Recently in Afganistan US forces uncovered "terrorist" munitions in a school. In the operation to subdue the "insurgency" and "militants" as they were referred to in the article, the army was able to hit multiple targets that provided these groups with strategic positions against US armed forces. The obvious problem I find with the coverage is the semantics. These groups are in my opinion insurgents, or guerilla fighters because they are not targeting non-combatants. Calling this discovery "terrorist munitions" doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Furthermore, generally speaking, terrorists would most likely not use conventional munitions or conventional strategies of engagement. Terrorists inflict more damage and are more successful when their targets and methods remain under the radar, example being using box-cutters to hijack planes or car bombs in market places. I am of the belief that the "War on Terror" is a misnomer given that much of the US resources to fight terrorism are being used to combat insurgency and guerilla efforts that are against US national interest. The name needs to be changed to something more grandiose like the "War on any non-state with an anti-american interest" rather than just "War on Terror."
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=48637
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Acceptable Targets
The fourth question we are to answer in defining what constitutes terrorism is what types of targets are acceptable. Moreover, we are to decide how much action is required to be considered a terrorist act. We all know that terrorist groups successfully use the internet as a recruiting tool, but an
article I read recently includes cyber attacks as a form of terrorism. These cyber attacks can severely damage a country's economy and infrastructure. In our technology-driven age I believe this is an important distinction to make in defining terrorism. Although I do not know of any today, in the future there may be organizations, with specific political motivations, that only use "cyber attacks" to attain desired interests. Are these to be considered terrorist or criminal acts?
article I read recently includes cyber attacks as a form of terrorism. These cyber attacks can severely damage a country's economy and infrastructure. In our technology-driven age I believe this is an important distinction to make in defining terrorism. Although I do not know of any today, in the future there may be organizations, with specific political motivations, that only use "cyber attacks" to attain desired interests. Are these to be considered terrorist or criminal acts?
Sri Lanka Ceasefire
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10443184
Here's an interesting article from The Economist about the Tamil Tigers and the official end of the ceasefire in Sri Lanka. In class we've been talking about the requirement of political motivation in some definitions of terrorism (Hoffman and Pillar). The Tamil Tigers fit that requirement; the article addresses their desire for an autonomous section of Sri Lanka (the Tamils are a minority). This article also discusses the breach of the ceasefire agreement by both the state and the Tigers. The government has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands in Sri Lanka, which sparks the question of whether state actions can be considered terrorism. It seems like a state could engage in terrorism when it violates the ceasefire agreement, just like the "terrorist" group...but I agree with Pillar that if a state is openly involved in terrorist acts, then those are acts of war and not terrorism.
Here's an interesting article from The Economist about the Tamil Tigers and the official end of the ceasefire in Sri Lanka. In class we've been talking about the requirement of political motivation in some definitions of terrorism (Hoffman and Pillar). The Tamil Tigers fit that requirement; the article addresses their desire for an autonomous section of Sri Lanka (the Tamils are a minority). This article also discusses the breach of the ceasefire agreement by both the state and the Tigers. The government has killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands in Sri Lanka, which sparks the question of whether state actions can be considered terrorism. It seems like a state could engage in terrorism when it violates the ceasefire agreement, just like the "terrorist" group...but I agree with Pillar that if a state is openly involved in terrorist acts, then those are acts of war and not terrorism.
Friday, January 11, 2008
"terrorism" term missaplied
We've discussed in class how the term "terrorism" is often misapplied. I found a very interesting article about a recent occurrence in Detroit. You can find the article here.
I am wondering why he was charged with terrorism. As we read in Inside Terrorism, the FBI defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (Inside Terrorism pg 31). This guy walked into the ER with a hand grenade. How is that terrorism? The article doesn't mention anything about him try to coerce the government, intimidate the civilian population, or anything with a political or social goal. Does he belong to a subnational group?
Certainly he should be locked up, but did he really commit an act of terrorism? I guess it depends on how to prosecution twists the definition of the word, but they'll have a hard time proving that one.
I am wondering why he was charged with terrorism. As we read in Inside Terrorism, the FBI defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (Inside Terrorism pg 31). This guy walked into the ER with a hand grenade. How is that terrorism? The article doesn't mention anything about him try to coerce the government, intimidate the civilian population, or anything with a political or social goal. Does he belong to a subnational group?
Certainly he should be locked up, but did he really commit an act of terrorism? I guess it depends on how to prosecution twists the definition of the word, but they'll have a hard time proving that one.
Tamil Tigers =
This is a very interesting group- I served my mission in Sri Lanka, and have a number of first hand reports from people there that reported the attacks made against civilians by the Tigers. During the civil war they would attack mainly military targets, but once they were forced back they would attack civilian targets with bombs and other instruments to spread terror in the southern parts. Because of this, though they have elements of being a guerilla group, it would seem to me that they are better classified as a terrorist organization. The US State Department also has them listed as a terrorist organization. as well as a number of other countries. Although I believe them to be a terrorist organization, they do pose an interesting facet to defining the issue.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
More action in Pakistan....
I am amazed at the frequency of attacks which occur throughout the Middle East and elsewhere. In response to the recent bombing in Pakistan Deputy Spokesman for the Department of State, Tom Casey was quick (see the State Department website--http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2008/jan/99118.htm) to mark this particular incident as an act of terrorism reinforcing the idea that while terrorism is difficult to define we know it when we see it. An article regarding the bombing can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/world/asia/11pakistan.html?ref=world
Interestingly enough, very little was said regarding this during "act of terrorism" during the press briefing as it immediately moved on to another subject. Much more was said referring to Kenya and the conflict which started after the questioned election results and continues to unfold there. Apparently we've gotten to the point that terrorism is expected and, while tragic, inevitable. I personally don't want to live in such a world and do not consider terrorist attacks/ suicide bombings as unstoppable (however, there is no doubt that it is very difficult to stop)--Most of this is probably because I am an optimist. Of course the US State Department doesn't consider terrorism unpreventable, but there is clearly no surprise at the occurence, nor at the repeated suicide bombings in Pakistan and Iraq (insurgency or terrorism--you decide). You might think that such a method of attack would lead to a shortage of terrorists, but they keep coming.
Paul R. Pillar as a Source
On the back of the TUFP book it gives a brief bio about the author Paul R. Pillar. It states that he was the assistant to Director of Central Itelligence to William Webster. I find this very interesting because Webster was at one point the director of the FBI and then later on made the director of the CIA. In a book I am reading called Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11 the author says that when Webster became the head of the CIA he brought a lot of his colleagues from the FBI to take authoritative positions. One comment about the former FBI director taking over was that that the "CIA would rather be run by a Cub Scout den mother than the former head of the FBI." My question is this, did Paul Pillar start out in the FBI and transfer over to the CIA with Webster, what were Pillar's thought about having Webster in charge of the CIA?
Why Define Terrorism?
I was intrigued by Professor Payne's question of the why it is important to define terrorism. I have come to the simple conclusion that the world has made this critical in today's world because it tends to focus heavily on terrorism. It is nearly impossible to turn on the news or pick up a newspaper without seeing some mention of terrorism. The world has made terrorism an important issue and therefore the definition of terrorism is even more critical. By defining terrorism we are able to better understand the acts of terror going on through the world. However, when defining terrorism it is important for us to remember that there will always be multiple definitions, the definition of terrorism will never be universal. However, that does not make defining the term any less important.
Locality of Terrorism
Due to the de-centralized nature of terrorism i.e. the fact that most do not have a physical piece of land it might make it hard to answer the question where does terrorism come from. I think most would say that the Middle East or Asia seems to have a lot terrorists groups based out of this part of the world. Because I am a Latin American Studies major I try to take a spin from the Latin American side of things. When I was thinking about I couldn’t really think of any terrorist organizations or major terrorist attacks that have occur din that region of the world. But the FPRI site has reports grouped by region and I was surprised to find that one of the largest mentions of terrorism in Latin America was that of Drug Cartels. As we are discussing how to define terrorism it is interesting to include this thought as well: Can terrorism be financially motivated as well as political and whatever other reason?
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
News Website
And, another good website to check out is drudgereport.com--it's got a bunch of different news venues. Of course, everyone that took PLSC 200 has probably already heard of it, but it's still a good site.
FPRI website
The Foreign Policy Research Institute's website has a bunch of articles on terrorism. Some of them are really interesting. Here's the link:
http://www.fpri.org/bysubject.html#terrorpre911
What is a movement?
Our class discussion today left me thinking about the relationship or movements and individuals in definitions of terrorism. Discussing Hoffman today, we concluded that the individual needed to be involved in a movement in order to be defined as a terrorist. We also read from Hoffman who said that Sirhan Sirhan was not a terrorist because he was not linked to a movement. What then is a movement?
It appears to me that the movement as discussed in this definition must be organized. It does not seem to matter whether or not the individual is part of any organization seeking to forward the movement, as long as he has participated in the movement to an extent prior to the action that is classified as terrorism. An organized movement then is required for an act to be defined as terrorism. Again this led me to a question: What level of organization is needed and to what extent must one participate in the movement? I concluded that an ideology supported by an organization like Hamm as is obviously representative of an organized movement. I also concluded that the ideological movement that motivated Ted Kaczynski is definitely not an organized movement. The difference between the two movements is the development of institutions of some size with the express desire to forward the ideology. This definition also pushes me towards my previous question: to what extent must one participate in the movement to be a terrorist? Sirhan Sirhan was opposed to Israeli occupation of Palistine territories, a similar ideology to Hamm as, but is he not a terrorist because he didn't take physical part in the movement?
Sirhan Sirhan is as much a terrorist to me as any Hamm as member. He may not have been part of an organization, but he was a supporter of an organized movement. If he had even attended one meeting of such an organization, there would be little belief that he was not a terrorist. I do not see belonging to an organization in an organized movement as a prerequisite to being a terrorist. If you have a similar ideology and employ similar tactics to advance the similar ideology as part of an organized movement, then you qualify, at least on this one part of the debate, as a terrorist. I am not arguing that being part of an organized movement is a sufficient condition or a necessary condition, but I am arguing that Sirhan Sirhan was a terrorist contrary to the reading discussed today. I do not believe that you must be a member of an organization to be a terrorist, and that influence without direct contact is enough.
It appears to me that the movement as discussed in this definition must be organized. It does not seem to matter whether or not the individual is part of any organization seeking to forward the movement, as long as he has participated in the movement to an extent prior to the action that is classified as terrorism. An organized movement then is required for an act to be defined as terrorism. Again this led me to a question: What level of organization is needed and to what extent must one participate in the movement? I concluded that an ideology supported by an organization like Hamm as is obviously representative of an organized movement. I also concluded that the ideological movement that motivated Ted Kaczynski is definitely not an organized movement. The difference between the two movements is the development of institutions of some size with the express desire to forward the ideology. This definition also pushes me towards my previous question: to what extent must one participate in the movement to be a terrorist? Sirhan Sirhan was opposed to Israeli occupation of Palistine territories, a similar ideology to Hamm as, but is he not a terrorist because he didn't take physical part in the movement?
Sirhan Sirhan is as much a terrorist to me as any Hamm as member. He may not have been part of an organization, but he was a supporter of an organized movement. If he had even attended one meeting of such an organization, there would be little belief that he was not a terrorist. I do not see belonging to an organization in an organized movement as a prerequisite to being a terrorist. If you have a similar ideology and employ similar tactics to advance the similar ideology as part of an organized movement, then you qualify, at least on this one part of the debate, as a terrorist. I am not arguing that being part of an organized movement is a sufficient condition or a necessary condition, but I am arguing that Sirhan Sirhan was a terrorist contrary to the reading discussed today. I do not believe that you must be a member of an organization to be a terrorist, and that influence without direct contact is enough.
Tamil Tigers
Are the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka a terrorist group, guerrilla fighters, or insurgents? I have always thought they were terrorists, but after reading an article found on Reuters at http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSCOL560, I am less convinced. The author of the article stated that Sri Lankan troops have recently captured a portion of rebel-held territory in Sri Lanka and killed over 30 Tigers in open military confrontations. According to the article, the Tamil Tigers want to create an independent state in north and east Sri Lanka. Because the Tigers are fighting for territory in Sri Lanka in organized military units, wouldn't they be considered guerrilla fighters? Do the Tigers use a lot of propaganda, and if so, would they be considered insurgents? I don't know that much about the Tamil Tigers, so comments about their organization would be interesting. Any ideas?
some humor to start class off...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1uwOL4rB-go
Not sure if the blog will let us embed or not, but here is the link as well. It was only a matter of time for a comedian to incorporate the idea of a dead terrorist into his act he makes some interesting comments about the motives of the terrorist through his satiracle approach, anyhow I figure it would be fun to start with a joke before we get too serious, hope you all enjoy :)
~Shane
Not sure if the blog will let us embed or not, but here is the link as well. It was only a matter of time for a comedian to incorporate the idea of a dead terrorist into his act he makes some interesting comments about the motives of the terrorist through his satiracle approach, anyhow I figure it would be fun to start with a joke before we get too serious, hope you all enjoy :)
~Shane
Al-Qaeda spokesman interviewed
Note: this is not an official weekly post and should not be graded.
-Jon
-Jon
Class blog assignment
Ten percent of your final grade in the course will be determined by your contributions to a class weblog on international terrorism and counter-terrorism. The weblog is hosted by Blogger, located at: http://byu379r3w08.blogspot.com. All students should have received an email invitation to join this blog as an author– please notify the instructor if this is not the case.
Students may wish to post anonymously, and this desire is understandable. In order to protect your privacy from the general public, you may use a pseudonym for your contributions. However, your pseudonym must be known to the instructor and to the other members of the class. For the sake of simplicity and relative transparency, please consider using your first name and the initial of your last name as a quick and easy blog handle.
Each week, students will be judged on their participation. At the end of the semester, students will be graded based on their best ten weeks’ contributions. Students may contribute to the class blog in two basic ways: by posting, or by commenting. For any given week, a good contribution to the blog would be one good post, or two good comments.
Blog posts will generally consist of a link to one or more news stories concerning international terrorism or counter-terrorism, with some remarks. Explain why this story interests you. Does it raise a question which you had not considered before? Does it answer a question previously raised by the instructor, or one of the students in class? Does this story illustrate a principle discussed in class or in the required readings? Is this a new threat, or an aspect of the terrorism problem that you had not considered before? What in this story do you find to be new, enlightening, or problematic? A good blog post does not need to be long– one or two paragraphs will often suffice– but some students will find that they enjoy the chance to write longer essays.
Comments likewise do not need to be lengthy, but they should contain some new insight or idea. Simply agreeing that the link is interesting is not sufficient, although it is a good beginning. Ideally, the class blog should be a place for students to have conversations about the ideas presented in the course, outside of our regular class room. A good comment is a part of this conversation.
Remember always that the same standards of decorum for the classroom should guide your behavior in blog posts, and especially in blog comments. Be responsible. Do not give in to the temptation to be rude, offensive, or abrasive. Students who abuse this forum will find that their grade will suffer.
Lastly, some students may wish to help improve the look and design of the blog. Perhaps you have an original artistic contribution, or would like to nominate a website for a place on our list of permanent links. Feel free to post about your ideas, although the instructor will have the final say. This is an option available to all, but mandatory for none. Art and design contributions will also get students credit, but should be a minor portion of your efforts for this assignment.
Good luck, and remember that this is in some ways an experiment. If you are experiencing a problem with this assignment, please notify the instructor as soon as possible so that corrections can be made.
Students may wish to post anonymously, and this desire is understandable. In order to protect your privacy from the general public, you may use a pseudonym for your contributions. However, your pseudonym must be known to the instructor and to the other members of the class. For the sake of simplicity and relative transparency, please consider using your first name and the initial of your last name as a quick and easy blog handle.
Each week, students will be judged on their participation. At the end of the semester, students will be graded based on their best ten weeks’ contributions. Students may contribute to the class blog in two basic ways: by posting, or by commenting. For any given week, a good contribution to the blog would be one good post, or two good comments.
Blog posts will generally consist of a link to one or more news stories concerning international terrorism or counter-terrorism, with some remarks. Explain why this story interests you. Does it raise a question which you had not considered before? Does it answer a question previously raised by the instructor, or one of the students in class? Does this story illustrate a principle discussed in class or in the required readings? Is this a new threat, or an aspect of the terrorism problem that you had not considered before? What in this story do you find to be new, enlightening, or problematic? A good blog post does not need to be long– one or two paragraphs will often suffice– but some students will find that they enjoy the chance to write longer essays.
Comments likewise do not need to be lengthy, but they should contain some new insight or idea. Simply agreeing that the link is interesting is not sufficient, although it is a good beginning. Ideally, the class blog should be a place for students to have conversations about the ideas presented in the course, outside of our regular class room. A good comment is a part of this conversation.
Remember always that the same standards of decorum for the classroom should guide your behavior in blog posts, and especially in blog comments. Be responsible. Do not give in to the temptation to be rude, offensive, or abrasive. Students who abuse this forum will find that their grade will suffer.
Lastly, some students may wish to help improve the look and design of the blog. Perhaps you have an original artistic contribution, or would like to nominate a website for a place on our list of permanent links. Feel free to post about your ideas, although the instructor will have the final say. This is an option available to all, but mandatory for none. Art and design contributions will also get students credit, but should be a minor portion of your efforts for this assignment.
Good luck, and remember that this is in some ways an experiment. If you are experiencing a problem with this assignment, please notify the instructor as soon as possible so that corrections can be made.
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Inaugural
This is the blog for the 2008 winter semester 379R class on international terrorism and counter-terrorism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)