POS 339

1. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Terrorism studies comprise the study of events, ideas, motivations, histories that result in terrorist violence. Martin text designed to be primary resource for university students and professionals. Terrorism: A Conceptual Review. Opening Viewpoint: The Ideology of Al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri ideology. Struggle is a clash of civilizations. Holy war is a religious duty and necessary for the salvation of one’s soul and the defense of the Muslim nation. Only two sides exist, no middle ground in an apocalyptic conflict between Islam and the forces of evil. Violence in a defensive war on behalf of Islam is the only course of action. There cannot be peace with the West. Just war, theological and legal restrictions on the use of force by Muslims do not apply.

2. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Because US and Western power is based on their economies large scale mass casualty attacks focusing on economic targets is a primary goal. Muslim governments that cooperate with the West and do not adopt strict Islamic law are apostasies and must be violently overthrown. Israel is an illegitimate nation and must be destroyed. Terrorism has been a dark feature of human behavior since the dawn of recorded history. Terrorism has always challenged the stability of societies and peace of mind of everyday people. Modern day terrorism age of instantaneous global communication has amplified the power of terrorism. Gray areas of terrorism. September 11th, 2001 a Dawn of a New Era of Terrorism. Terrorism using asymmetrical methods.

3. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Extremism and Terrorism. Extremism is a quality that is “radical in opinion, especially in political matters; ultra; advanced.” Intolerance toward opposing interests and divergent opinions and the primary motivation for terrorist behavior. Extremism is both the content of one’s beliefs and the styl in which one expresses those beliefs. Terrorism – “instinctive understanding.” Politically motivated violence. Usually directed against soft targets (e.g. civilian and administrative government targets). With an intention to affect (terrorize) a target audience. History of terrorist behavior extends into antiquity and common themes and concepts that span the ages. State terrorism and dissident terrorism and other types of political violence are found in all periods of human civilization.

4. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Following concepts hold true regardless of contexts of history, culture, or religion. Those who practice revolutionary violence and state repression always claim to champion noble causes and values. Policies that advocate extreme violence always cite righteous goals to justify their behavior – such as the need to defend a religious faith or defend the human rights of a people. Perpetrators of violent acts uniformly maintain that they are freedom fighters (in the case of revolutionaries) or the champions of law and social order (in the case of governments). Underlying Causes of Terrorism. Political violence, including terrorism, has systemic origins that can be ameliorated. Social and economic pressures, frustrated political aspirations, personal experience of terrorist all contribute to the terrorist reservoir. Terrorism is a group phenomena, roots in intergroup conflict, insurgent terrorism (unlike state terrorism) is a weapon of the weak.

5. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Mala prohibita, crimes made illegal by legislation. Mala in Se, crimes that are immoral or wrong in and of themselves. Just war doctrine. Jus in bello – correct behavior while waging war. Jus ad bellum – having correct conditions for waging war in the first place. From a terrorist and counterterrorist perspective above issues are relevant for analyzing actions o both states and dissidents. Moral checklist for evaluating the war on terrorism. Is it justified to attack states and overturn regimes to get at terrorists? Can the United States legitimately target figures such as Mullah Mohammad Omar? What are US obligations to limit civilian casualties? What type of force should be used? When should US forces take prisoners rather than killing Afghans? Is there a plan for peace?

6. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Recent attacks in the United States: Symbolism and Aftermath. Symbolism is a central feature of terrorism. Terrorists very mindful of their image and skillfully construct public image and propaganda campaigns to package themselves. Oklahoma City Bombing and attacks of 9/11 demonstrate the importance of symbolism in the worldview of terrorism. Oklahoma City Bombing symbolic act of terrorism against the federal state, with careful consideration to the high casualty rate. Symbolism and ferocity of the attacks of 9/11 shifted US polity from openness to security. Shifted counterterrorism from law enforcement mode to a security mode. Response to 9/11 Reorganization of Homeland Security and Intelligence in the United States. Law Enforcement Agencies. Services Agencies.

7. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Pre-9/11US security apparatus fragmented into competing fiefdoms that did not share or coordinate intelligence. Problems in homeland security community. Longstanding interagency rivalries. Entrenched and cumbersome bureaucratic cultures and procedures. No central coordination of homeland security programs. Fragmentation of counterterrorist operations. Poor coordination of counterterrorist intelligence collection and analysis. Disconnect between field offices and Washington headquarters. “Turf” based conflict between FBI and CIA. Department of Homeland Security created. National Counterterrorism Center. Martin Chapter Perspective 1.1. War on terrorism unconventional war against shadowy terrorist cells and elusive leaders.

8. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Martin Chapter Perspective 1.1 continued. Not a war against a nation but rather against ideas and behavior. Coordination of law enforcement, intelligence, and military assets in many nation across the globe. War not fully fought in the shadows US invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq overt use of force. Definition of victory in “war on terror” difficult to define. Martin suggests the best way to assess progress in war on terror is to focus on management rather than elimination of terrorism. Terrorism and Criminal Skills: Three Cases in Point. Case 1: Richard Baumhammers, neo-Nazi who went on a killing spree – low degree of criminal sophistication. Case 2: Theodore Kaczynski, bomber of corporations and universities, medium degree of criminal sophistication. Case 3: Ramzi Yousef, master of sophisticated terrorist attack, high degree of criminal sophistication.

9. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Historical Perspectives on Terrorism. Ancient world cases and stories of state repression and political violence were common. Tyrannicide. The Roman Age. Empire built on state terrorism – use of crucifixion. Regicide. Ancient and Medieval Middle East. Scarii and Zealots who resisted Roman occupation of Palestine. The French Revolution. Word terrorism coined in its modern context, Reign of Terror in France led by the radical Jacobin-dominated government – state terrorism. Nineteenth Century Europe. Luddites – anti-industrial. People’s Will (Narodnaya Volya) – anti Czarist.

10. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Modern Era and the War on Terrorism. New terrorism characterized by: Loose cell based networks. Desired acquisition of high-intensity weapons and weapons of mass destruction. Politically vague, religious, or mystical motivations. “Asymmetrical” methods that maximize casualties. Skillful use of the Internet and manipulation of the media. Contrasted with “traditional terrorism”: Clearly identifiable organizations or movements. Use of conventional weapons usually small arms and explosives. Explicit grievances championing specific classes or ethnonational groups. Relatively “surgical” selection of targets.

11. POS 339/439 Political Violence and Terrorism Discussion Box Questions p. 30 and 31. Are deliberate attacks against civilians legitimate acts of war? Were deliberate attacks on civilians during World War Two acts of terrorism? If these were acts of terrorism , were some attacks justifiable acts of terrorism? Is there such a thing a justifiable terrorism? Is terrorism malum in se or malum prohibitum? Is the practice of total war by individuals or small and poorly armed groups different from its practice by nations and standing armies? How so or how not?