Differing definitions of terrorism
- 1. Terrorism IB Global Politics UWC Costa Rica
- 2. Learning Objectives • To understand that there is no agreed definition and that terrorism can be defined in many different ways • To analyse the consequences of defining terrorism in different ways • To evaluate how different individuals, groups and states might use the term for political advantage
- 4. Terrorism Terrorisme Terrorismo 恐怖主义 恐怖主義 Le Terrorisme Terfysgaeth THERE IS NO SINGLE AGREED DEFINITION OF TERRORISM. HOW DO YOU DEFINE TERRORISM? ADD YOUR DEFINITION TO THE WALL
- 5. Terrorism Terrorisme Terrorismo 恐怖主义 恐怖主義 Le Terrorisme TerfysgaethYOU MAY CHOOSE TO GO AND DEVELOP, REFINE OR COMPLETELY CHANGE YOUR DEFINITION AT ANY POINT DURING THIS LESSON
- 6. Competing Definitions • You need to be in groups of 4 students • You will need to move the furniture so you are sat in your group • Each group will need a team leader and a timekeeper • You have 2 minutes to make this happen
- 7. Competing Definitions • Log on to the Glopo Website (Lesson 27) and access the following links: – ‘In Mideast, One Weapon of Choice is a Loaded Word’ – ‘Terror and Tyranny: What Powerful States Call Terrorism May Be an Inevitable Response to Injustice’ – ‘Definitions of Terrorism Often Vary’
- 8. Competing Definitions • Each group must read at least two of the articles. Group members may read different articles. The articles are rated according to e.a.l accessibility and you may wish to take this into account • Once group members have article, as a group you should identify key issues relating to definition of terrorism • You may record your discussion as a mind map
- 9. Competing Definitions • AIM is not to come up with authoritative definition of terrorism • Aim is to raise questions and uncover areas of disagreement raised by writers • Remember, you are free to change your post-it definition
- 10. Sharing learning • Each group should share what you believe to be the most important issues and most important questions you have identified as a result of your group learning • We will now attempt to structure our thinking using the following headings – – Methods/Results – Perpetrator, – Target – Motive – Point of View • You may find the Thinking Framework provided on the website useful to help you in making notes
- 11. Methods/Results • Most people would agree that terrorism includes violence. • What about threats of violence? Kidnapping? Arson? Rape? • What if no one is harmed -- is it still terrorism?
- 12. Perpetrator • Who carries out terrorism? • Is terrorism always carried out by organized opposition groups? • Can states be terrorists? Can individuals? • Consider issues of inspiration, planning, provision of weapons, and military assistance
- 13. Target • Does terrorism target only civilians? Could an attack on a military target be terrorism? How do you decide what a civilian is? • To qualify as terrorism, must perpetrators of an act of violence deliberately target civilians, or simply be reckless as to whether civilians as well as military targets might be harmed? • Are all attacks on civilians terrorism? • Is the target of terrorism always human, or can acts of sabotage against property also be considered terrorism?
- 14. Motive • Is the motive behind an act important in deciding whether it is terrorism, or should only the act itself be considered? • What is the objective of terrorism? Is terrorism "violence for an audience" -- an act committed to inspire fear in the public and therefore force policy changes? Or does a terrorist act have specific strategic objectives? • Does it make any difference if the perpetrators consider themselves martyrs for a religious or political cause?
- 15. Point Of View • If a cause is considered legitimate, are any means to achieve its goals legitimate? How does one distinguish between a terrorist and a freedom fighter? • Is terrorism "the weapon of the weak"? • Are illegitimate acts against an enemy in war terrorism, war crimes, or is there even a difference? Does history change the definition of terrorism? • If a group achieves independence using tactics called "terrorist" by their previous occupier or sovereign, making their "rebellion" into a "war of independence," are they justified by their eventual success in becoming a state?
- 16. ‘Is it Terrorism?’ Checklist • Based on your notes from the previous activity, develop your own terrorism checklist • Include questions that need to be answered in order to evaluate if an act constitutes terrorism or not • You will use this list to evaluate various scenarios
- 17. Scenario ONE1 • A paramilitary group seeking independence blows up the military headquarters of the occupying force. The group's warning that there will be a bombing is ignored, and many people, civilian as well as military, are killed.
- 18. Scenario TWO • Rebels seeking to set up an independent state fire at occupying troops from concealed positions.
- 19. Scenario THREE • Members of a particular ethnic or religious group are killed in order to frighten other members of their group into fleeing territory
- 20. Scenario FOUR • A radical group makes a list of opponents it believes should be killed and distributes it to sympathizers, telling them that they will be rewarded in heaven for defending the innocent if they carry out these assassinations
- 21. Scenario FIVE • More than a dozen undercover agents of the state are killed in one day by a radical rebel group.
- 22. Scenario SIX • A government routinely "disappears," tortures, and murders civilians as well as political and military leaders whom it suspects of opposing the regime
- 23. Scenario SEVEN • A militant religious group attacks, among others, women it feels are acting in an immodest fashion in public in order to pressure other women to behave in a certain way
- 24. SCENARIO EIGHT • Religious militants attack members of the government, including an assassination attempt on the president. The government responds by sending in troops and destroying an urban area where the religious militants are based, killing more than 10,000 people in the process, including many civilians
- 25. Discussion Questions • Discuss the political impact of the term terrorism. Why is it an effective political tool (or weapon, as Cameron Barr describes it) to accuse your opponent of being a terrorist? • Being able to convincingly claim that your opponent is a terrorist grants enormous moral legitimacy to a party in a conflict. Is it important -- or possible -- to have a single consistent definition of terrorism? Why? How could such a definition be crafted?
Editor's Notes
- #3: Why are we studying terrorism? Been in news recently… Paris Attacks esp. 9/11 put terrorism into western news agenda but terrorism has been issue previously e.g FARC, IRA etc
- #8: Open each link in a separate page
- #9: Open each link in a separate page
- #10: Open each link in a separate page
- #13: As an example, the Egyptian state has said attacks on tourist buses or assassinations of political leaders by Islamist militants were acts of lone, deranged individuals, not terrorism, because they wanted to prevent further loss of tourism and preempt claims that the state wasn't doing enough to counter terrorism.
- #18: Based on the Irgun's bombing of the King David Hotel
- #19: Based on the tactics of the American colonists at Concord, Massachusetts, during the Revolutionary War.
- #20: Ethnic cleansing, seen in Rwanda, Bosnia, and other contexts. Class might also discuss whether American acts against Native Americans would fall into this categoryrd, Massachusetts, during the Revolutionary War.
- #21: Radical antiabortion groups have published lists of doctors who perform abortions. Many people believe this is an encouragement to murder them
- #22: Michael Collins and the IRA killed 14 British secret agents in 1920 in Dublin
- #23: Iraq is a prime example of this, but there are and have been many other examples, including Chile under Gen. Pinochet
- #24: The Armed Islamic Group in Algeria, the Lashkar-e Tayyiba in Pakistan, and other groups have threatened women who do not wear a veil or who otherwise breach the group's vision of modesty. ISIS may also be a suitable example.
- #25: Syria's Hafez al-Asad attacked the city of Hama, a stronghold of the Muslim Brotherhood, in 1982