenging these narratives. The approach to the frame of reference changed with a number of publications that started appearing at the beginning of the second decade of the twenty-first century. They still have to be considered academic reactions to 9/11 and to the universal increase of terrorist violence thereafter.

What characterizes the publications by professional historians released since 2010 is that quite a number of these studies present fresh interpretations of the overall history of terrorism. Their authors arrive at these reinterpretations by using different sets of source material and methods of history writing, and they present different narratives. For example, the cultural historian Mikkel Thorup—one of the first to offer such a reevaluation of the standard narrative—uses more or less well-known political tracts and the classic approach of history of ideas as it is applied to the intellectual history of political theory. With the help of this approach, he intends to show that “the state form determines its challengers,” and that it does so not in a conscious or intentional way, but because the state “is the privileged descriptor and all-important center of attention. Changes in how the state organizes, describes and legitimates itself will have profound consequences for how it conceptualizes challenges and how it can be fought, both legitimatorily [ sic ] and violently.” 52 Somewhat similarly, the historian of modern Russia Martin A. Miller integrated into his narrative of the history of terrorism “the violence of governments and insurgencies into a single narrative format as a way of understanding terrorism in its broadest historical representation.” 53 In an article published earlier, Richard Bach Jensen also argued for an essential interconnection between government action and terrorist violence (as well as other factors) in explaining the origins of anarchist violence. 54 Other studies began to reconstruct and analyze little-known cases in addition to the prominent ones and investigated larger time frames in the history of terrorism and counterterrorism based on published and archival sources, as well as on the scholarly social scientific and historical literature. 55 Whatever the precise narrative and its basis, however, a common denominator of all these publications is that—in different ways and with varying emphases—they pay increased attention to the dynamics and interactions between terrorism, on the one hand, and the state, public, and media actions and reactions, on the other, in order to analyze and explain the emergence and development of terrorism during larger time frames. These dynamics and interactions thus become an integral part of the narrative, “bringing the state back in” (Theda Skocpol) to the history of terrorism.

In all these and other studies mentioned previously, research by professional historians has begun to yield results. And as more material becomes available over time, it can be expected that more historical studies will be produced. But how did these results and historical research more generally change the ways in which the history of terrorism is conceived? The answer to this question first requires a review of those interpretations and narratives, which are still dominant in the field of terrorism studies.

Major Narratives of the History of Terrorism

The standard narrative of the global history of terrorism since the 1970s was presented by the polymath Walter Laqueur and the American political scientist David C. Rapoport. Laqueur published his book Terrorism in 1977. 56 This pioneering empirical study covers all aspects of terrorism as a phenomenon of political violence, including its history. Laqueur takes into account a remarkably broad range of terrorist phenomena. As early forms of terrorism, Laqueur mentions the Jewish Sicarii in their fight against the Roman Empire, the Assassins in medieval Persia, and the Indian Thugs. According to Laqueur, the turning point toward modern terrorism is the French Revolution, when the word “terror” ( terreur ) became laden with political and secular meaning. In Laqueur’s opinion, the origins of modern terrorism lie in the Enlightenment and the rise of the revolutionary principles of democracy and nationalism, and especially in the idea of nationhood. As the first high point of terrorist violence he describes the nihilist and anarchist “propaganda of the deed” of the 1880s and 1890s. 57 Furthermore, Laqueur examines nationalist terrorism as exemplified by the Irish, Armenian, and Macedonian separatist movements, and he also addresses right-wing groups such as the Romanian Iron Guard, the German Free Corps, and the Zionist Irgun and Lehi (whose name derives from the acronym LEHI, for Lohamel Herut Israel [“Fighters for the Freedom of Israel”]), as well as the Muslim Brotherhood. 58

Rapoport, who also began to publish on terrorism and its history in the 1970s, developed an influential theoretical approach to the history of terrorism. The theory explains the evolution of terrorism on the basis of historical patterns, making it possible, at least to a certain extent, to predict future developments of the phenomenon. In essays such as “Fear and Trembling: Terrorism in Three Religious Traditions” and in his “four wave theory,” 59 Rapoport argues the existence of a religiously inspired premodern terrorism, like Laqueur citing the Sicarii, Assassins, and Thugs as examples. For Rapoport, modern terrorism began in 1879 in Russia and comprises four ideological waves: anarchist (1878–1919), anticolonial (1920s–early 1960s), New Left (mid-1960s–1990s), and religious (1979–?). He defines a wave as a “cycle of activity in a given time period” and exhibiting an international character, in which “similar activities occur in many countries driven by a common predominant energy shaping participating groups and their mutual relationships.” As the names of these waves suggest, each is driven by a different energy. Rapoport maintains that a wave lasts for approximately a generation. This prognostic capability of theory of waves is one reason his theory is much valued by researchers studying terrorism. 60 Rapoport explains the emergence of the first wave as having been made possible by advances in transportation and communication technology (the invention of the telegraph, the expansion of railways, and the founding of daily newspapers) and having been fueled by the dissemination of democratic ideas and the discovery of a strategy of terror by Russian revolutionaries. Each new wave is then characterized by a new ideology as well as new technologies of communication and weaponry. 61

This narrative of the forerunners of terrorism found in ancient times in religious violence and tyrannicide, the origins of revolutionary terrorism in the terror of the French Revolution, and its evolution by way of Narodnaia Volia in tsarist Russia and anarchist individuals in Western Europe and the United States is today considered valid by the overwhelming majority of the current literature on terrorism and its history. This literature also includes a basic consensus on classifying terrorism according to the categories of social-revolutionary, ethnic-nationalistic, and radically right-wing, even though these three types are not equally integrated into the history of terrorism. In the 1990s, religious terrorism was added as a fourth category. 62

Since the late 1990s and even more prominently since 2001, two contrary counternarratives have begun to challenge the standard narration of the history of terrorism. According to the first counternarrative, modern terrorism begins with the 1972 attack against the Israeli Olympic team in Munich. 63 This interpretation results from an emphasis on the role of technology in this violent attack. The taking of hostages in Munich was the first act of terrorism to be broadcast on television in real time to a worldwide audience. This fact is indeed noteworthy. But while technical innovations may indeed justify the marking of a turning point within the history of terrorism, they do not indicate the beginning of (modern) terrorism, because the tactic of exploiting the media technology then available had already been developed and tested frequently.

The second counternarrative posits that terrorism is a universal phenomenon spanning all of human history. Terrorist violence, argue the authors advocating this approach, has always existed and has been experienced all over the world. 64 The distinction between this interpretation and the standard narrative can be explained by the differences in their understanding of terrorism. Those who view terrorism as an anthropological phenomenon have a broad conception of this form of political violence. For Caleb Carr, terrorism is “warfare deliberately waged against civilians with the purpose of destroying their will to support either leaders or policies that the agents of such violence find objectionable”; 65 and for Martin A. Miller, it is a form of violence encompassing both insurgent terrorism and state terror. 66 Such definitions broaden the history of terrorism into a history of murder, terror, and psychological warfare, which covers a multitude of different violent phenomena ranging from Greek tactics for intimidating opponents, to the Spanish Inquisition, to National Socialist and Stalinist state terror, to the bombing of cities by German and Allied Forces in World War II and the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These are important subjects in a history of violence, but they should not be lumped in with the history of terrorism, lest it lose analytical incisiveness regarding its actual topic and invite revanchist interpretations. 67 Neither of these counternarratives represents a persuasive alternative for a history of terrorism.

The Significance of Place and Time in the History of Terrorism

Within the standard narrative of the history of terrorism, the main focus lies on Russia. Even if Laqueur and Rapoport both mention different beginnings and forms of terrorism, they concurrently argue that the decisive and potent manifestation of modern terrorism originated in Russia, and that the most important organization in the history of terrorism was the Russian group Narodnaia Volia, founded in 1879. After all, it was the members of Narodnaia Volia who self-confidently professed to be terrorists, and it was they who assassinated Tsar Alexander II in 1881. So—at least at first glance—there are indeed good and historically precise arguments to be made for highlighting the part that Russia played in the history of terrorism, not least because terrorism played such a decisive role in Russian history.

Furthermore, the times and circumstances under which the standard narrative of the history of terrorism was developed may have encouraged a focus on Russia. Laqueur and Rapoport developed the standard narrative of the history of terrorism in the 1970s—during the middle of the Cold War. In the eyes of many historians who were researching and writing during the Cold War, the importance to world history of the series of assassination attempts that Russian terrorists staged in 1866 and again after 1879 can scarcely be overstated. The “hunt” that the members of Narodnaia Volia carried out against their “crowned game” destabilized the tsarist empire and halted the political, economic, and social reforms that Tsar Alexander II had launched and promoted since early in his reign. The destabilization and the end of the reform processes, in turn, were important preconditions and causes for the revolutions in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century: the Revolution of 1905, and the February Revolution and October Revolution of 1917. 68 The Bolshevik October Revolution, from which emerged the Soviet Union and ultimately the armed confrontation with the West, was one of the pivotal events for the Cold War world. This was also true of events that had paved the way for the revolution, such as the terrorist attacks carried out by Narodnaia Volia and the Socialist Revolutionary Party, even if both groups were opposed to and rivals of the Bolsheviks. These groups had contributed to the destabilization of the tsarist state by means of repeated terrorist attacks and thus were important in leading to the Russian Revolution.

Another factor has to be taken into account as well. Based on the then-current experience with terrorist attacks in highly industrialized countries in the 1970s, social-science experts in terrorism studies and historians of terrorism alike tended to pay attention mainly to social-revolutionary terrorism (as compared to its ethnic-nationalist, far-right, or religious manifestations). The Russian terrorist movements fit the bill precisely.

Moreover, the history of historiography and its authors played a role in developing this strong focus on Russia. Facilitating it was the fact that a number of reliable source editions and a fairly extensive corpus of scholarly historical research and writing on the history of terrorism in Russia were readily available in the 1970s, just when the standard narrative of the history of terrorism was being developed. The reasons are easy to understand. The existing literature in Russian and other European languages that had been published on the topic since the late nineteenth century assured historians of terrorism that they were on solid ground here, and the source editions and detailed accounts by Soviet researchers based on archival sources published before the 1930s and since the 1960s lent themselves to synthetic, comprehensive narratives for Western audiences, who, because of language barriers, had very limited access to the original studies. 69 The availability of such editions and research publications was especially valuable during the Cold War, when Soviet archives were not easily accessible by researchers from abroad. In short, the history of historiography of terrorism shaped its very content.

Last, but not least, the writing of history is always pursued by historians who have their own personal histories. Thus, any historiography has to take into account the biographies and backgrounds of the authors who wrote the histories in question. Emigrants from Russia as well as Eastern and Central Europe seem to have become especially prolific and prominent in the study of terrorism. They had fled the violence of the Russian Revolutions and the ensuing civil war, or the persecution before and after the Nazi takeover in Germany and Austria, Reichspogromnacht (also known as Kristallnacht ), World War II, and the Holocaust. They had emigrated to Palestine/Israel or to Western European countries, and to the United States, and in their new home countries they had taken up the study and writing of history, often speaking all the relevant European languages fluently. 70 Perhaps not least because of such personal experiences, some of them—Adam B. Ulam and Walter Laqueur, for instance—turned an attentive eye to the role that violence had played generally in history and politics and especially in Russian as well as Eastern and Central European history, in order to better understand the origins of the events that had uprooted them and their families. 71 An additional reason might be that they, as recent immigrants, recognized the opportunity that lay in turning to the history of terrorism, a field that was perhaps regarded as messy and lacking in prestige, but that was understudied in the West.

On the basis of their personal experiences and in the context of the Cold War, some of these emigrants from Russia and from Eastern and Central Europe tended to stress the importance of Narodnaia Volia, the Socialist Revolutionary Party, and the Russian Revolution or drew even more long-range connections between earlier Russian history and the global history of terrorism. One such example is Albert Parry. Born and raised in Russia, he escaped a White Army firing squad, and then fled the country and its civil war for the United States, where he wrote a book on the history of terror and terrorism (Parry does not differentiate between these terms) that is insightful in many respects. 72 In it he points to the many different phenomena of violence that he considers to lie at the root of terror and terrorism in East and West. Time and again, however, he returns to the special role that Russia played in the history of political violence in general and in the history of terror and terrorism specifically: “From the heritage of the Mongol-Tatar enslavers and torturers,” Parry writes, “carried on and improved upon by such native insurgents as Razin and Pugachev, derives much of the terror of that giant bloody upheaval, the Russian Revolution. And from that Revolution stems much of the political terror in the world today.” 73 Thus, according to Parry, important roots of the history of terror and terrorism lay in the thirteenth-century struggles of European Russians with the peoples of Central Asia. Through the Russian Revolution and the political measures effected by the Soviet Union, these forms of terrorism and terror became important phenomena of world history. Parry’s sweeping historical narrative, influenced by his personal history, is incorrect; the claims and connections it suggests cannot stand up to the scrutiny of historical research. But at the time of the Cold War it was well received, perhaps not least because it accorded so well with the prevailing mindset of the era.

With the end of the Cold War, the global significance of the Russian Revolution waned. Moreover, a number of terrorist groups that had been active in Europe for many years and connected to social-revolutionary ideologies one by one began to enter peace negotiations and renounce violence. The era of political-secular terrorism—according to the standard narrative of the history of terrorism—seemed to be ending.

Yet, despite the supposed end of this era, the tactic of terrorism lived on, as signified at the latest by the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001. In the political arena, these attacks were immediately interpreted in historical terms, but the interpretations were contradictory. On the one hand, commentators and politicians alike emphasized the new and unprecedented aspects of this violence. The American secretary of defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, spoke of “a new kind of war,” and President George W. Bush of “a new kind of evil.” 74 Such views went hand in hand with the instant conviction of the transformative power of these attacks and their historical significance worldwide: “America, in the spasms of a few hours, became a changed country,” Lance Morrow remarked in Time magazine. 75 Other commentators spoke of a “turning point” in history, a fundamental “break in the development of humanity,” and the beginning of a new “age of terrorism.” 76 Interpretations such as these were decidedly future oriented, because they seemed to suggest that 9/11 was an event without precedent, without history. 77

On the other hand, different interpretations of the 9/11 terrorist attacks turned the attention of politicians, academics, and the general public to what—according to the standard narrative of the history of terrorism—could be called “holy terror,” or pre- and postmodern, religious terrorism. 78 As a consequence of this new focus of attention, another line of tradition, already present in the standard narrative, now came to the fore: that linking the current terrorist attacks perpetrated by Muslims to the medieval Islamic sect of the so-called Assassins, the Ismaili. 79 This narrative seemed to gain more plausibility as the tactic of suicide terrorism became more prominent. 80 Important examples in addition to the 9/11 attacks include the repeated suicide attacks by Lebanese and Palestinian groups, such as Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade against American, French, and Israeli targets since the early 1980s, and the attacks on London’s public transport system on July 7, 2005, to name but a few. 81 The fact these suicide attacks were perpetrated by Muslims strengthened this narrative, even though, starting in 1987, it was members of the non-religiously based Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka who had been responsible for the majority of suicide attacks.

As they had during the Cold War, when terrorism experts looked to Russian history for the origins of terrorism, after 9/11 many authors and commentators maintained that the Assassins and the Islamic history of martyrdom had exerted an influence on, and found a receptive audience in, modern suicide terrorists. Some authors tried to locate the origins of terrorism and specifically of an Islamic history of violence in medieval Persia, Iraq, and Syria. 82

These attempts to trace the origins of terrorism to medieval Persian or Russian history or to declare the phenomenon entirely unprecedented are unconvincing in the face of historical analysis. Clearly there have been too many examples of terrorist attacks since the nineteenth century for the 9/11 attack to be thought of as new. The use of passenger planes as weapons in a suicide attack was of course unprecedented, and the attacks created a great deal of havoc. Moreover, they were especially deadly in that an exceptionally high number of people from all over the world, who worked in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, were killed. The terrorist tactic itself was not new, however. Furthermore, attempts to trace the origins of terrorism to medieval Persian or to Russian history take current phenomena as a starting point and suggest (more or less) sweeping genealogies that are based largely on prima facie analogies. In the construction of some of these genealogies, striking forms of war and violence along with vague political or religious connections serve as reference points in drawing lines of tradition across seven or eight centuries, ignoring all differences in detail and all the changes in almost every sphere of life that have since occurred and that distinguish these societies. It would not be difficult to point to a large number of cruel wars and horrifying forms of violence in Western societies, however, including religiously based tyrannicide and the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) in Europe, or the wars between conquerors or settlers and indigenous Americans in the New World, or the lynching of African Americans and others in America, to give just a few examples. Why should phenomena of violence such as these figure any less prominently in tracing the origins of terrorism? Furthermore, one cannot escape noticing that attempts to trace the beginnings of terrorism to medieval Persian or Russian history ascribe the emergence of this phenomenon of political violence to the culture and history of the West’s then-current geopolitical opponent. Together with the idea that the 9/11 attacks were unprecedented, all three narratives suggest that it is unnecessary to look for the origins and causes of terrorism in the history of those who present these narratives: the history of the West.

In conclusion, from a historical perspective none of the major narratives of the history of terrorism that have been and still are dominant in the field of terrorism studies is entirely convincing. Moreover, studies by professional historians since 2010 and the fresh interpretations of the history of terrorism they offer challenge these major narratives by stressing the dynamics and interactions between terrorism, the state, the public, and the media in order to understand and explain the history of terrorism since its emergence. Both these results call for a new historical approach to the global history of terrorism.

A New Global History of Terrorism

This Handbook presents a reevaluation of the major narratives in the history of terrorism, by exploring the emergence and the use of terrorism in world history from antiquity up to the twenty-first century on the basis of new historical research. Because it is impossible for any one historian to possess in-depth knowledge of all the relevant sources and to keep up with the specialized literature that has to be considered in so large a field of study, such an exploration necessarily is a collective endeavor. Therefore, this volume brings together a number of professional historians whose expertise lies in different places and eras. The contributors have also pursued a variety of approaches in their earlier research. To be sure, all had studied the phenomenon of violence in history before, violence that in its various forms (such as assassination, guerrilla war, revolution, or terror) was important for their respective time and place. But not all of the contributors carried out research on terrorism before contributing to this Handbook , and only a few of them would describe themselves as having a special focus on the history of terrorism. Furthermore, in their chapters they consult a wide-ranging set of sources, which they analyze using different methodologies. For these reasons, the chapters of this Handbook offer a wide variety of innovative and original perspectives on the history of terrorism.

In light of the breadth and diversity of the research covered by this Handbook , two guidelines ensure its cohesion. The first is a common definition of terrorism. The German sociologist Peter Waldmann defines it as “violence against a political order from below which is planned and prepared [ planmäßig vorbereitet ] and meant to be shocking. Such acts of violence are supposed to spread feelings of insecurity and intense fear, but they are also meant to generate sympathy and support.” 83 The term “political order” in the original German terminology can include the social and economic order of a society, so Waldmann’s definition also includes right-wing terrorists (such as the National Socialist Underground [NSU] in Germany or Anders Behring Breivik in Norway) and social-revolutionary terrorists (such as the nineteenth-century anarchists). Waldmann underlines the political dimension expressed in the political intentions and objectives of the violence committed by the terrorists. 84 Terrorism is thus a politically motivated strategy of resorting to spectacular violence with the goal of producing a powerful psychological effect in a society—fear on the one hand, sympathy on the other—in order to compel political change. This view limits the concept of terrorism to underground acts of violence against an inherently more powerful opponent (bottom-up), whereas acts of violence by the state against the population (top-down) are called “terror.” And even if one can find a wealth of definitions of terrorism in the general literature on this topic, more recent research literature reflects broad international agreement on the elements identified in this definition. 85 Therefore, the contributors to the Handbook have used this definition, as far as was feasible for them with regard to their respective fields.

The major narratives in the history of terrorism, taken together, constitute the second guiding principle. Because the Handbook intends to reevaluate these narratives on the basis of new empirical research, basic statements constituting these narratives indicate crucial fields of study. This holds true for the standard narrative of terrorism presented by Laqueur and Rapoport as well as for the two narratives challenging this standard narration: the one maintaining that modern terrorism begins with the 1972 attack against the Israeli Olympic team in Munich, and the other stating that terrorism is a universal phenomenon spanning the entirety of time. 86 The historical reevaluation in this Handbook takes all of these narratives into account either implicitly or explicitly.

Of these three narratives of the history of terrorism, the standard narrative certainly poses the greatest challenge for historical reevaluation. For instance, it is imperative to study the question of whether there existed a premodern terrorism that mainly had religious goals, a modern terrorism fighting for secular-political aims, and a postmodern terrorism that is primarily motivated by religion. Then, for each of these time frames, the question arises of whether terrorism was actually perpetrated by the groups that the authors of the standard narrative have suggested. Regarding premodern religious terrorism, for example, the question arises of whether the Sicarii, the Assassins, and the Thugs actually used terrorist tactics, and if so, with what objective. Thus, the statements set forth in the standard narrative of the history of terrorism served as a selection criterion in deciding, for this Handbook , what required study regarding the emergence and use of terrorism in world history, from antiquity up to the twenty-first century. Of course, there are always other topics that warrant inclusion as well.

At the core of the standard narrative is the problem of the relationship between terrorism and modernity. The term “modernity” has at least two different basic meanings, one temporal and one substantive: “modern” can be used to denote an epoch in world history—the modern era—but it can also be used to characterize distinct phenomena and processes, such as industrialization or urbanization. However, there is no general agreement on how to flesh out these two meanings. When does the modern era start? When does it end? Suggestions for the beginning of the modern era range from the emergence of nominalism in the European High Middle Ages via Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press and the Reformation around 1500 to the political and industrial revolutions of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Furthermore, the substantive meaning of the term is as contested as the temporal one. In this respect, technological processes are as important as “big developments” such as urbanization, migration, mobility, and internationalization. Moreover, there are cultural aspects of modernity, its “promissory notes” (Björn Wittrock), that were able to create new affiliations and identities even in places and at times where the substantive changes were marginal. 87 All these aspects of modernity have to be taken into account when examining possible links between modernity and the emergence of terrorism.

However, this coming together of technological innovations, enormous socioeconomic developments, and modern culture is precisely the point where the expertise of historians is called for. It is where their work has to begin. Rapoport and Laqueur both argued that the concept of modern terrorism originated in the French Revolution with the birth of modern democracy, and they repeatedly emphasized the importance of technological, societal, and intellectual developments for the emergence of terrorism in the nineteenth century as well as the changes it underwent in the twentieth. But how exactly did these factors—technological innovations, immense socioeconomic developments, and modern culture—come together to bring forth the new form of political violence that we today call terrorism? Exactly how and where did this transformation of political violence take place? How did it work? Who contributed what? And concerning the time frame we have to ask: What was the starting point? What traditions and practices in the use of political violence already existed that were subject to the transformations unfolding in modern society? What kinds of events were its precursors? Did the phenomenon of terrorism as Waldmann defined it exist prior to the invention of the term in the French Revolution—for example, in the European religious wars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries? If so, what does that mean for our assumptions about the relationship between terrorism and modernity?

And finally, there is the question of transfer and reception. According to the standard narrative of terrorism studies, modern rebel terrorism originated in Europe and quickly spread to other parts of the world, such as the Balkans, Asia, and South America. If terrorism and modernity are linked, the question arises of whether there are causal links between their spread: did somebody using terroristic methods in China or the Philippines have to embrace certain techniques and ideas that might be characterized as modern? In other words: Did terrorism spread with modernity? Where and at what time was it taken up, and in what ways? What were the preconditions in different societies that made the concept and the method of terrorism appear to certain groups to be an interesting and relevant tool? How was it linked to the general global movement of goods, people, and ideas?

The contributions assembled in this Handbook provide specific answers to questions such as these and thus shape a new history of terrorism. And it might well be that questions such as the ones above and the answers provided are of current relevance if we want to understand the upsurge of terrorism worldwide and find long-lasting political responses.

Acknowledgments

I wrote most of this chapter while I was a Heisenberg Fellow of the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft; DFG), and I would like to express my gratitude to the Foundation for its support of my work. Some of the thoughts presented here were presented in an initial version in the radio feature “Der Anschlag und seine Geschichte: Was wir aus den tatsächlichen Ursprüngen des Terrorismus lernen können,” broadcast on April 23, 2017 by Deutschlandfunk in the series “Essay & Diskurs.” My thanks go to Wolfgang Schiller for inviting me to contribute to the series and for his encouragement and support when formulating these ideas. Moreover, I am indebted to Richard Bach Jensen, Andrea Meyer-Fraatz, and Franziska Schedewie, whose corrections and critiques were extremely valuable. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are mine.

For a critique of the concept of modernity, see my “Toward a History on Equal Terms: A Discussion of Provincializing Europe ,” History and Theory 47, no. 1 (2008): 69–84. In this text and this volume, however, the term is employed according to common usage.

See, e.g., Alphons Thun, Geschichte der revolutionären Bewegungen in Russland (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1883); Cesare Lombroso and Rodolfo Laschi, Il delitto politico e le rivoluzioni in rapporto al diritto (Turin: Fratelli Bocca, 1890). Thun was a professor of national economies, and Lombroso was an Italian medical scientist, psychiatrist, and anthropologist. Lombroso’s study was very influential in its time. It appeared in German translation in 1891 and in French translation in 1892.

Richard Bach Jensen, “The United States, International Policing, and the War against Anarchist Terrorism, 1900–1914,” Terrorism and Political Violence 13, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 15–46, at 16; reprinted in Terrorism: Critical Concepts in Political Science , vol. 1, The First or Anarchist Wave , ed. David C. Rapoport (London: Routledge, 2006) , 369–400, at 371.

See Richard Bach Jensen, “Daggers, Rifles and Dynamite: Anarchist Terrorism in Nineteenth Century Europe,” Terrorism and Political Violence 16, no. 1 (2004) : 116–153, at 116.

One of these few is Martha Crenshaw. See her Revolutionary Terrorism: The FLN in Algeria, 1954–1962 (Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University, 1978), and Terrorism in Africa (New York: G. K. Hall; Toronto: Maxwell Macmillan Canada, 1994).

For more on these terrorist groups and their attacks, see p. 7, nn. 49–51.

For an analysis and assessment of these security policies by one of the pioneers in the field of terrorism studies, see David Carlton, The West’s Road to 9/11: Resisting, Appeasing, and Encouraging Terrorism since 1970 (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).

Seminal works in English from this pioneering research period are David Carlton and Carlo Schaerf, eds., International Terrorism and World Security (London: Croom Helm, 1975); Yonah Alexander, ed., International Terrorism: National, Regional, and Global Perspectives (New York: Praeger, 1976); Yonah Alexander and Seymour Maxwell Finger, eds., Terrorism: Interdisciplinary Perspectives , with a foreword by Hans J. Morgenthau (New York: John Jay Press, 1977); Yonah Alexander, David Carlton, and Paul Wilkinson, eds., Terrorism: Theory and Practice (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1979); Martha Crenshaw, “The Causes of Terrorism,” Comparative Politics 13, no. 4 (July 1981): 379–399; Martha Crenshaw and Irving Louis Horowitz, eds., Terrorism, Legitimacy, and Power: The Consequences of Political Violence; Essays (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1983); Alex P. Schmid and Janny de Graaf, Violence as Communication: Insurgent Terrorism and the Western News Media (London: Sage, 1982); Alex P. Schmid, Political Terrorism: A Research Guide to Concepts, Theories, Data Bases and Literature , with a bibliography by the author and a world directory of “terrorist” organizations by Albert J. Jongman (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1984).

See esp. the publications of Walter Laqueur: Terrorism (Boston: Little, 1977), reprinted as A History of Terrorism: With a New Introduction by the Author , 2 nd ed. (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002), and The Terrorism Reader: A Historical Anthology (New York: New American Library, 1978), published in a new and supplemented edition as Voices of Terror: Manifestos, Writings, and Manuals of Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Other Terrorists from Around the World and Throughout the Ages (New York: Reed Press, 2004); and of David C. Rapoport, Assassination and Terrorism (Toronto: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 1971), “Fear and Trembling: Terrorism in Three Religious Traditions,” American Political Science Review 78, no. 3 (1984): 658–677, “Why Does Messianism Produce Terror?” in Contemporary Research on Terrorism , ed. Paul Wilkinson and A. M. Stewart (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1987), 72–88, and “Four Wave Theory,” first presented as a paper to the American Political Science Association in 1985. For the respective titles see n. 59.

See his web page at UCLA, College: Social Sciences, Political Science, Distinguished Professor Emeritus David Rapoport, Biography, accessed February 19, 2021, https://polisci.ucla.edu/person/david-rapoport/ . See also Jeffrey Kaplan, “Waves of Political Terrorism,” in Oxford Research Encyclopedia: Politics, Oxford University Press 2016, accessed February 19, 2021, https://oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-24 .

Cf. the web page of the publisher Taylor & Francis for the two journals: https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uter20 and https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ftpv20 .

See the information given on the Centre’s web page, “About CSTPV,” https://cstpv.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/# .

Standard works in English, many of which have become standard works for students of terrorism across the world, are Grant Wardlaw, Political Terrorism: Theory, Tactics, and Counter-Measures (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982); James M. Poland, Understanding Terrorism: Groups, Strategies, and Responses (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1988); Martha Crenshaw, ed., Terrorism in Context (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995) ; Bruce Hoffman, Inside Terrorism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998); Clifford E. Simonsen and Jeremy R. Spindlove, Terrorism Today: The Past, the Players, the Future (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000); David C. Rapoport, ed., Inside Terrorist Organizations (London: Frank Cass, 2001); Charles Townshend, Terrorism: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Louise Richardson, What Terrorists Want: Understanding the Enemy, Containing the Threat (New York: Random House, 2006) ; Gus Martin, Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues , 3 rd ed. (Los Angeles: Sage, 2010). Most of these books have seen several editions.

Carlton observes a similar tendency for the higher echelons of the fields of security studies and international relations as represented for example by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, the United Kingdom’s Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), and “most of the leading Western journals in the international relations field.” See Carlton, The West’s Road to 9/11 , 3–4, at 4.

Michael Howard, as cited in Bruce Hoffman, “Current Research on Terrorism and Low-Intensity Conflict,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 15, no. 1 (1992): 25–37, at 25. Carlton, The West’s Road to 9/11 , 4 also gives this quotation.

There are exceptions to the rule, however, such as Menachem Begin, who fought against the British mandatory government in the 1940s and later became prime minister of Israel; and Gerry Adams, who is said to have been a high-ranking member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) in the 1970s before he was elected president of Sinn Féin and member of the British House of Commons.

Isabelle Duyvesteyn, a global historian and international studies scholar, the historian of international relations Beatrice de Graaf, the modern historians Robert Gerwarth, Heinz-Gerhard Haupt, and Sylvia Schraut have come to similar conclusions. See, e.g., Isabelle Duyvesteyn, “The Role of History and Continuity in Terrorism Research,” in Mapping Terrorism Research: State of the Art, Gaps and Future Direction , ed. Magnus Ranstorp (New York: Routledge, 2006) , 51–75; Isabelle Duyvesteyn and Beatrice de Graaf, “Terroristen en hun bestrijders, vroeger en nu,” in Terroristen en hun bestrijders, vroeger en nu , ed. Isabelle Duyvesteyn and Beatrice de Graaf (Amsterdam: Boom, 2007), 7–12; Robert Gerwarth and Heinz-Gerhard Haupt, “Internationalising Historical Research on Terrorist Movements in Twentieth-Century Europe,” European Review of History 14, no. 3 (2007): 275–281, at 275; Sylvia Schraut, “Zentrale Begriffe und Konzepte,” in Terrorismus und politische Gewalt (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2018) , 15–63.

They contributed in two distinct roles: as historical researchers and as contemporary pundits. For an early French study on a perpetrator of what is now discussed as one of the earliest cases of terrorist violence, see Louis-François du Bois, Charlotte de Corday, essai historique, offrant enfin des détails authentiques sur la personne et l’attentat de cette héroïne; avec pièces justificatives, portrait et fac-simile (Paris: Librairie historique de la Révolution, 1838). For a prominent German example of a historian-pundit, see Heinrich von Treitschke, “Der Socialismus und der Meuchelmord,” Preußische Jahrbücher 41, no. 6 (1878): 637–647. For examples of nineteenth-century terrorism research in disciplines other than history, see n. 2.

For an informative overview and in-depth discussion of the Russian historiography on terrorism as well as its political contexts, see the historiographical introductions in Mikhail Gerasimovich Sedov, Geroicheskii period revoliutsionnogo narodnichestva (Iz istorii politicheskoi bor’by) (Moscow: Mysl, 1966), 3–54, esp. 24–28 (focusing on Narodnaia Volia); Mikhail Ivanovich Leonov, Partiia sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov v 1905–1907 gg. (Moscow: ROSSPĖN, 1997), 3–25; Roman Aleksandrovich Gorodnitskii, Boevaia organizatsiia partii sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov v 1901–1911 gg . (Moscow: ROSSPĖN, 1998), 3–26, esp. 5f. (both focusing on the Socialist Revolutionary Party and its fighting organization). For an English-language overview, see Anke Hilbrenner and Frithjof Benjamin Schenk, “Introduction: Modern Times? Terrorism in Late Tsarist Russia,” Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas 2 (2010): 161–171.

The most famous example is the 1921 autobiography by Vera Figner, Memoirs of a Revolutionist , trans. Camilla Chapin Daniels and G. A. Davidson (New York: International, 1927). On the Russian-language historiography on terrorism in this period, see esp. O. V. Shemiakina, “Istoriografiia narodnicheskogo dvizheniia glazami ego uchastnikov,” Vestnik RGGU: Seriia literaturovedenie, iazykoznanie, kul’turologiia 1 (2017): 132–139.

See esp. the studies by Mikhail Konstantinovich Lemke, Ocherki osvoboditel’nogo dvizheniia “shestidesiatykh godov” po neizdannym dokumentam s portretami (1908; The Hague: Mouton, in cooperation with Europe Printing, Vaduz, 1968); and Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Kornilov, Obshchestvennoe dvizhenīe pri Aleksandre II, 1855–1881: Istoricheskīe ocherki (Moscow: Tovarishchestvo tipografīi A. I. Mamontova, 1909).

A case in point is Dmitrii Vladimirovich Karakozov, who perpetrated the first assassination attempt on Tsar Alexander II in 1866. See, e.g., the Russian sources and research published on him, his background, and his attempt on the tsar’s life: Aleksei A. Shilov, “Iz istorii revoliutsionnago dvizheniia 1860-ch gg.,” Golos minuvshago 10–12 (1918): 159–168; V. P. Alekseev and B. P. Koz’min, Politicheskie Protsessy 60-kh g.g. materialy po istorii revoliutsionnogo dvizheniia v Rossii (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo, 1923); Aleksei A. Shilov, “Pokushenie Karakozova 4 Aprelia 1866 g.,” Krasnyi arkhiv 17, no. 7 (1926): 91–137; M. M. Klevenskii and K. G. Kotel’nikov, eds., Pokushenie Karakozova: Stenograficheskii otchet po delu D. Karakozova, I. Khudiakova, N. Ishutina i. dr. (Moscow: Izdatel’stvo tsentrarchiva R.S.F.S.R., 1928); Boris Jakovlevich Bukhshtab, “Posle vystrela Karakozova,” Katorga i ssylka: Istoriko-revoliutsionnyi vestnik 5 (1931): 50–88, at 78; B. I. Gorev and B. P. Koz’min, Revoliutsionnoe dvizhenie 1860-kh godov (Moscow: Izdatel’stvo vsesoiuznogo obshchestva politkatorzhan i ssyl’no-poselentsev, 1932).

See Sedov, Geroicheskii period , 45f.; Leonov, Partiia sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov , 10f.; Gorodnitskii, Boevaia organizatsiia , 5, 10; Hilbrenner and Schenk, “Introduction,” 162.

See esp. the source edition of S. N. Valk, S. S. Volk, B. S. Itenberg, and Sh. M. Levin, eds., Revoliutsionnoe narodnichestvo 70-kh godov XIX veka: Sbornik dokumentov i materialov , 2 vols. (Moscow: Nauka, 1964); and the studies of R. V. Filippov, Revoliutsionnaia narodnicheskaia organizatsiia N. A. Ishutina—I. A. Khudiakova (1863–1866) (Petrozavodsk: Karel’skoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo, 1964); Ė. S. Vilenskaia, Revoliutsionnoe podpol’e v Rossii (60-e gody XIX v.) (Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Nauka,” 1965); Sedov, Geroicheskii period ; Stepan Stepanovich Volk, Narodnaia Volia, 1879–1882 (Moscow: Nauka, 1966); Nikolai Alekseevich Troitskii, “Narodnaia Volia” pered tsarskim sudom 1880—1894 gg. , 2 nd expanded and revised ed., (Saratov: Izdat. Saratovskogo universiteta, 1983); Evgeniia Levovna Rudnitskaia, Russkaia revoliutsionnaia mysl: Demokraticheskaia pechat 1864–1873 g. (Moscow: Nauka, 1984).

For such studies in English, see, e.g., Edward Hallett Carr, Michael Bakunin (London: Macmillan, 1937); Franco Venturi, Roots of Revolution: A History of the Populist and Socialist Movements in Nineteenth Century Russia [Italian Orig. 1952], trans. Francis Haskell, revised ed. (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1960); Avrahm Yarmolinsky, Road to Revolution: A Century of Russian Radicalism (London: Cassell & Company, 1957); Oliver H. Radkey, The Agrarian Foes of Bolshevism: Promise and Default of the Russian Socialist Revolutionaries February to October 1917 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1958).

See esp. the anthologies by Eric John Hobsbawm, Revolutionaries: Contemporary Essays (London: Weidenfeld, 1973), including essays from the years 1961–1972; and Wolfgang J. Mommsen, and Gerhard Hirschfeld, eds., Social Protest, Violence, and Terror in Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Europe (London: Macmillan, in association with Berg Publishers for the German Historical Institute, 1982) .

Notable studies by historians of Russia and Eastern Europe teaching in Western Europe, Israel, and the United States from this period are for example Paul Avrich, The Russian Anarchists (1967; repr., Oakland, CA: AK Press, 2005), chap. 2; Philip Pomper, The Russian Revolutionary Intelligentsia , 2 nd ed. (Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan Davidson, 1993); Maureen Perrie, The Agrarian Policy of the Russian Socialist-Revolutionary Party from Its Origins through the Revolution of 1905–1907 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976); Adam Bruno Ulam, In the Name of the People: Prophets and Conspirators in Prerevolutionary Russia (New York: Viking Press, 1977); Manfred Hildermeier, The Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party before the First World War [German Orig. 1978] (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000); Astrid von Borcke, Gewalt und Terror im revolutionären narodničestvo: Die Partei Narodnaja Volja (1879–1883); Zur Entstehung und Typologie des politischen Terrors im Russland des 19. Jahrhunderts (Cologne: Bundesinstitut für Ostwissenschaftliche und Internationale Studien, 1979); Jacques Baynac, Les socialistes-révolutionnaires de mars 1881 à mars 1917 (Paris: Éditions Robert Laffont, 1979); Norman M. Naimark, Terrorists and Social Democrats: The Russian Revolutionary Movement under Alexander III (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983); Deborah Hardy, Land and Freedom: The Origins of Russian Terrorism, 1876–1879 (New York: Greenwood Press, 1987); Nurit Schleifman, Undercover Agents in the Russian Revolutionary Movement: The SR Party, 1902–14 (Houndsmill, Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1988); Hannu Immonen, The Agrarian Program of the Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party, 1900–1914 (Helsinki: SHS, 1988). On this see esp. Leonov, Partiia sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov , 14–17.

See esp. Barbara Alpern Engel and Clifford N. Rosenthal, eds., Five Sisters: Women against the Tsar , with a foreword by Alix Kates Shulman (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1976); Richard Stites, The Women’s Liberation Movement in Russia: Feminism, Nihilism, and Bolshevism, 1860–1930 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1978), chap. 5; Jay Bergman, Vera Zasulich: A Biography (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1983); Barbara Alpern Engel, Mothers and Daughters: Women of the Intelligentsia in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983); Barbara Alpern Engel, Women, Gender and Political Choice in the Revolutionary Movement of the 1870’s , Research Paper 66 (Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Marjorie Mayrock Center for Soviet and East European Research, March 1988). See also the book by the Menshevik writer Vera Broido, Apostles into Terrorists: Women and the Revolutionary Movement in the Russia of Alexander II (London: Maurice Temple Smith, 1978).

See the source editions of Viktor Efimovich Kel’ner, ed., 1 marta 1881 goda: Kazn imperatora Aleksandra II; Dokumenty i vospominaniia (Leningrad: Lenizdat, 1991); Oleg Vital’evich Budnitskii, ed., Istoriia terrorizma v Rossii v dokumentakh, biografiiakh, issledovaniiakh , 2. expanded and revised ed. (Rostov-on-Don: Feniks, 1996); Oleg Vital’evich Budnitskii, ed., Zhenshchiny-terroristki v Rossii (2. Rostov-on-Don: Feniks, 1996); Evgeniia Levovna Rudnitskaia, ed., Revoliutsionnyi radikalizm v Rossii: Vek deviatnadtsatyi; Dokumental’naia publikatsiia (Moscow: Arkheograficheskii tsentr, 1997); N. I. Delkov, A. A. I. Ushakov, A. A. Chernobaev, and E. I. Shcherbakova, eds., Politicheskaia politsiia i politicheskii terrorizm v Rossii (vtoraia polovina XIX–nachalo XX vv.): Sbornik dokumentov (Moscow: AIRO-XX, 2001); as well as the studies by V. M. Chernov, V partii sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov: Vospominaniia o vos’mi liderakh . Publication, introduction, edition and commentaries by A. P. Novikov and K. Khuzer. (Saint Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2007); K. N. Morozov, ed., Individual’nyi politicheskii terror v Rossii, XIX–nachalo XX v. Materialy konferentsii (Moscow: “Memorial,” 1996); Leonov, Partiia sotsialistov-revoliutsionerov ; Gorodnitskii, Boevaia organizatsiia ; Oleg Vital’evich Budnitskii, Terrorizm v Rossiiskom osvoboditel’nom dvizhenii: Ideologiia, ėtika, psichologiia (vtoraia polovina XIX–nachalo XX v.) (Moscow: ROSSPĖN, 2000); Valerīi M. Volkovins’kii and Īvanna V. Hīkonova, Revoliutsīinii terorizm v Rociīs’kīI imperiī i Ukraina (druga polovina XIX—pochatok XX ct.) (Kiev: Starii cbīt, 2006). Ekaterina Igorevna Shcherbakova, “Otshchepentsy”: Put k terrorizmu (60-e–80-e gody XIX veka) (Moscow: Novyi khronograf, 2008) contains a number of crucial sources.

See esp. Anna Geifman, Thou Shalt Kill: Revolutionary Terrorism in Russia, 1894–1917 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); Anna Geifman, Russia under the Last Tsar: Opposition and Subversion, 1894–1917 (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1999); Anna Geifman, Entangled in Terror: The Azef Affair and the Russian Revolution (Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources, 2000); Leonid Grigor’evich Praisman, Terroristy i revoliutsionery, okhranniki i provokatory (Moscow: ROSSPĖN, 2001).

Michael Kronenwetter, Terrorism: A Guide to Events and Documents (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2004), vii; Michael Fellman, In the Name of God and Country: Reconsidering Terrorism in American History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2010), 1.

Kronenwetter, Terrorism , vii–viii.

On violence in the United States in connection with class conflict, see Robert Hunter, Violence and the Labour Movement (London: Routledge & Sons, 1916); Louis Adamic, Dynamite: The Story of Class Violence in America (New York: Viking Press, 1931); Paul Avrich, The Haymarket Tragedy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984); Paul Avrich, Sacco and Vanzetti: The Anarchist Background (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991); Kevin Kenny, Making Sense of the Molly Maguires (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998); and esp. Melvyn Dubofsky, We Shall Be All: A History of the Industrial Workers of the World (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1969). On the Ku Klux Klan, see David Mark Chalmers, Hooded Americanism: The First Century of the Ku Klux Klan, 1865–1965 (Garden City, NJ: Doubleday, 1965); Allen W. Trelease, White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and Southern Reconstruction (London: Secker & Warburg, 1971).

Beverly Gage, “Terrorism and the American Experience: A State of the Field,” Journal of American History 98, no. 1 (2011): 73–94, at 81.

For Austria, Germany, and Switzerland see, e.g., Julius Hans Schoeps, Bismarck und sein Attentäter: Der Revolveranschlag Unter den Linden am 7. Mai 1866 (Frankfurt am Main: Ullstein, 1984); Harald Seyrl, Der Tod der Kaiserin: Die Ermordung der Kaiserin und Königin Elisabeth von Österreich-Ungarn am 10. September 1898 im Spiegel der zeitgenössischen Darstellung (Vienna: Edition Seyrl, 1998). For France see, e.g., Jean Maitron, Ravachol et les anarchistes (Paris: Julliard, 1964); Association Française pour l’histoire de la justice, ed., L’assassinat du Président Sadi Carnot et le procès de Santo Ironimo Caserio (Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon, 1995).

There are a few exceptions, however. See, e.g., Jonathan Stevenson, “We Wrecked the Place”: Contemplating an End to the Northern Irish Troubles (New York: Free Press, 1996).

Thus also Schraut, “Zentrale Begriffe und Konzepte,” 25.

Thus also, e.g., Frank Trommler, “Foreword,” in War and Terror in Historical and Contemporary Perspective , ed. Michael Geyer (Washington, DC: American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, 2003), v. The holdings of the Library of Congress may be taken as an indicator of this wealth of literature. Even before the first decade of the twenty-first century had passed, a search for the term “terrorism” in the LC Catalog Quick Search would result in the note “Your search retrieved more records than can be displayed. Only the first 10,000 will be shown.”

For notable studies by pioneers of terrorism studies, who—under the impression of new events and their contexts—expanded earlier interpretations in interesting ways, see esp. Carlton, The West’s Road to 9/11 ; Walter Laqueur, No End to War: Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century (New York: Continuum, 2003); James M. Poland, Understanding Terrorism: Groups, Strategies, and Responses , 2 nd ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005). For a contribution from French terrorism studies pioneers and experts in English, see Gérard Chaliand and Arnaud Blin, eds., The History of Terrorism: From Antiquity to Al Qaeda (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007) .

See, e.g., Thomas R. Mockaitis, The “New” Terrorism: Myths and Reality (Westport, CT: Praeger Security International, 2007); Peter R. Neumann, Old and New Terrorism: Late Modernity, Globalization and the Transformation of Political Violence (Cambridge: Polity, 2009).

See, e.g., Brenda J. Lutz and James M. Lutz, Global Terrorism (London: Routledge 2004); James M. Lutz and Brenda J. Lutz, Terrorism: Origins and Evolution (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005); Brenda J. Lutz and James M. Lutz, eds., Global Terrorism , 4 vols. (Los Angeles: Sage Publications, 2008).

For interesting and in some respects especially original and thought-provoking interpretations by journalists and publicists, see, e.g., Caleb Carr, The Lessons of Terror: A History of Warfare against Civilians; Why It Has Always Failed, and Why It Will Fail Again (London: Little, Brown, 2002); Andrew Sinclair, An Anatomy of Terror (London: Macmillan, 2003); Kronenwetter, Terrorism ; Matthew Carr, The Infernal Machine: A History of Terrorism from the Assassination of Tsar Alexander II to Al-Qaeda (New York: New Press, 2006) .

See, e.g., Noam Chomsky, Pirates and Emperors, Old and New: International Terrorism in the Real World , new ed. (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 2002); Paul Virilio, Ground Zero (London: Verso, 2002); Slavoj Žižek, Welcome to the Desert of the Real! Five Essays on 11 September and Related Dates (London: Verso, 2002); Jean Baudrillard, The Spirit of Terrorism and Other Essays (London: Verso, 2003); Paul Berman, Terror and Liberalism (New York: Norton, 2003); John Gray, Al Quaeda and What It Means to Be Modern (London: Faber & Faber, 2003); Ian Buruma and Avishai Margalit, Occidentalism: The West in the Eyes of Its Enemies (New York: Penguin Press, 2004); Terry Eagleton, Holy Terror (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005); Judith Butler, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (London and New York: Verso, 2006).

For publications in English covering this large time frame, see esp. Brett Bowden and Michael T. Davis, eds., Terror: From Tyrannicide to Terrorism (Queensland: University of Queensland Press, 2008); Randall D. Law, Terrorism: A History (Cambridge: Polity, 2009) ; Randall D. Law, The Routledge History of Terrorism (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015) .

For publications at least partly in English, see esp. European Review of History/Revue européenne d’histoire 14, no. 3 (September 2007), ed. Robert Gerwarth and Heinz-Gerhard Haupt; Modern Times? Terrorism in Late Imperial Russia , ed. Anke Hilbrenner and Frithjof Benjamin Schenk, special issue, Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas , N.F. 58, no. 2 (2010); Michael Burleigh, Blood and Rage: A Cultural History of Terrorism (London: Harper Press, 2008).

See, e.g., Mike Davis, Buda’s Wagon: A Brief History of the Car Bomb (London: Verso, 2007); Annette Vowinckel, Flugzeugentführungen: Eine Kulturgeschichte (Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag, 2011).

See Ana Siljak, Angel of Vengeance: The “Girl Assassin,” the Governor of St. Petersburg, and Russia’s Revolutionary World (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2008); Claudia Verhoeven, The Odd Man Karakosov: Imperial Russia, Modernity and the Birth of Terrorism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009), John M. Merriman, The Dynamite Club: How a Bombing in Fin-de-Siècle Paris Ignited the Age of Modern Terror (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2009); Beverly Gage, The Day Wall Street Exploded: A Story of America in Its First Age of Terror (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).

Thus also Schraut, Terrorismus und politische Gewalt , 152f.

For Germany, see esp. Klaus Weinhauer, Jörg Requate, and Heinz-Gerhard Haupt, eds., Terrorismus in der Bundesrepublik: Medien, Staat und Subkulturen in den 1970er Jahren , (Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2006); Andreas Elter, Propaganda der Tat: Die RAF und die Medien (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 2008); Hanno Balz, Von Terroristen, Sympathisanten und dem starken Staat: Die öffentliche Debatte über die RAF in den 70er Jahren (Frankfurt am Main: Campus, 2008); Beatrice A. de Graaf, Nicole Colin, Jacco Pekelder, and Joachim Umlauf, eds., Der “Deutsche Herbst” und die RAF in Politik, Medien und Kunst: Nationale und internationale Perspektiven (Bielefeld: Transcript, 2008). For the United States, see esp. Bernardine Dohrn, William Ayers, and Jeff Jones, Sing a Battle Song: The Revolutionary Poetry, Statements, and Communiqués of the Weather Underground, 1970–1974 (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2006); Mark Rudd, Underground: My Life with SDS and the Weathermen (New York: William Morrow, 2009); Arthur M. Eckstein, Bad Moon Rising: How the Weather Underground Beat the FBI and Lost the Revolution (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2016).

See Ulrich Herbert, “Drei politische Generationen im 20. Jahrhundert,” in Generationalität und Lebensgeschichte im 20. Jahrhundert , ed. Jürgen Reulecke (Munich: Oldenbourg, 2003), 95–114.

For a comparative study on Germany and the United States, see esp. Jeremy Varon, Bringing the War Home: The Weather Underground, the Red Army Faction, and Revolutionary Violence in the Sixties and Seventies (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004); for a study on transnational connections and influences with a special focus on Germany and Italy, see Petra Terhoeven, Deutscher Herbst in Europa: Der Linksterrorismus der siebziger Jahre als transnationales Phänomen (Munich: Oldenbourg Verlag, 2014); for different case studies with a transnational component, see Jussi M. Hanhimäki and Bernhard Blumenau, eds., An International History of Terrorism: Western and Non-Western Experiences (Abingdon: Routledge, 2013).

Mikkel Thorup, An Intellectual History of Terror: War, Violence and the State (London: Routledge, 2010), ix–x.

Martin A. Miller, The Foundations of Modern Terrorism: State, Society and the Dynamics of Political Violence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013) , 2.

See Jensen, “Daggers, Rifles and Dynamite,” 116, 143. See also Isabelle Duyvesteyn and Beatrice de Graaf, “Terroristen en contraterrorisme: continuïteit en discontinuïteit,” in Terroristen en hun bestrijders, vroeger en nu , ed. Isabelle Duyvesteyn and Beatrice de Graaf (Amsterdam: Boom, 2007), 139–147.

See esp. Richard Bach Jensen, The Battle against Anarchist Terrorism: An International History, 1878–1934 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014) ; Elun T. Gabriel, Assassins and Conspirators: Anarchism, Socialism, and Political Culture in Imperial Germany (DeKalb, IL: NIU Press, 2014); Marcus Mühlnikel, “Fürst, sind Sie unverletzt?” Attentate im Kaiserreich, 1871–1914 (Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 2014); Iuliia Safronova, Russkoe obshchestvo v zerkale revoliutsionnogo terrora, 1879–1881 gody (Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2014); Carola Dietze, The Invention of Terrorism in Europe, Russia an the United States , trans. David Antal, James Bell and Zachary Murphy King, revised and expanded from the German edition (London and New York: Verso 2021; a Russian translation is published in Moscow by Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2022); “Explosive Melange: Terrorismus und imperiale Gewalt in Osteuropa,” ed. Anke Hilbrenner and Felicitas Fischer von Weikersthal, special issue, Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas , N.F. 66, no. 4 (2016); Tim-Lorenz Wurr, Terrorismus und Autokratie: Staatliche Reaktionen auf den Russischen Terrorismus 1870–1890 (Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, [2017]); Schraut, Terrorismus und politische Gewalt ; Carola Dietze, “Legitimacy and Security from a Historical Perspective: A Case Study in the History of Terrorism,” in Conceptualizing Power in Dynamics of Securitization: Beyond State and International System , ed. Regina Kreide and Andreas Langenohl (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2019) , 135–173.

Laqueur, Terrorism , reprinted as A History of Terrorism .

Laqueur, A History of Terrorism , 7–12.

Ibid., 12–14, 16–18.

See esp. Rapoport, “Fear and Trembling”; Rapoport, “Why Does Messianism Produce Terror?”; David C. Rapoport, “The Four Waves of Modern Terrorism,” in Attacking Terrorism: Elements of a Grand Strategy , ed. Audrey Kurth Cronin and James M. Ludes (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2004) , 46–73; David C. Rapoport, “Terrorism,” in Encyclopedia of Government and Politics , vol. 2, ed. Mary E. Hawkesworth and Maurice Kogan (London: Routledge, 2004), 1049–1077; David C. Rapoport, Terrorism: Critical Concepts in Political Science , 4 vols. (London: Routledge, 2006) ; David C. Rapoport, “Generations and Waves: The Keys to Understanding Rebel Terror Movements,” February, 20, 2021, https://international.ucla.edu/institute/article/5118 . For his earlier work, see n. 9.

Rapoport, “Generations and Waves.” See also Rapoport, “The Four Waves of Modern Terrorism”; Rapoport, “Terrorism”; Kaplan, “Waves of Political Terrorism.” On the reaction to his theory, see, e.g., Berto Jongman, “Research Desiderata in the Field of Terrorism,” in Mapping Terrorism Research: State of the Art, Gaps and Future Direction , ed. Magnus Ranstorp (New York: Routledge, 2006), 255–291; Kaplan, “Waves of Political Terrorism,” 10–14.

See, e.g., Rapoport, “Terrorism,” 1051f., 1067.

See, e.g., Grant Wardlaw, Political Terrorism: Theory, Tactics, and Counter-Measures , 2 nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), chaps. 1–3, or Peter Waldmann, Terrorismus: Provokation der Macht (Munich: Gerling Akademie, 1998), reprinted as Terrorismus: Provokation der Macht; Das Standardwerk , 2 nd , completely revised ed. (Hamburg: Murmann, 2005), chap. 3.

An example of this view is John Deutch, “Terrorism,” Foreign Policy 108 (1997): 10–22.

See Bowden, and Davis, Terror ; Carr, The Lessons of Terror ; Kronenwetter, Terrorism ; Lutz and Lutz, Global Terrorism ; Lutz and Lutz, Terrorism ; Law, The Routledge History of Terrorism ; the relevant chapters in a series of general survey books, e.g., in Martin, Understanding Terrorism .

Carr, The Lessons of Terror , 6.

Miller, The Foundations of Modern Terrorism , 2.

The importance of analytically precise distinctions is emphasized by, e.g., Ariel Merari, “Terrorism as a Strategy of Insurgency,” in The History of Terrorism: From Antiquity to Al Qaeda , ed. Gérard Chaliand and Arnaud Blin (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007) , 12–51; Sylvia Schraut, “Terrorismus und Geschichtswissenschaft,” in Terrorismusforschung in Deutschland , ed. Alexander Spencer, Alexander Kocks, and Kai Harbrich (Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaft, 2011), 99–122, at 106. For a case from Germany available in English, see Peter Sloterdijk, Terror from the Air , trans. Amy Patton and Steve Corcoran (Los Angeles: Semiotext[e], 2009).

For a succinct, contemporary explication of this connection, see Astrid von Borcke, “Violence and Terror in Russian Revolutionary Populism: The ‘Narodnaya Volya,’ 1879–83,” in Social Protest, Violence, and Terror in Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Europe , ed. Wolfgang J. Mommsen and Gerhard Hirschfeld (London: Macmillan Press in association with Berg Publishers for the German Historical Institute, London, 1982), 48–62, at 48f. For later presentations of similar arguments, see, e.g., Anna Geifman, Death Orders: The Vanguard of Modern Terrorism in Revolutionary Russia (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Security International, 2010), e.g., 3f.

For this literature, see esp. nn. 19–24.

For a partly autobiographical portrait of the group fleeing Germany as youth, see Walter Laqueur, Generation Exodus: The Fate of Young Jewish Refugees from Nazi Germany (Hanover, NH: Brandeis University Press, 2001).

This might hold true, even though Adam B. Ulam explicitly refers to his “enduring addiction to the detective story” when he traces the reasons for studying prerevolutionary terrorism in Russia. See his Understanding the Cold War: A Historian’s Personal Reflections [2000], 2 nd ed. (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2008), chap. 21, quotation at 241. See also Walter Laqueur, Thursday’s Child Has Far to Go: A Memoir of the Journeying Years (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1992), where he traces the topics of his intellectual engagement until 1951 (see esp. 335–345).

Albert Parry, Terrorism: From Robespierre to Arafat (New York: Vanguard Press, 1976).

Donald H. Rumsfeld, interview with Tony Snow, Fox News Sunday , September 16, 2001, 9:05 A.M. EDT, accessed January 16, 2016, http://archive.defense.gov/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=1887 ; and George W. Bush, remarks by the president upon arrival: the South Lawn, September 16, 2001, 3:23 P.M. EDT, accessed January 16, 2016, http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010916-2.html .

Lance Morrow, “The Case for Rage and Retribution,” Time , Wednesday, September 12, 2001, accessed December 4, 2016, http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,175435,00.html .

E.g., Reed Johnson, “Will War on Terrorism Define a Generation? Historians Ponder to What Extent the Attacks Will Be a True Turning Point for Society,” Los Angeles Times , September 23, 2001, E1; Ralf Beste et al., “Wir sind eine Welt,” Spiegel Online , September 15, 2001, accessed January 7, 2016, http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-20128594.html ; Martin Klingst and Gunter Hofmann, “Ich will nicht nur Sicherheit: Bundesinnenminister Otto Schily über die Schwierigkeiten, eine Strategie gegen den neuen Terror zu finden,” Die Zeit , September 17, 2001, 4.

Thus also Isabelle Duyvesteyn and Leena Malkki, “The Fallacy of the New Terrorism Thesis,” in Contemporary Debates on Terrorism , ed. Richard Jackson and Samuel J. Sinclair (London: Routledge, 2012), 35–42.

On the concept of “holy terror” or religious terrorism, see esp. Rapoport, “Why Does Messianism Produce Terror?”; Mark Juergensmeyer, Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000). Both authors point out that this type of violence can arise from all major religions, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

For the Assassins’ place in the standard narrative of terrorism, see esp. Laqueur, A History of Terrorism , 8–9; Rapoport, “Why Does Messianism Produce Terror?,” 72f.; Rapoport, “Fear and Trembling,” 659f. and 664–668. On the medieval sect of the Ismailis (i.e., the Assassins, in the Western tradition) and the interpretations surrounding them, in English see the classic work of Marshall G. S. Hodgson, The Secret Order of Assassins: The Struggle of the Early Nizârî Ismâʻîlîs against the Islamic World (1955; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005); Farhad Daftary, The Ismā’īlīs: Their History and Doctrines (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1990); Farhad Daftary, The Assassin Legends: Myths of the Ismaʻilis (London: Tauris, 1994); Farhad Daftary, A Short History of the Ismailis: Traditions of a Muslim Community (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998); Meriem Pagès, From Martyr to Murderer: Representations of the Assassins in Twelfth- and Thirteenth-Century Europe (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2014).

On suicide terrorism as a specific kind of terrorism and its rise and spread since the 1990s, see Laqueur, No End to War , chap. 4; Hoffman, Inside Terrorism , chap. 5; and esp. Robert A. Pape, “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism,” American Political Science Review 97, no. 3 (2003): 343–361, reprinted in Lutz and Lutz, Global Terrorism , 311–346. See also Christoph Reuter, My Life Is a Weapon: A Modern History of Suicide Bombing , trans. Helena Ragg-Kirkby (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004); Mia Bloom, Dying to Kill: The Allure of Suicide Terror (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005); Robert Anthony Pape, Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism (New York: Random House, 2005); Ami Pedahzur, Suicide Terrorism (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005); Nasra Hassan, “Suicide Terrorism,” in The Roots of Terrorism , ed. Louise Richardson (New York: Routledge, 2006), 29–42; Assaf Moghadam, The Globalization of Martyrdom: Al Qaeda, Salafi Jihad, and the Diffusion of Suicide Attacks (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008).

On the suicidal character of the attacks on September 11, 2001, see esp. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, The 9/11 Commission Report , authorized ed. (New York: W. W. Norton, [2004]); on suicide attacks by the Tamil Tigers and by Lebanese and Palestinian groups, see, e.g., Laqueur, No End to War , chap. 4; Hoffman, Inside Terrorism , chap. 5; Pape, Dying to Win , esp. chap. 8; Pedahzur, Suicide Terrorism , chaps. 3 and 4. On the July 7 attacks in London, see Moghadam, The Globalization of Martyrdom , chap. 6.

See, e.g., Reuter, My Life Is a Weapon , 20–28; Bloom, Dying to Kill , 4–11; Pedahzur, Suicide Terrorism , 9; James M. Poland, Understanding Terrorism: Groups, Strategies, and Responses, 3 rd ed. (Boston: Prentice Hall, 2011), 23f.; Jeremy Spindlove and Clifford Simonsen, Terrorism Today: The Past, the Players, the Future (Boston: Pearson, 2013), 32. For a different perspective, see, e.g., the introduction in Moghadam, The Globalization of Martyrdom . See also Pape, Dying to Win , who draws these long historical lines (11–14, 33–35) while emphasizing that “the presumed connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism is misleading” (3).

Waldmann, Terrorismus , 12, with minor changes, as translated in Carola Dietze and Claudia Verhoeven, “Introduction,” paper presented at the Conference on Terrorism and Modernity: Global Perspectives on Nineteenth-Century Political Violence, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, October 23–26, 2008, 6.

Waldmann, Terrorismus , chaps. 1–2, at 12.

For Germany see also Friedhelm Neidhardt, “Zur Soziologie des Terrorismus,” Berliner Journal für Soziologie 1, no. 2 (2004): 263–272; from the perspective of security policy, Kai Hirschmann, Terrorismus (Hamburg: Europäische Verlagsanstalt, 2003), 7–9; from the criminological viewpoint, Anne Wildfang, Terrorismus: Definition, Struktur, Dynamik (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2010). For the Netherlands, see Erwin Roelof Muller, Ramón F. J. Spaaij, and A. G. W. Ruitenberg, Trends in terrorisme (Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer, 2003), 2–3. For the United Kingdom and Ireland, see Charles Townshend, Terrorism: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), chap. 1; Richardson, What Terrorists Want , chap. 1. For the United States, see Laqueur, A History of Terrorism , 79; Martha Crenshaw, “Thoughts on Relating Terrorism to Historical Contexts,” in Terrorism in Context , ed. Martha Crenshaw (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995) , 3–24; Hoffman, Inside Terrorism , chap. 1, 40–41. For Israel, see Boaz Ganor, Defining Terrorism: Is One Man’s Terrorist Another Man’s Freedom Fighter? (Herzliya: International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism, the Interdisciplinary Center, 1998); Ariel Merari, “Terrorism as a Strategy of Insurgency.” For Russia, see Murat Islamovich Dzliev, El’zad Seifullaevich Izzatdust, and Mikhail Pavlovich Kireev, Sovremennyi terrorizm: Sotsial’no-politicheskii oblik protivnika (Moscow: Akademiia, 2007), chap. 1.1, 28–35. For Australia, see Grant Wardlaw, Political Terrorism , chap. 1.1. The Italian sociologist Donatella Della Porta, Clandestine Political Violence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 9–10, likewise singles out these elements to define her term “clandestine political violence.”

For an overview over these narratives and the most important statements they contain, see above, pages 9–11.

Björn Wittrock, “Modernity: One, None, or Many? European Origins and Modernity as a Global Condition,” Daedalus 129, no. 1 (2000): 31–60. The skeptical stance toward the concept of “modernity” set forth in my “Toward a History on Equal Terms” certainly is compatible with the recognition of the fact of “big developments” and the “promissory notes” of the term “modernity” and therefore does not preclude such an approach, as Dietze, The Invention of Terrorism and my chapter in this Handbook show.

Carr, Matthew . The Infernal Machine: A History of Terrorism from the Assassination of Tsar Alexander II to Al-Qaeda . New York: New Press, 2006 .

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Chaliand, Gérard , and Arnaud Blin . The History of Terrorism: From Antiquity to Al Qaeda . Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2007 .

Crenshaw, Martha , ed. Terrorism in Context . University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995 .

Dietze, Carola . The Invention of Terrorism in Europe, Russia an the United States , trans. David Antal, James Bell and Zachary Murphy King, revised and expanded from the German edition. London and New York: Verso 2021, originally published in German as Die Erfindung des Terrorismus in Europa, Russland und den USA, 1858–1866 . Hamburg: Hamburger Edition, 2016 .

Dietze, Carola . “Legitimacy and Security from a Historical Perspective: A Case Study in the History of Terrorism.” In Conceptualizing Power in Dynamics of Securitization. Beyond State and International System , edited by Regina Kreide and Andreas Langenohl , 135–173. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2019 .

Duyvesteyn, Isabelle . “The Role of History and Continuity in Terrorism Research.” In Mapping Terrorism Research. State of the Art, Gaps and Future Direction , edited by Magnus Ranstorp , 51–75. New York, NY: Routledge, 2006 .

Hoffman, Bruce . Inside Terrorism . Rev. and expanded ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 2006 .

Ivianski, Zeev . “The Terrorist Revolution: Roots of Modern Terrorism.” In Terrorism: Critical Concepts in Political Science , Vol. 1, The First or Anarchist Wave , edited by David C. Rapoport , 73–94. London: Routledge, 2006 .

Jensen, Richard . “ Daggers, Rifles and Dynamite: Anarchist Terrorism in Nineteenth Century Europe. ” Terrorism and Political Violence 16, no. 1 ( 2004 ): 116–153.

Jensen, Richard Bach . The Battle against Anarchist Terrorism: An International History, 1878–1934 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014 .

Laqueur, Walter . A History of Terrorism . With a new introduction by the Author. 2 nd ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002 .

Laqueur, Walter . Voices of Terror: Manifestos, Writings, and Manuals of Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Other Terrorists from Around the World and Throughout the Ages . New York: Reed Press, 2004 .

Law, Randall D. Terrorism: A History. Cambridge: Polity, 2009 .

Law, Randall D. The Routledge History of Terrorism . London: Routledge, 2015 .

Miller, Martin A. The Foundations of Modern Terrorism . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013 .

Mommsen, Wolfgang J. , and Gerhard Hirschfeld , eds. Social Protest, Violence, and Terror in Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Europe . London: Macmillan Press in association with Berg Publishers for the German Historical Institute, 1982 .

Rapoport, David C. “The Four Waves of Modern Terrorism.” In Attacking Terrorism. Elements of a Grand Strategy , edited by Audrey Kurth Cronin and James M. Ludes , 46–73. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2004 .

Rapoport, David C. , ed. Terrorism: Critical Concepts in Political Science. London: Routledge, 2006 .

Richardson, Louise . What Terrorists Want: Understanding the Enemy, Containing the Threat. New York: Random House, 2006 .

Schraut, Sylvia . Terrorismus und politische Gewalt. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2018 .

Waldmann, Peter . Terrorismus: Provokation der Macht. 2 nd expanded rev. ed. Hamburg: Murmann, 2005 .

Walther, Rudolf . “Art.: Terror, Terrorismus.” In Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland , vol. 6, edited by Otto Brunner , Werner Conze , and Reinhart Koselleck , 323–444. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1990 .

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Terrorism Research Paper

This sample terrorism research paper features: 7300 words (approx. 24 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 57 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Feel free to contact our writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

Interdisciplinarity of Terrorism

The definition of terrorism, the history of terrorism, the new terrorism, terrorism and new technologies, terrorism in the contemporary world scene, terrorism and globalization, secular, religious, and fundamentalist terrorism, new areas of inquiry, future opportunities, more terrorism research papers:.

Anthropology of Terrorism Research Paper
Counterterrorism Research Paper
Counterterrorism and the Media Research Paper
Criminology and Terrorism Research Paper
Ecoterrorism Research Paper
History of Terrorism Research Paper
Homegrown Terrorism Research Paper
Policing Terrorism Research Paper
Politics and Terrorism Research Paper
Situational Approaches to Terrorism Research Paper
Social Disorganization and Terrorism Research Paper
Strategies of Counterterrorism Research Paper

Terrorism is an interdisciplinary topic that requires the contributions of experts in the areas of history, political science, social science, philosophy, religion, psychology, sociology, finance, strategic studies, international relations, criminal justice, crime prevention and control, public safety, warfare, counterterrorism theory and practice, anthropology, languages, and cultural studies. History, the social sciences, political science, and psychology are especially useful in understanding the origins, reasons, justifications, motivations, and changes in the meaning and definition of terrorism. The recent emergence of terrorism, which is inspired by religious fundamentalism and ethnicseparatist elements rather than political ideology, serves as but one critical example of the complex nature of this phenomenon. For these reasons, diverse theoretical approaches are needed to explain the worldwide growth and expansion of terrorism within the complex matrix of social, cultural, economic, religious, psychological, political, and strategic variables (Ross 1996; Sharif 1996).

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

Terrorism is political in its objectives and motives; violent or threatening violence; meant to have wide and deep psychological repercussions beyond the particular victim or target; committed by an organization with a command hierarchy that can be identified or a cell configuration that permits conspiratorial activities; and carried out by a subnational group or nonstate body. Thus, terrorism can be defined as the deliberate generation, instillation, and exploitation of fear into a competing group, party, government, or public opinion through violence or the threat of violence with the goal of introducing political change (Noble 1998).

Terrorists may be loners or people working in cells, small groups, or large coalitions. They do not answer to nor are they dependent on any government, they function across national borders, use advanced technology, and receive funding from anywhere in the world. Contemporary terrorists are not worried about limiting casualties. Current terrorism takes great advantage of ease and speed of travel, advanced communications and technology, anonymous financial transactions, and scientific and technological breakthroughs that greatly facilitate its mission. Most of all, the “new” terrorism has a global dimension. Indeed, globalization and religious extremism have greatly facilitated the activities of terrorism.

The interest of the social sciences in terrorism dates back to the analysis by political sociologists of anarchism, revolutionary movements, and insurgencies. Sociologists focusing on social change have also dedicated considerable space to the topic. In the past, Marxist and leftist sociologists addressed issues related to terrorism but did so within the context of liberation movements. The analysis and development of the area expanded in the 1970s, spurred by the growth of terrorism in the Middle East, related especially to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; in Europe, particularly in Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland), and Italy; and in various Latin American countries. In South America, reformers involved in the liberation theology movement and the struggle for social and political change in the hemisphere also contributed to the field. Work on the phenomenon was no doubt influenced and colored by political currents such as Marxism and other left-leaning approaches that stressed themes related to the struggle of the oppressed against subjugation and exploitation by colonialism and capitalism. On the opposite side of the spectrum, the center and center-right perspectives emphasized instead the darker, criminal, or antidemocratic side of terrorist activities. Sociology provided the conceptual approaches, theories, and tools to analyze, understand, and explain terrorism as a social phenomenon and to formulate remedial and preventative interventions.

The statutory definition that the U.S. government uses to track and keep statistics on terrorism is as follows: “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience” [22 U.S.C. 2656f (d)]. By this definition, terrorism has several elements:

There must be an intent and a prior decision to commit an act that entails this type of violence.
Political motivation, thus eliminating criminal violence for monetary gain or personal revenge. Of course, criminal violence can have political repercussions too as it generates more and more fear of crime. And, on the other hand, terror is often connected with criminal activities but its goal is serving a greater good as defined by the terrorists.
Attacking people who cannot defend themselves or respond in kind.
Planned and carried out by a group. There is debate whether or not there can be a case of “individual” terrorism. The place and the role of clandestine agents and subnational groups is a delicate issue because at times governments, including the United States, have used both. This has sometimes meant the use of force, which has generated civilian casualties.

It is noteworthy that the definition does not include the threat of violence and thus serves to establish that terrorism is but one form of behavior along a continuum of possible political behaviors people engage in to express themselves and to cast attention toward the social, economic, and political conditions they desire to change. In this area, then, it is essential to bear in mind that terrorism is first and foremost a method that is centered on what people do rather than who they are and what they are attempting to achieve. Thus, counterterrorism can be viewed as an attempt to civilize the way in which a heated political contest is waged.

Terrorism is basically and fundamentally political in nature. It is also very much about power—that is, pursuing power, acquiring power, and using power to cause political change. Consequently, terrorism is also violence or, just as importantly, the threat of violence used and aimed in the pursuit of or in the service of a political objective.

The word terrorism initially became popular during the French Revolution when it did have a progovernmental, “positive” connotation. The régime de la terreur of 1793–1794, from which the English word originates, was established as a means to impose and consolidate power during the transient anarchical time of disorder and unrest that followed the revolution of 1789. Thus, instead of meaning an antigovernment operation, like it does today, the régime de la terreur was a government tool used to consolidate and firm up the power of the new government by intimidating, terrifying, and eliminating counterrevolutionaries, political opponents, and other dissidents deemed to be “enemies of the people.” Less than a year after the execution of Robespierre, the word terrorism was popularized in English by Edmund Burke (1790) in his polemic tract against the French Revolution where he wrote about “thousands of those Hell hounds called Terrorists. . . . let loose on the people” (p. 34).

One of the major outcomes of the French Revolution was the growing rejection of absolute monarchical systems that claimed to derive their authority directly from God and therefore to be entitled to a divine right to rule without constraints or limits. It also inspired the overall political awakening of Europe. Independence and nationalist movements flourished and succeeded in creating modern nationstates in some parts of Europe, as in the case of Germany and Italy. At the same time, dramatic socioeconomic changes were taking place as a consequence of massive industrialization, particularly in England and Germany. The alienation and exploitation of workers by nineteenthcentury capitalism provided the fertile ground for the sprouting and growing of new “universalist” ideologies. The most important ones are socialism and eventually communism.

During this period of social change in Europe the concept of terrorism was expanded and elaborated on. For example, an Italian revolutionary, Carlo Pisacane, who forsook his nobility status to lead an ill-fated rebellion against the Bourbon monarchy in Southern Italy, developed the idea of “propaganda by deed,” a concept that has exerted considerable influence on revolutionaries, insurgents, and terrorists ever since. Pisacane argued that violence is needed not only to attract attention to the cause or to generate publicity but to inform, educate, and, in the end, get the masses behind the revolution. Pamphlets, wall posters, or gatherings will never effectively substitute for the didactic value of violence.

One of the most notable groups to put Pisacane’s theory into practice was probably the Narodnaya Volya (people’s will or people’s freedom), a small group of Russian proponents of constitutional government in Russia started in 1878 to limit the unconstrained power of the tsar. Ironically, the success of the group in assassinating Tsar Alexander II on March 1, 1881, led to its complete suppression. The message of Pisacane and of Narodnaya Volya deeply affected the growing anarchist movement. An anarchist conference in London in 1881 endorsed the killing of the tsar and supported the idea of tyrannicide as a means for achieving revolutionary change.

By the 1930s, terrorism did not mean so much revolutionary movements and violence against governments or empires but rather the politics and practices of mass oppression and repression used by dictatorships and their leaders against their own citizenry. In other words, it meant again, like at the end of the terror regime in France, governmental abuse of power as it was taking place especially in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and the Stalinist Soviet Union.

Similar forms of state-planned, imposed, or directed violence have taken place and are still occurring in various parts of the world. Violence has been a well-known aspect of right of center military dictatorships in Latin America, Europe, Asia, and Africa, especially in Chile, Argentina (Buchanan 1987; Cox 1983), Brazil, Greece, Spain, Portugal, various African countries, the Philippines, Indonesia, Burma, and Pakistan. Use of violence and intimidation by government authorities against their own people is generally identified as terror to distinguish such behavior from terrorism or violence that is carried out by nonstate entities (Moxon-Browne 1994).

The meaning of terrorism changed once more after World War II, thereby reclaiming the revolutionary reputation with which it is associated today. In the late 1940s, 1950s, and into the 1960s, terrorism was connected with the uprisings by indigenous populations in various parts of the world—Africa, Asia, the Middle East—to expel European colonial powers from their countries. At times they involved long guerrilla wars or terrorism. Well-known examples are Algeria, Cyprus, Israel, Kenya, and Vietnam. Many nationalistic rebellions took the form of guerrilla war. The Cuban Revolution of 1956 became a model for left-wing ideologues as a struggle against capitalist powers. Because these movements were perceived internationally as a struggle for liberation, decolonization, and self-determination, thanks in part to adroit public relations campaigns by the insurgents and their supporters in the First World, the term freedom fighter became increasingly used to describe them. This was also part of the Cold War’s psychological and political warfare between the Soviet Union and its supporters, which praised the insurgents fighting against capitalism, and the United States and Western European countries, which resisted them, for instance, in the Philippines and Puerto Rico.

At the end of the 1960s and into the 1970s, terrorism was still viewed within a revolutionary framework even though usage of the term was expanded to encompass nationalist and ethnic separatist groups beyond a colonial or neocolonial context as well as radical and ideologically driven organizations. In particular, ethnic minorities seeking independence or autonomy used terrorism not only to inflict casualties and serious damage to the dominant group but also to attract international attention, sympathy, and aid. The late 1960s also saw major student’s upheavals in Western Europe and the United States that had in some cases terrorist overtones and rhetoric (Wilkinson 1994).

More recently, the term terrorism has been used to describe broader, less narrow phenomena. In the early 1980s, terrorism was considered a planned and calculated strategy to destabilize the Western world as part of a vast global conspiracy. Claire Sterling (1981) in her book The Terror Network described apparently isolated terrorist events committed by different groups around the globe that were actually connected elements of a secret plan, under the direction of the former USSR and implemented by its Warsaw Pact countries to annihilate the free world. At the time the Cold War atmosphere offered the theory as appealing, particularly to the American and some western European governments.

The communist conspiracy was eventually overshadowed in the mid-1980s when a series of suicide bombings aimed mostly at American diplomatic and military targets in the Middle East abruptly called attention to the growing menace of state-sponsored terrorism. Several renegade foreign governments such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Syria were suspected and accused of being actively involved in sponsoring or commissioning terrorist acts.

In the early 1990s, the meaning and use of the term terrorism were once again changed by the appearance of two new expressions—narco-terrorism and the “gray area phenomenon.” Narco-terrorism was initially linked to an overall communist and Soviet plot to sabotage Western society. It presumably involved the use of drug trafficking to support and implement the objectives of certain governments and terrorist organizations, such as the Soviet Union, Cuba, Bulgaria, and Nicaragua. But the emphasis on this supposed type of narco-terrorism may have effectively diverted attention from yet another emerging trend— namely, the alliance of criminal and violence-driven organizations with terrorist and guerrilla entities that employed violence not only for the advancement of their business activities but for achieving political ends as well. One of the best-known examples of this was the growing power and influence of the Colombian cocaine cartels with their close alliance with left-wing terrorist groups in Colombia and Peru (Brown and Merrill 1995).

In the 1990s, terrorism was also cast by some analysts into a “gray area phenomenon,” thereby stressing the difficulty in clearly pinpointing what terrorism is. Basically, this approach reflects the growing fluidity of subnational conflict in the post–Cold War era. Terrorism in this sense represents threats to the stability of nation-states by nonstate actors and violence affecting large regions of the world or major urban areas where the central government has lost its influence and control to new half-political, half-criminal groups. It also covers different types of conflicts that do not fit well into traditionally recognized concepts of war as the fighting between clearly marked armed forces of two or more countries. It involves instead irregular forces as one or more of the combatants. The shift here is clearly toward nonstate conflict. Consequently, one could argue that terrorism is simply a manifestation of violence in a particular time period and thus it evolves and manifests itself in different ways. In a sense, terrorism is always changing (Alexander and Latter 1990; Baumel, 1999; Coates 1987; Corcoran, 1995; Smith 1994; Stern 1996; Walter 1995).

The United States and the world, particularly the Western world, were awakened to the existence of a new form of terrorism based in the Middle East by a series of events that ultimately culminated in the September 11, 2001, catastrophic attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. Since then, the names of Osama Bin-Laden and Al-Qaeda have become universally known and immediately connected with a violent struggle with an international reach and a strong religious dimension (Stern 1999) against the United States and Western interests based in the Middle East. The new terrorism has greater potential to cause damage to the United States, the West, and other countries, including parts of the Muslim world. The dangerous nature of the new terrorism stems from its being organized around loosely linked cells that do not depend on a single leader or a state sponsor. It is transnational, borderless, and carried out by nonstate actors. In comparing the “new” with the “old” terrorism, one would emphasize the following:

The new terrorism is more violent. In the old model, terrorists sought attention, not mass casualties. Presently, they want both.
The most dangerous terrorists today are transnational nonstate actors who operate at the global level and want to inflict damage and even destroy all secular state systems, including those with Islamic roots. Previous terrorist organizations held locally oriented aspirations; today’s terrorism is global in reach and has strategic objectives. Its members are transnational, nonstate actors whose allegiance goes to a cause, not a particular state or political entity.
The new terrorism is much better financed than its predecessors that depended on state sponsors to fund their activities.
Current terrorists are more impenetrable than previous groups. The loose, but networked, cellular structure of Al Qaeda and similar terrorist organizations are especially difficult. Religious and highly motivated extremists are also difficult to entrap using money, entertainment, and sex.
The reputed availability of weapons of mass destruction greatly raised the risk on the threat posed by contemporary terrorists and the potential damage they can inflict. In the past, the major concern was about small arms; explosives, particularly Semtex or plastique; rocketpropelled grenades and an occasional shoulder-fired antiaircraft missile (Gavel 2002).

The planned use of liquid explosives in London to down airplanes is the latest addition to the growing list of terrorist tools.

Significant changes in the terrorists’ methods include the use of new technologies, the deployment of terrorists across international frontiers, and changes in the origins of support. Information technologies used by terrorists include the Internet, cellular phones, instant messaging, and real-time photographic and filming capabilities. Such capabilities have amplified the global reach of terrorist organizations. As but one example, hacking has been used. Internet sites have been placed under attack; Web sites have been hijacked or defaced; there are documented cases of denial of Internet service, automated e-mail bombings, and Web sitins. Management and administrative functions of terrorist organizations; coordinating operations; recruiting possible members; improving communications between members; attracting people sympathetic to the cause; collecting, managing, and transferring funds; and spreading the group’s message and philosophy have been greatly facilitated by the impressive technological advances in global information. This has facilitated the tasks of the terrorists and allowed them to expand the range of their activities. In particular, the synchronization of terrorist attacks, such as those of September 11, 2001, and those on various U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998, was made possible by the use of contemporary information technology (Denning 2000).

Globalization and the establishment of regional trading zones such as the European Union, Mercosur, the North American Free Trade Area, and others have made it easier for terrorists to expand their activities across international borders, borders that seemingly no longer exist. Thus, terrorists recognize their efforts are less easily detected through the Internet. This has facilitated the territorial expansion of terrorist groups, assisted in the establishment of terrorist cells, and promoted free movement across vast regions of the world in the planning and execution of terrorist activities.

Technological innovations and the ease of financial operations worldwide have also assisted terrorists in expanding their operations. While Al-Qaeda is reputed to be one of the best-financed terrorist networks, it is reported that Aum Shinrikyo, Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRA (O’Day 1994), the Tamil Tigers, and others groups benefit from the vast network of funding sources. These sources may include legal enterprises such as nonprofit and charitable organizations, legitimate companies, and illegal enterprises such as drug production, trafficking, smuggling, bank robberies, fraud, kidnappings, and extortion. Web sites have also been used to raise funds (Center for Strategic and International Studies 1998).

The smooth movement of terrorists’ financial resources is illustrated by the reported movement of gold and U.S. currency across the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Once the gold and currency arrived in Pakistan, they were swiftly transferred to the informal hawala or hundi banking system to other Middle Eastern countries. There it was converted into gold bullion and dispersed around the world. Additionally, terrorist funds have been converted into other commodities such as diamonds and tanzanite. In general, terrorist groups, whose assets may be a small fraction of the total amount of funds moved daily by organized transnational crime groups, use a variety of vehicles for the transfer of money, from couriers to banks, money changing enterprises, and informal exchanges such as the hawala or hundi systems (Viano 2003).

Samuel Huntington (1996) outlined a theory of conflict for the twenty-first century, stating that particular types of conflict are known to dominate different historical periods. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States is the world’s only superpower. The struggles that may threaten world peace will no longer focus on nationalism or ideology. Rather, most conflicts result from cultural confrontations that threaten to spread violence; one such cultural conflict is religion. In Huntington’s view, international peace will be especially threatened in “torn countries,” where more than one sociocultural orientation exists. The Balkans, where violent ethnic and religious strife and ethnic cleansing took place in the 1990s, represents but one example of Huntington’s thesis in which religion and terrorism are linked.

According to Huntington’s thesis, terrorism will probably continue to find supporters among violent, true believers in areas of conflict. The implications for the United States seem clear: First, it will be targeted by religious zealots from different cultural backgrounds because they believe that the United States has wrongly intervened and violated their religious norms. Western Europe and Japan may be targeted as well. Second, since the United States routinely is open to immigration there is a growing potential for religious strife. While the United States is not a “torn” country, it does provide a fertile field for zealots of different religions who want to change or punish America with violence and for right-wing extremists who violently object to the increasing diversity of the country and forcefully oppose those who tolerate it and the government that makes it possible. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing is a clear example of the latter.

Bruce Hoffman (1998) and Walter Laqueur (1996, 1997, 2000) state that we are not only witnessing a resurgence and expansion of terrorist groups motivated by religion, but the situation is made even more difficult by the fact that religious terrorists behave differently than ethnic and nationalistic terrorists. The reason is that they are not constrained by the same factors that may inhibit other types of terrorists. In Hoffman’s view, religious terrorists differ from political terrorists in many ways. Holy terror represents a value system that is opposite to “secular terror,” secular terrorists function within the dominant political and cultural reality that they to replace with their own. Religious or “holy” terrorists are under no such constraint. Although fundamentalist and violent extremists may be attracted to any religion (Sargent 1995), for holy terrorists the world is a battlefield between the forces of good and evil, light and darkness. Winning is not understood in political terms. Rather, the enemy must be completely destroyed and, for this reason, killing is the outcome of an operation. For holy terrorists, killing is a sacramental act; the goal of their operation. For Islamic terrorism, the purpose of terrorism is to kill the enemies of God or to convert them to Islam (Rapoport 1988).

The current threat posed by terrorism is the product of the collision of different elements: maximum Western power, particularly that of the United States; globalization, driven mostly by Western interests; and the fundamentalist reaction to these trends affecting centuries-old ways of life in different parts of the world (Barber 1996). The root causes of and the growth of religious terrorism can be located in the declining influence of traditional forms of social and cultural cohesion within societies. The impact of globalization, political repression, economic disparity, and social change enhance the sense of fragility, instability, and unpredictability that exists throughout various parts of the world. Presently, the scale, amount, and intensity of religious terrorism, rather unprecedented in militancy and activity, indicate the depth of perception that those particular faiths and the communities linked to them stand at a critical survival juncture and that extreme measures must be taken to ensure that they continue to exist.

The perceived corruption of indigenous customs, religions, languages, economies, and entertainment are blamed on an international system that is frequently associated with American culture and values. The resulting distortions in local communities that result from being exposed to the global marketplace of ideas, goods, and values are more frequently blamed on the U.S.-led modernization. Christopher Coker (2002) aptly observes that while globalization is reducing the propensity for instrumental violence between states and communities, it is increasing the incentives for expressive violence or violence that is ritualistic, symbolic, and communicative. The current international terrorism is more frequently rooted in a need to assert identity or meaning against the advancing forces of homogeneity, particularly on the part of those cultures that are threatened by or are left behind by the secular atmosphere created by Western-led globalization.

According to a report published by the United Nations Development Program, one of the regions with the biggest deficit in terms of human development—the Arab world— is also the epicenter of the world’s most intense religiondriven terrorism. There is discontent in disenfranchised areas of the region of the world where the belief exists that the promises of globalization that include greater freedom, economic prosperity, and access to education, training, and knowledge are unfulfilled. As a result, there are dashed expectations, increasing resentment toward the hegemonic and often corrupt governments supported by the United States, and a desire to strike at the forces of modernization and globalization. There is also a desire to change the course of U.S. policy in the Middle East and Persian Gulf, particularly as it affects the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Given the enormous military power of the United States, the preferred course of action is not direct confrontation but the asymmetrical response that is terrorism.

The United States is a preferred target because of its involvement in the politics and conflicts of various regions of the world and because it is perceived to be the primary force behind globalization. Thus, today it is not possible to analyze terrorism without taking into consideration globalization. Both are tightly interwoven forces that affect and characterize global security in the twenty-first century. The main concern is whether or not terrorism will be able to disrupt the promise of a better life for millions of people.

Thus, one could say that terrorism is a by-product of larger historical shifts in the worldwide distribution of power and economic, military, political, ideological, and cultural resources. Assuming that current trends will continue, global disparities and inequalities will also continue to grow. Thus, we can anticipate that terrorism will not only continue to exist but will grow and expand. At the same time, terrorists will have continued access to more powerful technologies, increased territory and more targets, enhanced recruiting techniques, and more exploitable sources of discontent and rage than before (Laqueur 2004).

A serious problem is that the response of the West to terrorism is inadequate, superficial, and unlikely to dampen or mitigate any of the long-term trends already mentioned above. The benign intentions of the mostly and increasingly secular West do not necessarily appear benign to those who are marginalized by globalization. To frustrated people in the Arab and Muslim world and elsewhere, the strict following of fundamentalist religious doctrines and practices appear to be a rational response to the perceived threat when their own governments offer no alternative solution. The reality is that small groups of dedicated terrorists could not survive and operate for any extended period of time without the widespread support of the larger population. Any effective interventions by the West would begin at and focus on the broader, enabling environment that must be studied and understood (Kupperman 1985; Kupperman and Trent 1979).

Moreover, a panoply of long-term policy instruments should be used to address the international environment that makes it possible for terrorist networks to remain formidable organizations (Howard 2002). There is no question that the more effective policy tools are probably nonmilitary in nature such as intelligence, public diplomacy, cooperation with allies, updated international conventions and treaties, reforms leading to genuine democratization, and economic assistance (Burton 1976; Campbell 1988; Cobban 1984).

Religious beliefs are a useful, powerful, and ready-made source for justifying terrorism because beliefs sanctify the terrorist and deify the terrorism. Religious terrorism employs theological issues to justify violence and terror. Thus, terrorists are not subject to social limitations relating to violence and killing is justified given those being killed are enemies of their deity. To be “deified” means that the act of terrorism itself is made sacred and holy. The religious terrorists are mortals who are on a mission from God (Kibble 1996).

There is yet another difference between secular and religious terrorists. Political terrorism is also the theater aimed at influencing a wider audience to spread a message and obtain support. Thus, targets must be carefully chosen and there are some limits to what one can do. On the other hand, religious terrorists work only for their god. Thus, they need no wider audience or social approval. Juergensmeyer (1992, 1999) describes the conditions that must exist for terrorists to reach these conclusions: Believers must identify with a god and believe they are participating in a struggle to change the course of history by addressing good and evil. True-believing terrorists actually mimic and exaggerate mainstream social patterns and beliefs. They use the established social paths and models of religion and ideology to justify their actions (Oliverio 1998; Pearlestein 1991).

Fundamentalist terrorism in the twenty-first century exists mostly in the Middle East and/or in Islamic countries. The roots of terrorism in the Middle East are complex but can be reduced to four major areas: (1) questions on the political control of Palestine or the IsraeliPalestinian conflict (Nusse 1998); (2) who should rule the Arab world or intra-Arab rivalries and struggles; (3) the relations between the two main branches of Islam, Sunnis, and Shiites; and (4) how to eliminate and expel Western colonialism and imperialism and once again create a panArab “Caliphate” or realm of Islam.

Terrorism originating in this area is especially driven by anti-Western feelings because of the historical colonial domination and exploitation of the region. France and especially Great Britain dominated the region or attempted to for centuries. The Soviet Union also made forays attempting to gain a warm water port and counteract the other two colonial countries’influence. The United States has also played an increasingly dominant role in the region linked to the exploitation of its energy resources and at times in direct or indirect confrontation with the other Western colonial powers and the Soviets. The rejection of Western influence is connected with the colonial experience and also with the deeply held feeling that this entire region should be an exclusive Islamic realm. The presence of foreign troops in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the region is perceived as colonialism, sacrilegious, and as a modern version of the medieval crusades. The ideology of Al Qaeda and of other groups inspired or associated with it stresses both themes—anticolonialism or “anticrusaders” and the reestablishment of the Caliphate—as a justification for their terrorist activities (Gurr 1993; Hoffman 1998; Howard and Sawyer 2003, 2004; Johnson 1997). The terrorist is fundamentally an altruist who believes he is serving a good cause. The terrorist is basically a violent intellectual ready and committed to use force in the realization of his goals (Perdue 1989).

After September 11, 2001, interest and research in terrorism has grown exponentially. One such area of inquiry addresses the mind-set of the terrorists and the tactics they employ in their quest for power and, ultimately, political and social change. Although terrorists bank on the efficacy of violence in achieving change, their actions are not random, crazed, or capricious acts as politicians maintain they are. On the contrary, these actions are carefully planned and conservatively executed. Innocent and harmless people get caught in the middle just as they are in acts of war. Both the military and the terrorists claim that they are performing carefully targeted acts—“precision bombing” in U.S. military parlance. Recently, there have been increases in the use of violence. Possibly due to the “CNN effect” or the need to attract worldwide media coverage for maximum impact, terrorists have been engaging in more dramatic and destructively lethal deeds to garner the same amount of attention that a less violent and bloody action would have obtained in the past, looking for recognition and publicity. In a world saturated with violence and aggression by the media, entertainment, movies, video games, and sports such as football, hockey, boxing, terrorists seem to have understood that to hold a jaded public’s attention they must increase the level and drama of their actions (Miller 1982).

Another element that is affecting terrorism’s organizational and operational dynamics is the Internet. The rise and expansion of network forms of organization is a central outcome of the continuing information revolution. The speed of communications, the facility of sharing and diffusing information, and the ease and instantaneity of transferring funds worldwide have changed contemporary life, including terrorism’s conduct and modes of operation.

This permits the creation of organizations with multiple, dispersed leaders and private sources of funding. The reasons, motives, and rationales of the terrorists may not have changed but their modus operandi certainly has. What the information and Internet age have made possible are flatter, less hierarchical, very flexible, and localized structures and networks of power with centripetal dynamics fueled by intense and easy communications and exchanges (Picard 1993).

Terrorism is evolving. Terrorists’ shift toward less hierarchical organizational structures and their growing use of advanced communications technologies for command, control, and coordination will further empower small terrorist groups and even individuals. While most of the governmental efforts and public concern, anxiety, and attention are focused on preventing and foiling traditional violent terrorist acts, the next 9/11 might very well be an act of cyberterrorism or massive netwar, disabling regional, national, or even international computer-driven systems that control practically every aspect of our lives (Whine 1999). The content of information and the conduits of information infrastructures very likely will become the new targets. In this area, the destructive power of terrorism will be exponentially greater than it has been in the past, even if it had been able to use “weapons of mass destruction.” It is also true, of course, that the frequency and extent to which terrorist organizations use information infrastructures to carry out their activities may eventually make them vulnerable to detection and destruction by counterterrorist entities (Rubin 1991).

The widespread uncertainty of the forces of globalization and the search for a new world order create a fertile ground for the creation and development of religious terrorist groups, with religious conviction functioning as a firm anchor. These groups perceive an opportunity to shape history and the world in line with their divine duty, cause, and mission. It is essential that we understand the inner logic of these groups and the dynamics that produce terrorism. As we progress further into the twenty-first century, it is doubtful that the United States and other Western governments are adequately prepared to meet this challenge (Juergensmeyer 1999). Thus, the need exists for further research in areas such as nationalistic and ethnic terrorism, technological terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, changing group structures and the metamorphosis of terrorism, the origins of terrorism in the Middle East, and the role of the media (Zanni 1999).

Future public policy concerns include counterterrorist measures and the impact such policy will have on democratic society. The passage and reauthorization of the Patriot Act is a clear indication that in the future a democratic government will respond to a real or perceived terrorist threat by introducing measures that greatly limit civil and political liberties. In the wake of 9/11, population movement control, transportation security, the protection of infrastructures deemed vital, the introduction of a system of threat warnings, and immigration and border control measures were quickly introduced. The de facto adoption of a national identity card, in the form of a federally standardized driver’s license, was approved. Moreover, the federal government has engaged in widespread detention and interrogation; introduced new surveillance tools, instituted new financial regulations, controls, and rewards; modified the administration of the justice system; and promoted greater information sharing among law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The public desire for a completely risk-free life and society in a world dominated by science and technology, which promise and deliver a constantly increased control of daily life and death situations, provided vast popular support for this approach (Labeviere 2000). However popular the international war on terrorism is, the civil and human rights of citizens and noncitizens alike were reduced and at times violated in the process. This is a fertile field for investigation, analysis, inquiry, and affirmation of democratic values for the social scientist (Merari 1985).

The lack of a comprehensive strategy to address terrorism based on a deep-rooted, well-grounded comprehension of the history, patterns, motivations, and types of terrorism reflects the lack of understanding of terrorism in the academic community. Some academics consider terrorism a too policy-oriented area to be worthy of serious research. Since terrorism is a miltidisciplinary topic it depends on the interaction and collaboration of a number of disciplines. In the United States, most of the analyses on terrorism are being conducted in policy-oriented research institutes, which are often narrowly defined to fit the interests and time frame attendant to government-supported contracts.

The academy, on the other hand, is no more strategically oriented, visionary, and creative than the government. There is an urgent need for multidisciplinary collaboration that also includes law enforcement, intelligence, and finance. What is most needed is a concerted effort to move beyond the episodic interest in this phenomenon and instead develop, plan, and fund a long-term research and policy development agenda. Sociologists and in particular political sociologists can have a major role to play in researching the impact of antiterrorism measures and exposing whatever threats are posed to democracy, human freedom, and individual rights. And sociologists who focus on mass movements, group-think, mob reactions, and race and ethnic relations also have much to offer to a society in need of such information.

Additionally, the repercussions of the “war on terrorism” on international human rights and humanitarian laws provide a fertile ground for research and analysis for the sociologist of law. The creation of the “enemy combatant” label to facilitate weakening of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war and the alleged mistreatment and torture of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the Bagram base in Afghanistan, and Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, among others, serve as important sociological reminders of the effects culture and civil society have on human nature and the aggressive and violent instincts of Homo sapiens.

There is no question that social scientists have a major contribution to make to the analysis, understanding, prevention, and policymaking relative to terrorism. But within sociology it will also be important, given the political nature of actions identified as terrorist, that the sociologist be vigilant, adhere to professional standards, and maintain an independence of thought, analysis, and vision. In the future, the discipline may again be confronted with issues relating to Howard Becker’s question and critical challenge of the past, “Sociology for whom?”

Bibliography:

Alexander, Yonah and Richard Latter. 1990. Terrorism and the Media: Dilemmas for Government, Journalists and the Public. Riverside, NJ: Brassey’s.
Barber, Benjamin R. 1996. Jihad vs. McWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism are Redesigning the World. New York: Ballantine.
Baumel, Judith Tydor. 1999. “Kahane in America: An Exercise in Right Wing Urban Terror.” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 22:311–29.
Brown, David J. and Robert Merrill. 1995. Violent Persuasions: The Politics and Imagery of Terrorism. Seattle, WA: Bay Press.
Buchanan, Paul C. 1987. “The Varied Faces of Domination, State Terror, Economic Policy and Social Response during the Argentinian ‘Proceso,’ 1976–1981.” American Journal of Political Science 31:336–80.
Burke, Edmund. 1790. Reflections on the Revolution in France and On the Proceedings of Certain Societies in London Relative to that Event. London, England: J. Dodsley.
Burton, Anthony. 1976. Urban Terrorism. New York: Free Press. Campbell, Joseph, with Bill Moyer. 1988. The Power of Myth. New York: Doubleday.
Coates, James. 1987. Armed and Dangerous: The Rise of the Survivalist Right. New York: Hill & Wang.
Cobban, Helene. 1984. The Palestine Liberation Organization: People, Power and Politics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Coker, Christopher. 2002. “Globalization and Insecurity in the 21st Century: NATO and the Management of Risk.” Adelphi Paper No. 345, International Institute for Strategic Studies, London.
Corcoran, James. 1995. Bitter Harvest: The Birth of Paramilitary Terrorism in the Heartland. New York: Penguin.
Cox, Robert. 1983. “Total Terrorism: Argentina, 1969–1979.” Pp. 124–142 in Terrorism, Legitimacy and Power, edited by M. Crenshaw. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Center for Strategic and International Studies Global Organized Crime Project. 1998. Cybercrime, Cyberterrorism, Cyberwarfare: Averting an Electronic Waterloo. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Denning, Dorothy. 2000. “Cyberterrorism. Testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services, Special Oversight.” Panel on Terrorism, 107th Congress, 1st session, May 23, 2000. ( https://faculty.nps.edu/dedennin/publications/Testimony-Cyberterrorism2000.htm ).
Gavel, Doug. 2002. “Can Nuclear Weapons Be Put beyond the Reach of Terrorists?” Kennedy School of Government Bulletin,
Gurr, Ted Robert. 1993. Minorities at Risk: A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflicts. Washington, DC: U.S. Institute for Peace.
Hoffman, Bruce. 1998. Inside Terrorism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Howard, Michael. 2002. “What’s in a Name: How to Fight Terrorism.” Foreign Affairs 81(January–February):43–59.
Howard, Russell and Reid L. Sawyer, eds. 2003. Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Understanding the New Security Environment. Guilford, CT: Dushkin.
Howard, Russell and Reid L. Sawyer, eds. 2004. Defeating Terrorism: Shaping the New Security Environment. Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill.
Huntington, Samuel. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Johnson, James Turner. 1997. The Holy War Idea in Western and Islamic Traditions. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Juergensmeyer, Mark, ed. 1992. Violence and the Sacred in the Modern World. London, England: Frank Cass.
Juergensmeyer, Mark. 1999. Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Berkeley: University California Press.
Kibble, David G. 1996. “The Threat of Militant Islam: A Fundamental Reappraisal.” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 19:353–64
Kupperman, Robert. 1985. “Government Response to Mass Destruction Threats.” Pp. 157–62 in On Terrorism and Combating Terrorism, edited by A. Merari. Frederick, MD: University Publications of America.
Kupperman, Robert H. and Trent M. Darrell. 1979. Terrorism: Threat, Reality, Response. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.
Labeviere, Richard. 2000. Dollars for Terror: The United States and Islam. New York: Algora.
Laqueur, Walter. 1996. Guerrilla: A Historical and Critical Study. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
Laqueur, Walter. 1997. “Postmodern Terrorism.” Foreign Affairs 75(5):23–46.
Laqueur, Walter. 2000. The New Terrorism: Fanaticism and the Arms of Mass Destruction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Laqueur, Walter. 2004. Voices of Terror. New York: Reed.
Merari, Ariel, ed. 1985. On Terrorism and Combating Terrorism. Frederick, MD: University Publications of America.
Miller, Abraham. 1982. Terrorism, the Media and the Law. New York: Transnational.
Moxon-Browne, Edward, ed. 1994. European Terrorism. New York: Hall.
Noble, Kerry. 1998. Tabernacle of Hate: Why They Bombed Oklahoma City. Prescott, Ontario, Canada: Voyager.
Nusse, Andrea. 1998. Muslim Palestine: The Ideology of Hamas. London, England: Harwood Academic.
O’Day,Alan, ed. 1994. Dimensions of Irish Terrorism. New York: Hall.
Oliverio, Annamarie. 1998. The State of Terror. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Pearlestein, Richard M. 1991. The Mind of the Political Terrorist. Wilmington, DE: SR Books.
Perdue, William D. 1989. Terrorism and the State: A Critique of Domination through Fear. New York: Praeger.
Picard, Robert G. 1993. Media Portrayals of Terrorism: Functions and Meaning of News Coverage. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Rapoport, David C., ed. 1988. Inside Terrorist Organizations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Ross, Jeffrey Ian. 1996. “Beyond the Conceptualization of Terrorism: A Psychological-Structural Model of the Causes of this Activity.” Pp. 169–92 on Collective Violence: Harmful Behavior in Groups and Governments, edited by C. Summers and E. Markusen. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Rubin, Barry M. 1991. Terrorism and Politics. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Sargent, Lyman Tweed, ed. 1995. Extremism in America. New York: New York University Press.
Sharif, Idris. 1996. The Success of Political Terrorist Events: An Analysis of Terrorist Tactics and Victim Characteristics, 1968–1977. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Smith, Brent. 1994. Terrorism in America: Pipe Bombs and Pipe Dreams. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Sterling, Claire. 1981. The Terror Network. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Stern, Jessica. 1999. The Ultimate Terrorists. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stern, Kenneth. 1996. A Force upon the Plains: The American Militia Movement and the Politics of Hate. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Viano, Emilio. 2003. Transnational Organized Crime: Myth, Power and Profit. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Walter, Jess. 1995. Every Knee Shall Bow: The Truth and Tragedy of Ruby Ridge and the Randy Weaver Family. New York: Regan Books.
Whine, Michael. 1999. “Cyberspace: A New Medium for Communication, Command, and Control by Extremists.” Institute for Counterterrorism. ( https://www.ict.org.il/Article/764/Cyberspace%20A%20New%20Medium%20for%20Communication,%20Command%20and%20Control%20by%20Extremists ).
Wilkinson, Pail. 1994. Terrorism: British Perspective. New York: Hall.
Zanni, Michele. 1999. “Middle Eastern Terrorism and Netward.” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 22:247–56.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Essay On Terrorism In Pakistan With Outline In Easy Words

Essay On Terrorism In Pakistan With Outline In Easy Words: A major hitch in Pakistan that is overcoming the peace and prosperity of this Islamic country is Terrorism. It has been fenced the independence of our lives and we are always in a fright that can never be let us live freely and happily. So this problem must be uprooted with fits and starts and we have to be aware of the causes and preventions of this social issue. Terrorism means the use of aggression to fright the noble nation. Those who are spreading the terrorism are called a terrorist. Terrorist are everywhere and these are those peoples who are not a patriot and they have no mercy in their hearts for others. There are many ways of brutality that are causing terrorism like bomb blasting, target killing, use of hush money and much more. All these ways enhance the fright in our hearts and deadly disturb our lives and when in any country these things raise their heads the peace is gone and the fear makes it place with firm steps. So it can be stated that terrorism is the mother of all the social evils and we should take up the call against this giant who will destroy the abilities of the upcoming generation.

In this page we are written the Terrorism In Pakistan Essay In Simple Words With Outlines For Matric, Intermediate, and Even and Graduation Students Can Also Prepare This Essay For Their Exams. You Can Also Add Your Content In It Because There Are Different Online Readers Can Copy It. Related Articles 14 August Speech in English for Pakistan Independence Day August 18, 2023 The Potential of Social Media Marketing for Business Growth in Islamabad July 12, 2023 AIOU Tutor Search By Roll No 2024 June 4, 2023 Biotechnology Scope In Pakistan April 6, 2023

Reasons of Terrorism in Pakistan Essay:

There are many reasons which are causing terrorism but the main reasons are written below

Illiteracy is always the main reason for all the social evils as well as terrorism because one who is educated can never be acclaim for killing others
Poverty is also another reason for it because when the new generation will find it hard to meet the expenses of daily lives he will choose the wrong way and will become a terrorist
There are many outer agencies which are also working in Pakistan to high up the terrorism
The condition of Peoples are pathetic and they are not fully aware of the seriousness of terrorism and they are not coordinating with the government in order to prevent the terrorism
The role of concerned authorities is also not up to the mark

Prevention Of Terrorism In Pakistan Essay:

We can prevent the terrorism in Pakistan by taking some special steps against this evil with the great coordination of our Government

People should admission their child to school for education instead of job anywhere in the age of their school and government should make the education free for such peoples who cannot afford for it
Pakistan Army has taken special steps with the collaboration of the Government of Pakistan with the name of National Action Plan of Pakistan against terrorism
Peoples and government should join hands together and make a master plan that can be fade away terrorists from Pakistan
The special investigation departments and our rangers should be honest with their work and government should give them special training to caught such agencies which are spreading the terrorism in Pakistan

Impact Of Terrorism In Pakistan:

The impacts of terrorism in Pakistan is affecting the different phases of life. It impacts on society, economy, agriculture, and there are lots of international impacts leaving their impact on life on a national basis. Whenever, any terrorist attack held in bomb blasting, hijacking a school, or any other type of terrorism it left a big impact for a long time even the upcoming generation is in getting involved in a big issue that is overcoming their happiness, peace, and of course the ways of success.

While if we talk about the psychological impacts then there are no words to elaborate it because of the terrorist attack in Army Public school Peshawar on 14th December 2014 is yet alive in our minds and of course the child studying there. But we should show the unity so that we can overcome all these evils from our society.

So here I have written the essay on terrorism in Pakistan with outline in easy words where I have written the reasons and causes along with the impact of Terrorism on society, economy, and education as well as the psychological effects of this evil on the land of Pakistan and all over the world.

Best CV Format in Pakistan

A Hostel Life of Student Essay

University Life Essay

Preparation For Aptitude Test Guide in Pakistan

Adblock Detected

Terrorism in Pakistan: Causes, Impacts, and Way Forwards

Terrorism-in-Pakistan-A-Critical-Overview-

Usama Nawaz Dothar
December 17, 2022
CSS , CSS Essays , CSS Solved Essays , PMS , PMS Essays
41821 Views

What are the causes, impacts, and way forwards of Terrorism in Pakistan? | Terrorism in Pakistan: Causes, Impacts, and Way Forwards | CSS Essays | PMS Essays | Essays by Sir Syed Kazim Ali

Usama Nawaz Dothar has attempted this essay on the given pattern, which Sir Syed Kazim Ali teaches his students, who have consistently been qualifying their CSS and PMS essays. The essay is uploaded to help other competitive aspirants learn and practice how to write a comprehensive outline; how to write bullets in an outline; how to write the introductory paragraph; how to connect sentences and paragraphs; how to write a topic sentence; how to put evidence within the paragraphs.

1- INTRODUCTION

✓ Terrorism, a global evil threatening the world’s peace
✓ Wreaking havoc in Pakistan
✓ Affecting the socio-political and economic fabric of the country
✓ Raising a diverse range of issues for the country
✓ The miserable state of affairs urging for a viable solution

2- CURRENT SITUATION

✓ At present, Pakistan, along with other problems, is still struggling with the issue.
✓ According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, Pakistan witnessed 319 terrorism-related incidents in 2022 and 169 associated deaths of civilians.
✓ After the withdrawal of the USA, the new Taliban regime in Afghanistan further escalated the situation along the Pak-Afghan border.
✓ According to the Pak Institute of Peace Studies, a local think tank, as many as 433 people were killed and 179 injured in 250 attacks in Pakistan between August 15, 2021, and August 14, 2022

3- WHAT ARE THE MAJOR CAUSES BEHIND THE MENACE?

✓ Burgeoning national-provincial and provincial-provincial rift
✓ Halting socioeconomic growth that leads to a lack of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
✓ Overpowering all other concerns state resources under constant pressure, as a significant chunk of the budget goes for security buildup
✓ An increasing number of unemployed youngsters is an impetus for radicalization.
✓ Governing and relocating problems of Internally displaced persons, issues of refugees, and infrastructure rebuilding
✓ Sparking a concern to move to a safe place in the country or abroad

5- HOW SOME PRAGMATIC MEASURES CAN HELP PAKISTAN TO OVERCOME THE MENACE

✓ To educate and register madarises
✓ To create jobs and a business-friendly environment
✓ To eradicate religious and ethnic differences.
✓ To develop consensus among all stakeholders.
✓ To provide awareness to the masses through campaigns and the media’s active role.
✓ To expand state writ.

6- CRITICAL ANALYSIS 7- CONCLUSION

Extensive English Essay and Precis Course for CSS & PMS Aspirants

Terrorism is a global evil, threatening the world’s peace that humankind has struggled to achieve for centuries. Terrorism, the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population, is an organized warfare to achieve a diverse range of goals, particularly political objectives. In pursuance, terrorists, in particular, target innocent citizens and infrastructure worth millions to put immense pressure on the state authorities to kneel before their irrational demands. This heinous crime against humanity has halted many countries’ progress and jeopardized their peace, prosperity, and stability. For instance, events like the Twin Towers 2001, Mumbai Attacks 2008, and Army Public School 2016 jolted states’ security apparatus and psychologically made the public suffer. Unfortunately, the world has witnessed the brunt of terrorism, and Pakistan is the only country still reeling to combat the menace. As a result, the country has seen unprecedented bloodshed in the past two decades. According to Inter-Services Press Release (ISPR), more than 75000 lives have been claimed by terrorism, of which 65000 were civilians and 10000 were armed personnel. Undoubtedly, it has affected every socio-political and economic fabric of the country; however, the root of the problems lies in the state and society: lousy governance, racial and ethnic disparities, religious schism and intolerance. In fact, the ongoing dismal affairs have ignited a diverse range of issues, such as widening engulf among masses, convulsing conducive business environment, increasing unemployment and, above all, the issue of Afghan refugees. In fact, despite its complex nature, it is not impossible to be eradicated. A sincere and ambitious effort to root out terrorism is a need of the hour. Without any second thought, there is a need to review the education system as a whole, introduce structural changes, and make a compatible parallel system of madaris and private schools with the public sector. Further, accommodating youth, easing the doing of business for locals and foreigners, working to ensure parity among masses, developing a micro to macro-level consensus, and empowering state machinery to ensure state reach further are some immediate measures to curb the menace.

At present, terrorism is again around the corner. Despite a crackdown previously by security agencies, the terrorists who flee to Afghan soil are once again started pursuing their anti-state agenda in Pakistan. With empathy, the country has been up against several issues, such as political turmoil, economic slope, and the resurging terrorist activities tearing the country apart. According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, Pakistan witnessed 319 terrorism-related incidents in 2022 and 169 associated deaths of civilians. Undoubtedly, except for 2020, the average attacks in the country scored 160. Further, a holistic look at the year 2022 provides a speedy rise in terrorist attacks. In fact, the much-celebrated victory of the Taliban government in its western neighbour, Afghanistan, proved more lethal for Pakistan, evident from recent cross-border firing incidents. Furthermore, after the US withdrawal, the Afghan front’s situation has worsened, and terrorists manoeuvre along the border more freely; as a result, the country has started facing another blow of terrorism. According to the Pak Institute of Peace Studies, a local think tank, as many as 433 people were killed and 179 injured in 250 attacks in Pakistan between August 15, 2021, and August 14, 2022. Meticulously, the burgeoning bulk of the crisis might engulf Pakistan. The country has been fighting on many fronts, including environmental, security, and socio-political issues. Every problem has its solution; the state can nip it in the bud by mobilizing its resources, as it did after the Army Public School attack in 2016. But, keeping in mind that the previous mistakes would not repeat.

The genesis of the problem lies in socio-political and economic fault lines, which widen the aperture. There are a number of causes. In Pakistan, since its inception, the unequal distribution of wealth, racial discrimination, and unequal opportunities has widened the gap between rich and poor. Due to such inadequate treatment, poverty has multiplied tens of times after independence. In a recent report published by the World Bank, the country, for the fiscal year 2020-21, is 78.4%, using an upper-middle poverty rate of US$ 5.5 per day. Poverty deeply affects a person’s thinking capability, and he becomes unidirectional. In addition, the growing bomb population has started putting pressure on state resources. As a result, more than half of the youth are unemployed, and these demoralized young souls are more prone to terrorist ideologies. Next, the evil political and religious leaders corrupt practices are also one of the main factors behind increasing poverty and lack of jobs. As Nelson Mandela rightly said: “Poverty is not an accident, like slavery and apartheid. It is manufactured and can be removed by the actions of human beings.” In short, poverty knows no religion or humanity, so the poor and unemployed become more radicalized and know no right and wrong to earn their livelihood. For them, the only good is how to have a meal, so they start spreading terror to fulfil their wishes.

Preceding one of the appealing causes behind terrorism is a misinterpretation of religion. Not just a misunderstanding but also a rigid interpretation that has marred the universality of Islam. They are provoking inter-religion and intra-religion divides, which gives an impetus for terrorism. This makes society more vulnerable, and terrorists find it favourable. Indeed, they easily manipulate people by offering different perks to a person’s family and ensuring him of Paradise hereafter by reminding God’s promise. Nevertheless, with fewer ulemas and more mullahs, Mullah’s emphasis on struggle with the sword nurtures violent behaviour; also, they connote the sole reason behind Muslims’ miserable condition of the American People. After brainwashing, an individual’s tolerance level and sense of perceiving things drastically change. As a result, he considers people other than in-group enemies to him, society, and Islam. Therefore, he does not hesitate to kill himself, such as in suicide bombings. To understand fully, the Sunni-Shia riots in Pakistan are good to consider; in the 1980s, there was a norm to kill one another. In a critical diagnosis, the Muslim nations have waged war against each other based on religious differences and Saudi-Iran rivalry. On the contrary, Islam talks about universality and pluralist society. Conclusively, one of the strides behind terrorists’ sways is rigid and misinterpreting religion.

Going down the ladder, one of the striking causes behind terrorism is sectarian and ethnic differences. The divide between Balochi, Punjabi, Sindhi, and Mohajir has further aggravated the situation, and stunted the country’s growth. In short, minority and majority anathema and these differences ultimately provide ground for terrorism nurturing. For instance, the Mutahida Quami Movement activities in Karachi, terrorist groups in Swat, and the Federal Administrative Tribal Area (FATA0, now part of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), are pertinent to mention here . Indeed, ethnically motivated terrorism has its reasons. On the contrary, the sectarian division also unwelcomed dissent opinions, imbibing feelings of hate. Nonetheless, the ethnic and sectarian splits have radicalized society and started nurturing terrorist ideology. As of this, terrorist groups are growing in size and quantity.

Further, to talk about any issue in South Asia and the Middle East, the role of international and regional players is of great concern. In devoid of it, one cannot fully comprehend the reasons behind the problem. The United States (US) and its ally’s invasion of Iraq to carry its nefarious attacks resulted in Muslim hatred towards the West. Geographical compulsion was the reason Pakistan became a forefront ally of the US War on Terror after 9/11. Reluctantly, the country’s leadership found itself helpless in front of the United States’ immense pressure. Moreover, the war in the western neighbour provided momentum for different proxies. Rationally, the terrorism was a reaction against western proxies, which cost Pakistan more than the devil itself. Despite bearing many losses, the populous opinion in the US always censures the country’s efforts. The role of international players is not confined to the US role only but also the role of India, Israel, and other Eurasian Nations, which tried to destabilize Pakistan internally and isolate it internationally. In fact, the state and non-state actors started funding internal insurgent groups, eroding statehood sinews. One of the prime objects behind these fundings and proxies was Pakistan’s nuclear disarmament. In furtherance of their prime object, India and Israel started campaigning to stigmatize, prohibit, and eliminate nuclear weapons in Pakistan by creating propaganda they might end up in the hands of non-state actors, terrorists or Islamic radicals. Hence, the countries having vested interest promote terrorism in the country.

Last but not least, the other culprits behind terrorism are the executive’s role and Afghan refugees. The executive has failed to maintain the law. In comparison, the judicial system also has near to collapse. The erroneous irregularities in procedure and corruption have allowed law-breakers to flee, bypassing the system. The criminals know how to manage the police or judiciary. As Adam Smith rightly said, “The mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.” Therefore, when people lost hope, they decided to take the law into their hands. On the contrary, the state has failed to accommodate Afghan refugees. The burden of internally displaced persons (IDPs) was not enough that the government opened its borders to Afghan refugees on humanitarian grounds. The IDPs left their homes, business, and belongings but are now at the state’s mercy. The drone attacks were counter-productive and killed many civilians. The relatives of those families stand against the state, and some join terrorists. Injudicious and unpopular decisions of the government have raised some issues. In short, the above causes contributed to fanning the flames of terrorism, raising some challenges for Pakistan.

First, the rising rift between national-provincial and provincial-provincial is of great concern. The burgeoning issue has waged a war of mudslinging on one another. For instance, the Karabagh dam issue, a much-advocated project to meet water and energy viability, is a result of the split . The national-provincial dissent on a number of losses and inadequate compensation has divided the house so that separation voices are now heard from different sections and parts of the country. However, Pakistan has not forgotten the secession of East Pakistan. Indeed, a house divided against itself cannot stand. Therefore, the country must develop a consensus by putting aside its trivial issue to eliminate terrorism from its soil. Otherwise, the dingy state of affairs annihilates the country. Nevertheless, the gap between person to person has started widening. Political polarization is also an outcome of growing differences. Second, a death blow to the economy. According to official estimates, Pakistan has lost precious lives and infrastructure and suffered a loss of around $ 35-40 billion since 2001. Due to the ongoing war on terror, the country’s economy still suffers $6 billion in export losses annually. The clouds of fear and uncertainty have devastated the country’s business outlook. Owing to such far reaching impacts and future implications, the business sector is on the verge of collapse, and foreign direct investment has touched a record low, thus, further breaking the back of the poor and deprived masses. If the division and fear kept increasing, it would be more feasible for terrorists to carry on their agenda.

Third, the issue of security has overpowered all other concerns of the state. The major chunk of the budget goes for security build-up, which has made Pakistan lag behind other nations in terms of social indicators. Specifically, the country has repaired particular walls of official buildings and installed fences around them. Further, the government has increased security in different public places. In short, the government has to spend public money on bullets and tanks, which, thus, shifted the state’s focus from other works of public welfare, such as human capital development. Conclusively, security-related issues have overshadowed the country’s other concerns today. On similar lines, fourth, the unfettered growth of the population has further aggrandized the state’s agony. In particular, the youth, forming the majority of the population, is left on its own. As a World Bank report suggests, Pakistan’s youth unemployment rate for 2021 was 9.42%, a 0.2% increase from the preceding year. As a result, the demoralized youth without any purpose has become prey to terrorist ideals. Further, if the state would not accommodate youth and streamline their potential, they might become a weapon of terrorism, such as suicide bombers. Critically, if Pakistan wants to cherish its dream of becoming the tiger of South Asia, it needs to employ more than half the population, which is constituted by its youth. In short, these issues have hampered the state’s socio-economic growth and provided a stimulus for terrorism.

Next to it, fifth is the issue of relocating Internally Displaced People (IDPs) and Afghan refugees. Retrospectively, many people vacated their homes to facilitate law enforcement agencies. In this regard, Pakistan’s Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC) report unveils the number of total displaced persons. IDMC’s report shows around 70,000 displacements were recorded in 2021, mainly triggered by terrorism and disasters. Ostensibly, the government has sat on the fence to seek the issue, and people who came as frontline solider to sacrifice their hard-earned money, in particular homes, are struck by thunder that government is unable to alleviate their miseries. Certainly, the issue calls for an early solution. Otherwise, like terrorists, these people may follow the path of insurgents. Similarly, the issue of Afghan refugees, a looming sword of threat on our necks, has always stabbed in our back. In a joint report, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Government of Pakistan verified that 1.3 million Afghan refugees live today in Pakistan. Morally, giving them a piece of land to reside on humanitarian grounds was idealistic, without thinking of future liability. However, they have become such a liability that the state wants to drive them out. On the contrary, the refugees blame Pakistani that they are the sole reason behind the turmoil. Therefore, due to international pressure, the country has tried to alleviate IDPs and Afghan refugees to achieve perpetual peace for generations. Indeed, both issues have stunted the country’s socio-political and economic growth.

Last but not least, the people started moving towards safe places and even started residing abroad in quest of peace. When people’s basic rights, such as life, liberty, and property, are under constant attack, no one finds the country a place to abode. So, Pakistan’s intellectual and skillful labor has left the country, further distancing the country’s dream of achieving prosperity. Brain drain has become a grave issue for Pakistan. In a recent Gallop Survey, 7,50,000 people left the country for better life and opportunities abroad. Brain drain harms sending regions, such as reduced human capital, limited capacity to innovate, reduced economic growth, demographic shifts, and a higher cost of public goods. The issues, mainly, are knitted with terrorism. Precisely, terrorism has penetrated fear in all sectors of the country, instigated significant unrest, hampered social mobility, and robbed the future of million. Pakistan is up to several challenges because of terrorism.

After the diagnosis, one calls for an effective treatment. The cancerous disease of terrorism has jeopardized the state’s health, but, for sure, it is a curable disease. To cure, the state needs to adopt some pragmatic measures in the right direction at the right time. Some of the measures are following, which can eradicate the disease. First, improvement in the education sector can root out the problem of terrorism. The government should mitigate the gap between private-public schools, missionary schools, and madrassas. As per assertions of a recent report by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Pakistan has the world’s second-highest number of out-of-school children, counting 22.8 million children between the ages of 5 and 16, representing 44 per cent of children not attending schools. For sure, it is a dreadful situation. Illiterate ones can easily be exploited. Hence, an outdated syllabus and effective policy to enroll the maximum number of kids in school should be the state’s priority. Then, an ambitious effort, teachers must pursue to teach tolerance, patience, and hate against violence to root out the problem permanently.

Second, there is a need to create a conducive business environment. A much-needed effort to uplift local industry by introducing structural adjustments via a public-private partnership. Meanwhile, measures should be adopted to gain foreign enterprises’ confidence so that they can pour FDI. By creating such a feasible environment, the unemployed millions can have jobs and help eradicate poverty. If the measures are taken judiciously, it will help the country to portray itself as an emerging economy. Next to it fourth, the country needs to galvanize society and weave it into a single entity by rooting out all ethnic and sectarian conflicts. To do so, the country must ban hate material, register religious and local bodies, enact new laws, and provide equal opportunities to all, ensuring their growth and popularity. Anti-Terrorism in this regard was also a great achievement, but the vague interpretation of it further fueled the fire of sectarian conflicts. So, a commitment by state, province, local bodies, and religious schools to adopt tolerance and accept dissent can help eradicate the monster of terrorism, as a myopic mindset often promotes violence.

On the same footing, five pragmatic and far-sighted policies by the government can extirpate terrorism from Pakistan. First, Pakistan is bleeding because of ill-advised policies. Therefore, a road map adopted with the consent of all stakeholders can be a step forward to combat the menace. Further, a campaign to reach people regarding the evils of terrorism and take them in confidence can help implement policies and provide public support as the state has not had enough resources, so public involvement is a need of the hour. In this regard, Media can help promote anti-terrorist agenda to vitiate them from our soil. Media can highlight the dangers of terrorism and provide public pain-relieving news in time without sensitizing other propaganda. Meticulously, these steps help counter terrorist ideologies prevailing in society. Finally, the state needs to implement rule of law and other anti-terrorism laws, so culprits should be punished within due time. Even the speedy trials and separate courts for terrorists help root out terrorism. The Anti-Terrorism Courts (ATC) was a great development. However, the lack of security to judge derailed the process. So, the state needs to enforce its writ to far-flung areas and provide security to the functionaries, which helps punish criminals in time, resulting in deterrence. Conclusively, deterrence can help people fear the wrath of the state and a strong state writ. After that, terrorists find no place to hide and no mercy. As a result, peace will be ensured.

In a critical diagnosis, the issue of terrorism has overshadowed all other concerns Pakistan faces today. The devil has engulfed the country’s peace and prosperity, leaving it in a swamp of destruction. However, the state has the potential to close the devil in the bottle. Terrorism has created innumerable losses and fright that people still fear taking a breath in the fresh air. Indeed, things take time to settle; the state has once achieved victory against the devil. But, lack of farsightedness and too early celebrations have brought it back. Now, it is time to learn from past mistakes and monitor the cross-border flow of people. Moreover, Pakistan has neglected the costs of its porous borders on both the eastern and western borders. If the state needs to immune itself from terrorism, the state and global leaders must take a hard stance against the countries providing a safe haven to terrorists. Otherwise, the elusive dream of the world to achieve perpetual peace and peaceful co-existence with diverse nations can never be achieved.

To encapsulate the whole debate, terrorism has wreaked havoc in every sphere of life. The right to freely move, live and have a family is under constant threat because of terrorism. Pakistan has paid the price and still paying for it. Many factors have promoted terrorism in Pakistan, such as poverty, unemployment, racial and religious split, and misinterpretation of Islam. The far-reaching impacts are visible in the country’s social, political, and economic domains. According to official estimates, Pakistan has lost precious lives and infrastructure and suffered a loss of around $ 35-40 billion since 2001. Due to the ongoing war on terror, the country’s economy still suffers $6 billion in export losses annually. In addition, the figures, painting a gloomy picture of the state outlook, are appealing in every sphere, such as social indicators have touched the lowest of all time. Nevertheless, if taken timely, pragmatic measures can help Pakistan not only expatriate terrorism but also achieve unsurpassable growth. Judicious and prudent analysis highlights that Pakistan alone cannot combat the global menace single-handedly. A much-contested and collective effort is needed at regional and global levels to get rid of the devil for now and for times to come.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Want-to-Write-Argumentatively-the-Way-They-are-Writing.png

About the essay writer

Usama Nawaz is a student of Sir Syed Kazim Ali . He is a young writer and legal advisor. He writes on a diverse range of issues: contemporary social, political, economic, and environmental, with which the world has struggled. Further, he has done Llb (Hons) from the University of Punjab, Pakistan. Moreover, he has worked as an Associate in different firms such as Asma Jahangir Law Firm. Moreover, he writes to raise his voice against human rights abuses and pens his thoughts on various topics: opinions, blogs, and issues. Besides, he has done different internships, volunteered in different organisations, and unconditionally helped others. Now, he is learning writing communication skills to give his thoughts words under Mr Kazim’s mentorship. Lastly, he is a thorough gentleman preparing for competitive exams to pursue his dream of serving the Nation.

CSS Solved Past Papers’ Essays

Articles might interest you.

The following are some of the most important articles for CSS and PMS aspirants. Click on any to start reading.

Top Categories

Cssprepforum, education company.

cssprepforum.com

Welcome to Cssprepforum, Pakistan’s largest learning management system (LMS) with millions of questions along with their logical explanations educating millions of learners, students, aspirants, teachers, professors, and parents preparing for a successful future.

Founder: Syed Kazim Ali Founded: 2020 Phone: +92-332-6105-842 +92-300-6322-446 Email: [email protected] Students Served: 10 Million Daily Learners: 50,000 Offered Courses: Visit Courses

More Courses

Basic English Grammar and Writing Course

Extensive English Essay & Precis Course for CSS and PMS

CSS English Essay and Precis Crash Course for 2023

Subscribe to our mailing list to receives daily updates direct to your inbox.

CSS Solved Essays
CSS Solved GSA
CSS Solved PA
CSS Solved Islamiat
Current Affairs
All Courses
Writers Club
All Authors
All Members
All Teachers
Become an Author
Who is Sir Syed Kazim Ali?
Privacy Policy

CssPrepForum is Pakistan’s largest and greatest platform for CSS, PMS, FPSC, PPSC, SPSC, KPPSC, AJKPSC, BPSC, GBPSC, NTS, and other One Paper 100 Marks MCQs exams’ students. It has become Pakistan’s most trusted website among CSS, PMS students for their exams’ preparation because of its high-quality preparation material.

@ 2023 Cssprepforum. All RightsReserved.

Essay on “Terrorism” for CSS, PMS, and All Judiciary Examinations

July 29, 2021
Essay for CSS PMS and Judiciary Exam

This is an essay on “Terrorism” for CSS, PMS, and All Judiciary examinations. Terrorism is called the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. in this essay you will learn about Terrorism, its types, terrorist incidents, and the causes of terrorism. In this essay, you will learn about terrorism, its types, and the causes of terrorism. So here is a complete essay on the topic of Terrorism for CSS, PMS, and All other Judiciary Examinations.

Essay on “Terrorism”

Terrorism is the willful destruction of people or property by people not acting on behalf of an established government to redress a real or imaginary injustice attributed to an established government. Terrorism has become a part of modern life. Hijackings, bombings, and assassinations on different continents of the world may seem like isolated attacks, but they reflect an easy reliance on violence as a way to promote social , political , and religious change. They are elements of a pervasive end that justify the means philosophy being followed to its most perverse conclusions.

International terrorism has become the scourge of all democratic governments . This democratic government is accustomed to dealing within a legal structure, often finds it difficult to deal with criminals and terrorists that routinely operate outside of the law. However, deterrence is just as much a part of justice as proper enforcement of the laws.

Democratic governments that do not deter criminals inevitably spawn vigilantism as normally law-abiding citizens who have lost confidence in the criminal justice system take the law into their own hands.

A similar backlash is beginning to emerge as a result of the inability of western democracies to defend themselves against terrorists. However, a lack of governmental resolve is only part of the problem.

Terrorism is not new, and even though it has been used since the beginning of recorded history it can be relatively hard to define. Terrorism has been described variously as both a tactic and strategy; a crime and a holy duty; a justified reaction to oppression and an inexcusable abomination. Obviously, a lot depends on whose point of view is being represented. Terrorism has often been an effective tactic for the weaker side in a conflict.

As an asymmetric form of conflict, it confers coercive power with many of the advantages of military force at a fraction of the cost. Due to the secretive nature and small size of terrorist organizations, they often offer opponents no clear organization to defend against or to deter.

That is why preemption is being considered to be so important. In some cases, terrorism has been a means to carry on a conflict without the adversary realizing the nature of the threat, mistaking terrorism for criminal activity. Because of these characteristics, terrorism has become increasingly common among those pursuing extreme goals throughout the world. But despite its popularity, terrorism can be a nebulous concept. Even within the U.S. Government, agencies responsible for different functions in the ongoing fight against terrorism use different definitions.

Terrorism is a criminal act that influences an audience beyond· the immediate victim. The strategy of terrorists is to commit acts of violence that .draws the attention of the local populace, the government, and the world to their cause. The terrorists plan their attack to obtain the greatest publicity, choosing targets that symbolize what they oppose. The effectiveness of the terrorist act lies not in the act itself, but in the public’s or government’s reaction to the act.

There are three perspectives of terrorism: the terrorists, the victims, and the general public. The phrase “one man’s terrorist is another. man’s freedom fighter” is a view terrorists themselves would accept. Terrorists do not see themselves as evil. They believe they are legitimate combatants, fighting for what they believe in, by whatever means possible. A victim of a terrorist act .sees the terrorist as a criminal with no regard for human life . The general public’s view is the most unstable.

The terrorists take great pains to foster a “Robin Hood” image in hope of swaying the general public’s point of view toward their cause. This sympathetic view of terrorism has become· an integral part of their psychological warfare and needs to be countered vigorously.

Terrorist acts or the threat of such action have been in existence for millennia. Despite having a history longer than the modern nation-state, the use of terror by governments and those that contest their power remains poorly understood. While the meaning of the word terror itself is clear, when it is applied to acts and actors in the real world it becomes confused. Part of this is due to the use of terror tactics by actors at all levels in the social and political environment. Is the Unabomber, with his solo campaign of terror, a criminal, terrorist, or revolutionary?

Differences between Terrorism and Insurgency

If no single definition of terrorism produces a precise. unambiguous description. we can approach the question by eliminating similar activities that are not terrorism, but that appear to overlap. For the U.S. military, two such related concepts probably lead to more confusion than others. Guerilla warfare and insurgencies are often assumed to be synonymous with terrorism. One reason for this is that insurgencies and terrorism often have similar goals.

However, if we examine insurgency and guerilla warfare, specific differences emerge. A key diﬀerence is that an insurgency is a movement – a political effort with a specific aim. This sets it apart from both guerilla warfare and terrorism, as they are both methods available to pursue the goals of the political movement.

Goals and Motivations of Terrorists

Ideology and motivation will influence the objectives of terrorist operations, especially regarding the casualty rate. Groups with secular ideologies and non-religious goals will often attempt highly selective and discriminate acts of violence to achieve a specific political aim.

This often requires them to keep casualties at the minimum amount necessary to attain the objective. This is both to avoid a backlash that might severely damage the organization, and also maintain the appearance of a rational group that has legitimate grievances. By limiting their attacks they reduce the risk of undermining external political and economic support . Groups that comprise a “wing” of an insurgency, or are affiliated with aboveground, sometimes legitimate, political organizations often operate under these constraints.

The tensions caused by balancing these considerations are often a prime factor in the development of splinter groups and internal factions within these organizations.

In contrast, religiously oriented and millenarian groups typically attempt to inflict as many casualties as possible. Because of the apocalyptic frame f reference they use, loss of life is irrelevant, and fore casualties are better. Losses among their co-religionists are of little account because such casualties will reap the benefits of the afterlife. Likewise,· non-believers, Whether they are the intended target or collateral damage, deserve death, and killing them may be considered a moral duty.

The type of target selected will often reflect motivations and ideologies. For groups professing secular political or social motivations, their targets are highly symbolic of authority; government offices, banks, national airlines, and multinational corporations with direct relation to the established order.

Likewise, they conduct attacks on representative individuals whom they associate with economic exploitation , social injustice , or political repression. While religious groups also use much of this symbolism, there is a trend to connect it to greater physical devastation. There also is. a tendency to add religiously aﬀiliated individuals, such as missionaries, and religious activities, such as worship services, to the targeting equation.

Types of Terrorist Incidents

The most common types of terrorist incidents include:

Bombings are the most common type of terrorist act. Typically, improvised explosive devices are inexpensive and easy to make. Modern devices are smaller and are harder to detect.

Kidnappings and Hostage-Takings

Terrorists use kidnapping and hostage-taking to establish a bargaining position and to elicit publicity. Kidnapping is one of the most difficult acts fr a terrorist group to accomplish, but, if a kidnapping is successful, it can gain terrorists money, the release of jailed comrades, and publicity for an extended period. Hostage-taking involves the seizure of a facility or location and the taking of hostages. Unlike a kidnapping, hostage-taking provokes a confrontation with authorities. It forces authorities to either make dramatic decisions or comply with the terrorist’s demands.

Armed Attacks and Assassinations

Armed attacks include raids and ambushes. Assassinations are the killing of a selected victim, usually by bombings or small arms. Drive-by shootings are a common technique employed by unsophisticated or loosely organized terrorist groups. Historically, terrorists have assassinated specific individuals for psychological effects.

Arsons and Firebombings

Incendiary devices are cheap and easy to hide. Arson and firebombings are easily conducted by terrorist groups that may not be as well-organized, equipped, or trained as a major terrorist organization. An arson or firebombing against a utility, hotel, government building, or industrial center portrays an image that the ruling government is incapable of maintaining order.

Other Types of Terrorist Incidents

In addition to the acts of violence discussed above, there are also numerous other types of violence that can exist under the framework of terrorism. Terrorist groups conduct maimings against their own people as a form of punishment for security violations, defections, or informing.

Terrorist organizations also conduct robberies and extortion when they need to finance their acts and they don’t have sponsorship from sympathetic nations. Cyber terrorism is a new form of terrorism that is ever-increasing as we rely on computer networks to relay information and provide connectivity to today’s modern and fast-paced world. Cyber terrorism allows terrorists to conduct their operations with little or no risk to themselves.

It also provides terrorists an opportunity to disrupt or destroy networks and computers. The result is interruption of key government or business-related activities. This type of terrorism isn’t as high profile as other types of terrorist attacks, but its impact is just as destructive.

Historically, terrorist attacks using nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) weapons have been rare. Due to the extremely high number of casualties that NBC weapons produce, they are also referred to as weapons of mass destruction (WMO). However, a number of nations are involved in arms races with neighboring countries because they” view the development of WMD as a key deterrent of attack by hostile neighbors.

The increased development of WMD also increases the potential for terrorist groups to gain .access to WMD. It is believed that in the future terrorists will have greater access to WMD because unstable nations or states may fail to safeguard their stockpiles of WMD from accidental losses, illicit sales, or outright theft or seizure. Determined terrorist groups can also gain access to WMD through covert independent research eﬀors or by hiring technically skilled professionals to construct the WMD.

Terrorism is continually changing. While at the surface it remains “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear…” it is rapidly becoming the predominant strategic tool of our adversaries. As terrorism evolves into the principal irregular warfare strategy of the 21st century, it is adapting to changes in the world’s socio-political environment.

Some of these changes facilitate the abilities of terrorists to operate, procure funding, and develop new capabilities. Other changes are gradually moving terrorism into a diﬀerent relationship with the world at large.

Types of Terrorism

The Task Force classified terrorism into six categories.

Civil Disorders

A form of collective violence interfering with the peace, security, and normal functioning of the community.

Political Terrorism

Violent criminal behavior is designed primarily to generate fear in the community, or a substantial segment of it, for political purposes.

Non-Political Terrorism

Terrorism that is not aimed at political purposes but which exhibits “conscious design to create and maintain a high degree of fear for coercive purposes but the end is individual or collective gain rather fan the achievement of a political objective.”

Quasi-Terrorism

The activities incidental to the commission of crimes of violence that are similar in form and method to genuine terrorism but which nevertheless lack its essential ingredient. It is not the main purpose of the quasi-terrorists to induce terror in the immediate victim as in the case of genuine terrorism, but the quasi-terrorist uses the modalities and techniques of the genuine terrorist and produces similar consequences and reactions.

For example, the fleeing felon who takes hostages is a quasi-terrorist, whose methods are similar to those of the genuine terrorist but whose purposes are quite different.

Limited Political Terrorism

Genuine political terrorism is characterized by a revolutionary approach; limited political terrorism refers to “acts of terrorism which are committed for ideological or political motives but which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture control of the State.

Official or State Terrorism

Referring to nations whose rule is based upon fear and oppression that reach similar to terrorism or such proportions.

The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political conflict.

The type of conflict varies widely historical examples include:

the secession of a territory to form a new sovereign state
The dominance of territory or resources by various ethnic groups
Imposition of a particular form of government, such as democracy, theocracy, or anarchy
Economic deprivation of a population
Opposition to a domestic government or occupying army

Terrorism is a form of asymmetric warfare. and is more. common when direct conventional warfare either cannot be (due to differentials in available forces) or is not being used to resolve the underlying conflict.

Responses to terrorism

Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the political spectrum and reassessments of fundamental values. The term counterterrorism has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.

Specific types of responses include

Targeted laws, criminal procedures, deportations, and enhanced police powers
Target hardening, such as locking doors or adding traffic barriers
Preemptive or reactive military action
Increased intelligence and surveillance activities
Preemptive humanitarian activities
More permissive interrogation and detention policies
Official acceptance of torture as a valid tool

Most relevant ▼

Essay on “Innovations are Never-ending Headways” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “Single National Curriculum Pave the Way for the Desired Ideological Integration in Pakistan Society” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “Single National Curriculum Paving the Way for the desired ideological integration in Pakistan Society” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “The cost of inaction is greater than the cost of action” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “Inflation – A Result of Poor Economic Policies or a Part of Global Economic Woes” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “Democracy without Justice is Tyranny” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “Man is Born Free but Everywhere he is in Chains” for CSS, PMS
Essay on “Power Corrupts: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely” for CSS and PMS
Essay on the “Role of Social Media in the Modern World” for CSS and PMS
Essay on “Terrorism and its Socioeconomic Implications” for CSS, and PMS

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.

Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil (review)

Michael Rothberg
Wayne State University Press
Volume 43, Number 4, Fall 2001
pp. 478-484
10.1353/crt.2001.0046
View Citation

Additional Information

Buy Article for $9.00 (USD)

Buy Digital Article for $9.00 (USD)
Buy Complete Digital Issue for $24.00 (USD)

Project MUSE Mission

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

Share full article

Supported by

Latest North Korean Offensive: Dumping Trash on South Korea From the Sky

The South Korean military said on Wednesday that it found hundreds of balloons carrying garbage from North Korea.

By Choe Sang-Hun

Reporting from Seoul

North Korea has resumed an unusual operation to show its displeasure with South Korea: dumping trash from the sky across the world’s most heavily armed border.

Between Tuesday night and Wednesday, the South Korean military said that it found 260 balloons drifting across the Demilitarized Zone, the buffer between the two Koreas. Soon, residents across South Korea, including some in Seoul, the capital, reported seeing plastic bags falling from the sky.

The authorities sent chemical and biological terrorism response squads, as well as bomb squads, to inspect the payloads. But they only found garbage, like cigarette butts, plastic water bottles, used paper and shoes, and what looked like compost. The South Korean military said the garbage was released by timers when the balloons reached its airspace.

North Korea in recent years has taken an increasingly belligerent military stance . Its unusual offensive this week prompted South Korea to send a cellphone alert to residents living near the inter-Korean border to refrain from outdoor activities and watch out for unidentified objects falling from the sky. Some confusion arose when the alert message included the auto-generated English phrase “Air raid preliminary warning.” The government said it would fix the glitch.

“Acts like this by North Korea are a clear violation of international law and a serious threat to the safety of our people,” the South Korean military said in a statement on Wednesday. “We issue a stern warning to North Korea to stop this anti-humanitarian and dirty operation.”

The North Korean balloons arrived in South Korea days after Pyongyang accused North Korean defectors living in South Korea of “scattering leaflets and various dirty things” over its border counties and vowed to take “ tit-for-tat action .”

“Mounds of wastepaper and filth will soon be scattered over the border areas and the interior” of South Korea, Kim Kang Il, a vice defense minister of North Korea, said in a statement on Saturday. “It will directly experience how much effort is required to remove them.”

During the Cold War decades following the 1950-53 Korean War, the two countries waged fierce psychological warfare , bombarding each other with propaganda broadcasts and sending millions of propaganda leaflets across the border.

Such operations ebbed and flowed depending on the political mood on the Korean Peninsula. The two Koreas agreed to de-escalate their propaganda duel after a landmark summit in 2000 at which they agreed to promote reconciliation. The nations again reaffirmed that agreement when the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and President Moon Jae-in of South Korea met in 2018.

But North Korean defectors and conservative activists in the South continued to send balloons to the North. Their balloons carried mini-Bibles, dollar bills, computer thumb drives containing South Korean soap operas, and leaflets that called Mr. Kim and his father and grandfather, who ruled the North before him, “pigs,” “vampires” and “womanizers.”

These balloons, their proponents said, helped chip away at the information blackout and a personality cult North Korea imposed against its people.

North Korea took offense, so much so that its military fired antiaircraft guns to shoot down the northbound plastic balloons. In 2016, it retaliated by sending balloons loaded with cigarette butts and other trash, as well as leaflets calling the then South Korean leader, Park Geun-hye, an “evil witch.” A few years later, it claimed that balloons from the South were carrying the Covid-19 virus.

In 2021, South Korea enacted a law that banned the spreading of propaganda leaflets into North Korea. The government at the time said that the balloons did little more than provoke the North and also created trash in the South because some balloons never make it across the border.

But last year, the South’s Constitutional Court struck down the law, calling it an unconstitutional infringement on the freedom of speech.

On Wednesday, North Korea admitted to sending trash balloons to the South — and vowed to send more — to exercise its own “freedom of expression.”

Choe Sang-Hun is the lead reporter for The Times in Seoul, covering South and North Korea. More about Choe Sang-Hun

COMMENTS

Essay on Terrorism with Outlines and Quotes
Terrorism Essay with Quotes and Outline. Outlines: Terrorism has become one of the most dangerous forms of crime. The main causes of terrorism. Islam is the most misunderstood religion in the west. The Muslim concept of Islamic Fundamentalism. Terrorism is different from political or liberation movement.
528 Terrorism Essay Topic Ideas & Examples
Give a historical overview of your issue. For example, if you are writing about global terrorism, then it is apparent that a worldwide network of violent radicals did not come into existence overnight. Acknowledge and explain the origins of your assigned issue. Read other's sample essays.
Terrorism Essay in English [100, 150, 200-250, 300 Words]
Terrorism Essay: 100 Words. Terrorism is the result of widespread discontentment that has gone deeper into the minds of the poor and exploited class of people. Being instigated by some power-hungry politicians, these people take up arms against the establishment to voice their protest. When the language of protest violence and cause takes the ...
Terrorism Essay for Students and Teacher
500+ Words Essay on Terrorism Essay. Terrorism is an act, which aims to create fear among ordinary people by illegal means. It is a threat to humanity. It includes person or group spreading violence, riots, burglaries, rapes, kidnappings, fighting, bombings, etc. Terrorism is an act of cowardice. Also, terrorism has nothing to do with religion.
Essay on Terrorism
100 Words Essay on Terrorism. Terrorism is the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political and personal aims. It is a global phenomenon that has affected countries worldwide, causing harm to innocent civilians, damaging economies, and destabilizing governments. The causes of terrorism are complex and can include religious ...
Essay on Terrorism
Understanding Terrorism. Terrorism, a term that sends chills down the spine, is an act of violence primarily intended to create fear, disrupt societal structures, and promote political or ideological agendas. It is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, which has been escalating in frequency and intensity worldwide.
International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security Essay
International Terrorism as a Global Challenge. International terrorism has become the greatest danger to world security, overtaking the threats of military confrontations from rival great powers. Stewart (2006) observes that the international security threat posed by military confrontations between rival great powers has reduced dramatically ...
Terrorism
So does Wellman's example of "classroom terrorism": a professor threatens to fail students who submit their essays after the due date, causes panic in class, and thereby engages in terrorism. Robert E. Goodin offers a similar account, emphasizing the political role of terrorism: terrorism is "a political tactic, involving the deliberate ...
The Causes of Terrorism
In 1981, Martha Crenshaw, a well-known scholar of terrorism, wrote an important article titled "The Causes of Terrorism," published in the journal Comparative Politics. Crenshaw was interested in discovering the causes of "symbolic, low-level violence by conspiratorial organizations" (Crenshaw 1981, 379), which is one of the ways in ...
Full article: Making sense of terrorism: a narrative approach to the
Introduction. Terrorism has been the most prominent security issue since the start of the new millennium. Footnote 1 Since 2014, series of deadly attacks in France, Belgium, Germany, the United States, and Great Britain have fueled new anxieties about terrorist incidents, particularly in Western countries. That the terrorism label has remained ambiguous and contentious, with hundreds of ...
How to Write a Terrorism Essay: Tips, Topics, and Useful Sources
4. Make an outline. This is an obvious tip, but a really helpful one. An outline will establish the structure of your essay about terrorism and help you organize your thoughts. We also recommend you to include keywords if you don't want to forget about the essential details. 5.
Introduction: Writing the History of Terrorism
Terrorism and its history have been the topic of considerable public, political, literary, artistic, and academic attention, since this specific tactic of violence was invented concurrently with the advent of modernity. 1 It therefore can come as no surprise that the first academic treatises on terrorism as a subject of inquiry began to appear in the nineteenth century. 2 They were a reaction ...
Terrorism Research Paper
Terrorism Research Paper. This sample terrorism research paper features: 7300 words (approx. 24 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 57 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers ...
PDF How Ideology Influences Terror
1 Jack P. Gibbs, "Conceptualization of Terrorism," American Sociological Review 54, No. 3 (June 1989): 329-340; Zizi Papacharissi and Maria de Fatima Oliveira, "News Frames Terrorism: A Comparative Analysis of Frames Employed in Terrorism Coverage in U.S. and U.K. Newspapers," The International Journal of
PDF WORLD101: TERRORISM
WORLD101: TERRORISM ESSAY QUESTIONS 1. What motivates groups or individuals to engage in acts of terrorism? Answers should reference specific perpetrators and incidents as examples. 2. What makes terrorism different from other forms of violence? Judging by historic and current examples, to what extent is terrorism an effective means
PDF Essay 1. Terrorism and the law: past and present international approaches
venting and punishing terrorism (e.g., the 1977 European Convention on the Sup-pression of Terrorism10 and the 1978 Bonn Declaration on International Terrorism11). These instruments have been relatively effective tools in combating terrorism and, in the latter case, illustrate how administrative measures can be introduced to encourage
Terrorism, Evil, and Everyday Depravity
States' "war on terrorism." At the same time, the essay suggests that terrorism can be regarded as "evil" but only when considered among a multiplicity of "evils" com-parable to it, for example: rape, war crimes, and repression. The most recent appropriation of the term "evil" by President George W. Bush's administration has caused me to ...
Essay On Terrorism In Pakistan With Outline In Easy Words
Essay On Terrorism In Pakistan With Outline In Easy Words. Impact Of Terrorism In Pakistan: The impacts of terrorism in Pakistan is affecting the different phases of life. It impacts on society, economy, agriculture, and there are lots of international impacts leaving their impact on life on a national basis. Whenever, any terrorist attack held ...
TERRORISM AND GUERRILLA WARFARE A COMPARATIVE ESSAY
TERRORISM AND GUERRILLA WARFARE − A COMPARATIVE ESSAY. 1. INTRODUCTION. "Even more recently, the term "terrorism" (like "guerrilla") has been used in so many different senses as to become almost meaningless, covering almost any, and not necessarily political, act of violence."1. This observation made by Laqueur about 25 years ago ...
Terrorism in Pakistan: Causes, Impacts, and Way Forwards
Outline. 1- INTRODUCTION. Terrorism, a global evil threatening the world's peace. Wreaking havoc in Pakistan. Affecting the socio-political and economic fabric of the country. Raising a diverse range of issues for the country. The miserable state of affairs urging for a viable solution. 2- CURRENT SITUATION.
Essay on "Terrorism" for CSS, PMS, and All Judiciary Examinations
This is an essay on "Terrorism" for CSS, PMS, and All Judiciary examinations. Terrorism is called the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. in this essay you will learn about Terrorism, its types, terrorist incidents, and the causes of terrorism. In this essay, you will learn.
Telling stories of terrorism: a framework for applying narrative
ABSTRACT. Narrative has recently garnered in much attention in the study of terrorism but remains poorly understood. This paper offers some initial steps towards translating the promise of narrative approaches into a set of steps for systematically analysing and understanding terrorists' own accounts of their engagement with extremism and militancy.
Project MUSE
Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil by Alain Badiou. Translated by Peter Hallward. London and New York: Verso, 2001. Pp. 166. $23.00 cloth. The publication in English of Alain Badiou's Ethics (originally published in French in 1998) may come to constitute an "event" in just the sense that Badiou gives to the concept in his own work: a break with the received ideas of a given context.
North Korea's Latest Offensive: Dumping Trash on South Korea
North Korea has resumed an unusual operation to show its displeasure with South Korea: dumping trash from the sky across the world's most heavily armed border. Between Tuesday night and ...

Essay on Terrorism with Outlines and Quotes

Terrorism Essay with Quotes and Outline

Essay Writing 101: The Basics That Every Writer Should Know

Students and Social Service Essay with Quotations

Load Shedding in Pakistan Essay – 1200 Words

Terrorism Essay in English [100, 150, 200-250, 300 Words]

Terrorism Essay: 100 Words

Essay on Terrorism: 150 Words

Terrorism Essay in English: 200-250 Words

Terrorism in India Essay: 300 Words

Related Posts

Terrorism Essay for Students and Teacher

Types of Terrorism

Causes of Terrorism

The Effects Of Terrorism

Terrorist Attacks in India

Agencies fighting Terrorism in India

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Download the App

Products & Resources

Colleges & Courses

Predictors & E-Books

Predictors & Articles

Top Courses & Careers

Quick Links

Diploma Colleges

Upcoming Events

Other Exams

Top Countries

Student Visas

Engineering Preparation

Medical Preparation

Online Courses

Top Streams

Specializations

Top Providers

Essay on Terrorism

100 Words Essay on Terrorism

200 Words Essay on Terrorism

500 Words Essay on Terrorism

The Origins of Terrorism

Agencies In India Fighting Terrorism

Applications for Admissions are open.

Aakash iACST Scholarship Test 2024

ALLEN Digital Scholarship Admission Test (ADSAT)

JEE Main Important Physics formulas

PW JEE Coaching

PW NEET Coaching

JEE Main Important Chemistry formulas

Download Careers360 App's

We Appeared in

Essay on Terrorism

100 Words Essay on Terrorism

Impacts of Terrorism

Countering Terrorism

250 Words Essay on Terrorism

The Root Causes

The Impact of Terrorism

Counter-Terrorism Strategies

500 Words Essay on Terrorism

The Evolution of Terrorism

The Psychology of Terrorism

Conclusion: The Future of Counter-Terrorism

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

International Terrorism: The Challenge to Global Security Essay

Introduction

Bibliography

1.1.1 The reign of terror

1.1 “Terrorism” from the French Revolution to the early 21st century

1.2 Two core traits of terrorism and two types of definition

2. The moral issue

2.2 Consequentialism

2.3 Nonconsequentialism

Acknowledgments

Support SEP

How to Write an Essay on Terrorism: Complete Guide

How to Make Your Terrorism Essay Better: 10 Tips

7 Types of Terrorism to Write About in Your Terrorism Essay

30 Unique Terrorism Research Paper Topics for Your Writing