What is terrorism, and who is a terrorist?

While private American citizens

may claim to have a clear definition in their minds, particularly after
September 11, 2001, the answer to these questions is not necessarily as
easily verbalized. This paper will take a look at some of the sociological
and political forces that foster and stir up terrorist activity. In doing so, the
reader may glean a more comprehensive understanding of the apparently
amorphous practice of international terrorism in the post-industrial world.
Keywords Disenfranchisement; Jihad; Mujahideen; Nationalism; Terrorism
Sociology of Politics
Overview
It was a scene that could easily have been anywhere in the modern world:
buildings on fire, government in disarray, and private citizens fearful of
repeat incidents. In order to prevent further attacks, the government began
a campaign of almost oppressive vigilance designed to weed out terrorist
cells, but would in many incidents impinge on the constitutional rights of the
people during such campaigns. The attackers were a loosely organized
group of men without a country whose raison d'etre seemed to strike a
painful, brazen blow to the world's only superpower.
The attack in question, however, was not carried out in the modern world,
but more than 2,000 years ago, a time when pirates launched a terrorist
attack on the Roman port of Ostia, destroyed much of the consular fleet
and kidnapped a senator and his family. The attack on Ostia would have
been considered by many to be a mere footnote in the history of mankind
had it not largely repeated itself many times since. The terrorist attacks on
the U.S. on 9/11, for example, provided a strong historical parallel between
the Roman world and the world of post-industrial international society.
Indeed, international terrorism has long been in existence as a course of
action employed by disenfranchised individuals and groups seeking to
strike against incumbent, well-equipped entities (most often government
institutions and countries). Those who have been charged with terrorism
include Theodore Kacznyski (also known as "the Unabomber"), the Basque

separatist group ETA, the Irish Republican Army (IRA), the Palestinian
Liberation Organization (PLO) and, most recently, al-Qaeda.
When the events of 9/11 occurred, the immediate response, not only by the
U.S. but by the international community as a whole, was to seek the
eradication of international terrorism in all of its forms. Certainly, the biggest
offender was the amorphous al-Qaeda, which preaches radical Islam and
seeks the destruction of the Westernized world. However, the "war on
terror" would also encompass politically-motivated terrorism (such as
Communist guerrillas in Latin America and anarchists in Europe). By
declaring war not on a singular enemy but on a mode of attack, the
international community has opened a Pandora's Box.
What is terrorism, and who is a terrorist? While private American citizens
may claim to have a clear definition in their minds, particularly after
September 11, 2001, the answer to these questions is not necessarily as
easily verbalized. This paper will take a look at some of the sociological
and political forces that foster and stir up terrorist activity. In doing so, the
reader may glean a more comprehensive understanding of the apparently
amorphous practice of international terrorism in the post-industrial world.
A Rose by Any Other Name
In 1964, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, was preparing for
Jacobellis vs. Ohio, a case involving an adult theater and its assertion of a
right to freedom of expression. He became stuck, however, in attempting to
define it. A law clerk, Alan Novak, told him, "Mr. Justice, you will know it
when you see it" (Lattman, 2007). Indeed, terrorism is arguably just as
difficult to define in theoretical terms and yet so easily identified by those
who witness it.
In 2006, for example, the United Nations introduced the "Global CounterTerrorism Strategy," which was designed to help the international
community combat the threat posed by terrorist organization "in all its forms
and manifestations," yet shied away from a concrete definition of its target
(United Nations, 2008). In truth, it is difficult to define terrorism in a clear
manner. Title 22 of the United States Code paints a broad definition of such

acts as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against

non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents,
usually intended to influence an audience." Interestingly, the U.S.
government has used this definition since 1983 (U.S. Department of State,
2001).
Religious Extremism
In the post-9/11 era, the conventional Western view of terrorism focuses
predominantly on religious extremism. The radical views and brutal tactics
of Islamic groups such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban and others dedicated to
the notion of a jihad ("holy war") against the U.S.-led West are embedded
in the minds of most Americans as prototypical terrorism. Then again, for
Turks, the standard-bearer might be the PKK, or Kurdistan Workers Party,
which have conducted attacks across the Iraqi border. Sri Lanka has been
besieged by the Tamil Tigers, and Columbia has been fending off terrorist
attacks from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC).
Further Insights
Indeed, terrorism, within the context of the definition above, is in many
regards a mode of attack rather than an entity or institution. There is no
culture or society of terrorists, distinctive in appearance or bound by
geography. This fact is perhaps the most daunting aspect of combating
terrorism. While religious extremism, nationalism and political repression
are clearly heavy motivators for terrorism, even when the motives are not
always clear. The Russian province of Chechnya has been struggling for
independence since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and Chechen
terrorists have launched a number of attacks inside Russia to that end.
While the motive has largely been nationalism (the quest for
independence), foreign fighters have joined the cause, invoking jihad and
using religion as the motivator for international terrorists to help.
International Terrorism
The term "international" terrorism is somewhat paradoxical many
terrorist groups move across borders to stage their attacks or generate
cells in target countries so that attacks can occur from within. A great many

foreign mujahideen (Muslim holy warriors), for example, have left their
home countries, received terrorist training in remote "camps" and traveled
to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere to wage jihad borders do not seem to
confine international terrorists, nor do international terrorists seem
necessarily focused on national targets or agents thereof.
Still, there are some patterns to international terrorism that one may
observe. This paper will next cast a light on a few of the general forms of
international terrorism. Interestingly, as the reader will observe, many of
these manifestations may have political agendas but generate from largely
sociological underpinnings.
Radical Views of Peaceful Faith
Tenzin Gyatso, known around the world as the Dalai Lama (a man who,
ironically, has been accused by China of inciting terrorism), once
commented that his is a simple religion. "There is no need for temples, no
need for complicated philosophy," he said. "Our own brain, our own heart is
our temple; the philosophy is kindness" (Lewis, 2006).
In Judaism, the same concept ideally takes center stage in every
individual's life. The word "shalom," which in Hebrew means "peace," is
used both as a greeting and farewell. The etymology of the word, however,
paints an important illustration of the importance of diversity in Jewish
teachings "shalom" is derived from "shalem," which means "whole." In
other words, the word for "peace" comes...