Terrorism

The terrorism indicates the violent actions (Attentat S, Assassinat S, Enlèvement S, Sabotage S…) carried out against the population, so that their psychological repercussion - terror and fear - largely exceeds the circle of the direct victims to strike the public opinion concerned.

If an agreement exists on the concept, the delimitation of the terrorist phenomenon remains complex. The conceptualization of the Terreur was the work of the French revolution but was also asserted by Lénine in Russia. Today the term “terrorism” is connoted pejoratively. Its different definitions mobilizes many stakes even the interests of those which undertake qualified actions of terrorists.

It is generally allowed that terrorism is a weapon of weak against the forts (asymmetrical Guerre) even if, as Noam Chomsky underlines it, the states and institutions have also recourse to this method (Terrorisme of State). If one follows Gerard Chaliand, the actions of terrorism merge sometimes with the Guerre, the Guérilla or the Banditisme.

The attempts to work out a typology of the recourse to terrorism butt against the heterogeneity of the terrorists. Classifications (individual or organized action, type of doctrines, morality of the choice of the targets…) exist but are not enough to give an account of the phenomenon.

Terrorism showed sometimes that it could arrive to its ends, that it is within the framework of anti-colonial fights (Independence of the Ireland) or others (mediatization of the cause of the Palestine after years of attacks, negotiations in Corsica after the assassination of the Erignac prefect, many early releases of prisoners, payments of ransoms requested etc…).

The concept

History of the word

The word terrorism is attested for the first time in November 1794, it then indicates the “doctrines of the partisans of the Terreur”, those which, some time before, had exerted the power by carrying out an intense fight and violent one against the Contre-révolutionnaire S. It acts then of a mode of exercise of the capacity, not of means of action against him. The word quickly evolved/moved: in 1800 it indicates the attack against Napoleon, it does not act more than one action of the State but of an action against him.

It acquired a préjorative connotation and indicates today the violent actions against the civilians to spread terror and thus to make pressure on a State. They specifically aim the civil populations, made with an aim of destroying, of killing and of mutilating. The purpose of these attacks are to promote messages in ideological matter, Politique or monk by the fear and media publicity.

Attempts at definition

The term of terrorism is very frequently employed today in International law and by the international institutions, but it does not give place to a single and universal definition.

Certain elements seem to make consensus, the philosopher Jacques Derrida writes as follows: “If one refers to the current or explicitly legal definitions of terrorism, that does one find there? The reference to a crime against the human life in violation of the laws (national or international) there implies at the same time the distinction between civilian and soldier (the victims of terrorism are supposed to be civil) and a political objective (to influence or change the policy of a country by terrorizing its civil population)”.

Within the framework of a conventional War, there exists indeed a precise legal framework, the Droit of the war. The acts violating the right of the war are then described as war crimes. The concepts of terrorism and terrorist act are thus used to qualify acts outwards well defined framework of conventional war and right of the war, even if their precise definition is not well established from a strictly legal point of view, or more exactly, even if a use can be made about it at ends of political interests.

However, even once excluded the war crimes, terrorism remains difficult to define with a satisfactory precision. A definition suggested by the Group of high level personalities and the General secretary of UNO in 2004 is supported by France, it specifies: “any action which has for intention to cause death or of serious body wounds to civilians or the non-combatant ones, when the goal of such an act is, from its nature or its context, to intimidate a population, or to force a government or an international organization to take any measures or to abstain from some”.

Human rights and of this fact out the Loi. All this implies and returns to a definition of the Guerre, and to the right of the war which forces to save the civilians (see the texts of the International committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) which expose the principles of the Humanitarian right, themselves depend on the right of the war which they supplement PARAGRAPH TO BE RE-EXAMINED: this paragraph is written in a too vague way and lends has confusion because terrorism is placed apart from the framework of the war according to what I included/understood, it is thus vague to say that it contravenes the right of the war, LeYaYa

The terrorist acts are contrary with the right of the war and the Human rights and of this fact out the Loi. All this implies and returns to a definition of the war, with the right of the war which forces to save the civilians (see the texts of the International committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) which expose the principles of the Humanitarian right, themselves depend on the right of the war which are based on these of the same principles and definitions and return to the Human rights. The right of the war must include the principles of the Human rights. Article 33 of the the fourth Geneva Convention relating to the protection of the civil people in time of war of the August 12th 1949 specifies that The collective sorrows, just as any measurement of intimidation or terrorism, are prohibited. that plundering… and measurements of reprisals .

These texts of right article 13 of the two Additional protocols to Geneva Conventions concerning the Protection of the civil population stipulates that:

  1. The civil civil population and people enjoy a general protection against the dangers resulting from military operations. In order to make this protection effective, the following rules will be observed in all circumstances.
  2. Neither the civil population as such nor civil people will have to be the object of attacks. The acts or threats of violence are prohibited of which the principal goal is to spread terror among the civil population.
  3. The civil people enjoy the protection granted by this Title, except if they take part directly in the hostilities and throughout this participation

Conventions of UNO for the repression of terrorism give a precise framework to repress certain acts commonly considered as terrorist acts, such as the diversion of planes, the taking of hostage, or the attacks with the explosive, without however qualifying explicitly any of these actions d'" act of terrorisme" in the texts.

The legal review of analysis of the international law " Topicality and Right International" comment on these texts as well as others --->

Terrorism and resistance

One generally distinguishes terrorism and resistances on ethical criteria, resistance having to be useful, unlike terrorism, a legitimate objective. This distinction is developed by Maurice Duverger, according to him, resistance asserts right to self-determination of the people and its resistance to oppression, while terrorism concerns the organized crime (??). The resistance or war of partisans is used like a means of pressure in order to put an end to an occupation or has a violent tender. One can quote some examples of war of partisans or resistance: various currents during the Second world war like the Franc-tireurs and in favor (ftp) which will gather to form the French Forces of the interior (FFI) that de Gaulle organizes in an united front of resistance to the occupant Nazi and France of Vichy, the Guerre of Algeria as a war of independence against France which knew in its center of the terrorist acts on behalf of the secret armed Organization, or more recently in Great Britain with the fight of the Northern Ireland.

Jacques Derrida still recalls in a precise way that the definition of terrorism depends on the possibility of distinguishing various types of wars, on armed actions and combatants, in accordance with the analyzes of Carl Schmitt which refer on the matter]]. It specifies:

A critical reading of Carl Schmitt, for example, would be extremely useful to take into account, also far which it is possible, the difference between the traditional war (confrontation direct and declared between two enemy States, in the great tradition of the European right), the “Civil war” and the “war of the partisans” (in its modern forms, although it appears, Schmitt recognizes it, at the beginning of the XIXe century).

It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between acts from resistance and terrorist acts because the various terms return to a form of legitimacy supposed of the political objectives which would partly justify the made acts of violence. The perception of this legitimacy varies largely according to the protagonists and observers what largely complicates the establishment of an objective and universally accepted definition concept of terrorism. A all the more complex case as it belongs to the topicality is that of the Iraq, where various tendencies of the Islam are in larval war and certain armed bunches resort to violent acts against Iraqi or foreign civilians. Being considered resistant to the occupation of their country by the the United States of America the authors of its acts claim to find in this statute the justification of their actions. So on the other hand one refuses to grant this statute of resistant, is by refusal of objective political (considering not that Iraq either occupied ) or because it is considered that extreme violence used exceeds any form of justification, it will speak then about these acts of violence like terrorist acts. Thus, the name of terrorist implies a complete illegitimacy of these actions whereas the definition of resistant implies a legitimacy to resist the invader. This idea would be more understandable in the globality of the relation between " terrorism and propagande".

One distinguishes also terrorism from the Tyrannicide, this last would sanction disrespect by the sovereign of the rules to which its function subjects it, that these rules are of natural origin, traditional or different, while terrorism estimates the order in place and its iniquitous rules, and tends to their destruction.

Various types of terrorism

There exist three great types of terrorism:

  • the individual terrorism, i.e. that it is caused by rebels, anarchists, or nihilists (admitting a moral freedom)

  • organized terrorism, i.e. which it is proliferous by applicants groups with different ideologies (ex: extreme left, extreme right-hand side, Islamism)
  • the terrorism of State

Individual terrorism

Individual terrorism is a practice which developed at the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century. This terrorism was practiced by some anarchistic S, like Ravachol avenging the Répression for Fourmies in 1891 and Santo Geronimo Caserio, avenging the repression exerted on the anarchists by assassinating in 1894 the President Sadi Carnot) or differently by nihilist in various countries (Russia, France, Spain, Italy, etc).

The attacks of the nihilists or the anarchists aimed (often to avenge death for one their former comrades due to repression) of the personalities of the close political arena or (the rich person, the Militaire, the Prêtre, the police , the politician, etc) having taken part to repress the population or of one their comrades. The idea being that once removed the actors of this repression, this one would grow blurred due to the fear of the other actors of the repressive political arena. This terrorism had a spontaneous character, and a social base.

Organized terrorism

When it is practiced by a group of people not representing a government, it is named simply terrorism. In the Years 1960 and 1970, the terrorism of Extreme left and more rarely of Extrême right-hand side was most important, having different political goals, driving with a direct or indirect fight with the State, with an aim (for the extreme left) of politically radicalizing the company towards social questions, or (for the extreme line) of imposing the nationalist debate and/or, in a strategy of tension, of creating a situation leading the State to reduce the police force or the army in the streets.

The type of terrorism of extreme left is often called Armed struggle by those which practice it. The members of the terrorist groups are generally called themselves resistant - or combatants , in favor -, because they consider that they resist the oppression of the political power in place, where which they carry out of the actions of release, which they compare with those carried out by the Résistants to the occupation Nazi in Europe during the Second world war.

The terrorists claiming Islamism regard themselves as for them as combatants of God, carrying out a holy war (literal translation which refers only to the physical fight included in the term Djihad, having term of other significances). Since the Years 1990, the islamist Terrorisme took an increasing place on the international scene. Its authors justify it in particular like an answer brought to the political situation in Israel - Palestine and in Iraq following the American intervention.

The terrorism of extreme right-hand side finds illustration in the Ku Klux Klan in the United States of America, carrying out a constant terrorism against the black population until in the Sixties, or in other groupings like the authors of the attacks of the plays of Atlanta.

The terrorism of State is practiced by secret services with fine policies. In the years 1930, the Soviet and Italian secret services thus eliminated several from their opponents taken refuge in France. During the War of Algeria, the French services carried out several hundreds d'" actions homicides" against persons in charge of FLN and OAS. After independences, authoritarian regimes such as that of Saddam Hussein also practiced the liquidation of adverse tears abroad. The modern democracies could be marked of terrorism for acts like the dynamiting of the boat of the organization Greenpeace named Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand by the French secret services in 1984, or the cuban civil aircraft transporting Olympic athletes dynamited by the CIA in the Années 1970.

The adversaries of these groups or factions often use the term terrorism to indicate these often fatal actions. It is thus necessary to be careful because to tax its adversaries with terrorists is a usual political weapon.

The terrorism of State

See also: Terrorism of State

One speaks about terrorism of State if terrorist activities were implemented, were financed, handled or obligingly ignored by a State (i.e not of measurement to stop it). The methods employed are strictly the methods of terrorism (removal, sequestration and assassination) but under cover of the reason of State, the government officials implied profit on behalf of its authorities from the approval necessary to exceed the right and from the logistic and/or financial support necessary to their actions. This absence of legal framework thus represents a distorsion with the bases of the democracy, whatever the required objectives.

An example of terrorism of State is the “war dirty” control by services of the Spanish State against the group armed nationalist ETA Basque. GALL - Antiterrorist Group of Release - was implied in the physical elimination of 37 people considered as belonging or supporting ETA. The business implied the Socialist government of Felipe Gonzalez of which the Minister of Interior Department Jose Barrionuevo Peña and other persons in charge were finally considered to be and recognized guilty within the framework of the business " Marey" (of the name of a Franco-Spanish citizen sequestered by error by GALL). In spite of this initial decision, these silent partners of terrorist activities profited from a relative leniency of the legal apparatus, compared to the members of the ETA which arrives at the end of the initial sorrow and whose Spanish justice currently seeks to prolong the judgments.

The expression “terrorism of State” is sometimes used to describe aggressions openly made by a State against a particular group. Terror with the source of the “terrorism of State” (of the facts) can also concern the “Crime against humanity” (a judgment).

The terrorism of State is practiced by secret services with fine policies. In the years 1930, the Soviet and Italian secret services thus eliminated several from their opponents taken refuge in France. During the War of Algeria, the French services carried out several hundreds d'" actions homicides" against persons in charge of FLN and OAS. After independences, dictatorships as that of Saddam Hussein also practiced the liquidation of their opponents abroad. The modern democracies can be marked of terrorism for acts like the dynamiting of the boat of the organization Greenpeace named Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand by the French secret services in 1984, or financing of the Contras to the Nicaragua by the CIA as of 1981.

Acts of violence led by government officials, for example a murder made by a police officer or a soldier, when they are not financed by the state do not concern the terrorism of state itself.

Economic terrorism

See also: economic Terrorism

The concept of terrorism economic is discussed and generally used in a polemical or demagogic way to associate the term “terrorism” with a country, a company or a marked group of abuses.

It nevertheless is also used in a way more strictly defined to indicate an economic attempt at destabilization by a group. More precisely, the Center of security policy of Geneva defined in 2005 economic terrorism in the following way:

“Contrary to the " war économique" , which is carried out by States against of other States, the " terrorism économique" would be carried out by transnational or non-governmental entities. It would suppose actions varied, coordinates and sophisticated, or massive acts of destabilization to disorganize the economic stability and financial of a State, a group of States or a company (a such Western company with the market economy) for ideological or religious reasons. These actions, if carried out, could be violent or not. They could have immediate effects or inflict psychological effects which in their turn can have economic consequences. ”

Examples of terrorism

Here an not-exhaustive list of terrorist acts:

Terrorism of State

  • Terror during the French revolution: arrest and suppression of the suspects, massacres, censure, etc
  • Attempted murder with Rome of the Pape Jean-Paul II by Mehmet Ali Agca in 1981, of which it may be that it was financed by the KGB or the CIA.
  • Deposits of mines in the ports and organization of an armed struggle of paramilitaries (" Countered ") by the the United States with the Nicaragua between 1982 and 1988.
  • bombs posed by the Iran iens in Paris in 1986 in reprisals with the delivery of missiles Exocet with the agreement of François Mitterrand by the France with the mode of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
  • Destruction of an airliner Southern Korean by the secret service of the North Korea the 29 November 1987.

Political terrorism

  • Attacks of the Hood in September 1937 in Paris

  • Attacks and assassinations of the Red Army Fraction in Germany….
  • Attacks and assassinations of ETA in Spain
  • Attacks of Direct action in France
  • Attacks of the red Brigades in Italy
  • Attack of Piazza Fontana (December 1969; put on the back of the Red Brigades, it was acted in fact of an attack False flag perpetrated by the networks Gladio within the framework of the Stratégie of the tension; to also see the Attack of Bologna of 1980)
  • Attacks of the communist Cells fighting in Belgium
  • Corrosion with the Airport of Lod in Israel by three terrorists of the Red Army Japanese woman, the May 30th 1972, making 26 died and 76 wounded
  • Diversion the October 13rd 1977 of a Boeing of the Lufthansa by Wadie Haddad, successful attack of GSG-9 to release the hostages
  • Dead of Alfred Herrhausen, president of the Deutsche Bank in the explosion of its car the November 30th 1989 asserted by the Fraction Red Army
  • Attack and assassination with Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in Palestine by the State of Israel
  • Attack and assassination of Abdel Aziz Rantissi in Palestine by the State of Israel
  • Car bomb attack with the Lebanon against Rafiq Hariri in February 2005
  • Diversion of the Flight AF 8969 coming from Algiers, in December 1994
  • Attacks of GIA in Algeria

Other names

  • Al-Jama' has Al-Islamiya Al-Mousallah, Armed Islamic Groupement, Islamic Groupes Armed
  • Attentat with Jamaa Islamiya in Louxor in 1997, 62 dead
  • Attentats of the September 11th, 2001 against the World Trade Center
  • Attentats in Madrid of March 11th, 2004
  • Attentats of July 23rd, 2005 at Charm el-Cheikh

Terrorism with denominational component

  • the attack of the street of the Rose trees in Paris in 1982

  • the series of attacks against the Last temptation of Christ, culminating with the fire of Space Saint Michel in 1988
  • the attack with the Gas Sarin in the Subway of Tōkyō by the Buddhist Sect Aum Shinrikyo in 1995
  • attacks in the subway Paris IEN in 1995 by the members of the Islamic Group armed (GIA)
  • the attack against the synagog with Jerba in Tunisia in 2002
  • Attack of Bali in October 2002, one counts a little more than 200 dead
  • Attentats in Casablanca of the May 16th 2003
  • the Attentats of July 7th, 2005 in London
  • Attentats of October 1st, 2005 in Bali, 26 dead

Separatist terrorism or of independence

Terrorist methods

See also: Attack, asymmetrical War

If terrorism is defined by its finality, it can be also characterized by procedures which are clean for him. Thus the objectives of an attack are above all to mark the spirits and not to offer a strategic advantage as at the time of military operations of a conventional Guerre.

Psychology of the terrorist

There exist several tracks which allowing to explain why a person is ready to adopt a clandestine existence, to face the concerned with safety units, to even give its life:
  • personal factors
  • social environment and cultural
  • handling
  • effects of group

See too

Related articles

Random links:Urbanya | Nemexia | Boston Stock Exchange | Score of Moye | Tafarsit