Sun Tzu famously wrote that “If you do not know others and do not know yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.” If we want to fight terrorism, we must understand both state and terrorist; to this end, we should examine how and why terrorism is linked to the state.
This essay will discuss Dershowitz’s arguments as to why the so-called ‘ticking bomb terrorist’ should be tortured, and seek to counter them, concluding that it is too dangerous to legalise the use of torture, even in extreme circumstances.
Following the watershed attacks of 9/11, governments have found themselves confronted, not only with a need to implement protective policies against attacks, but also respond to the, often inflated and media-propelled, collective will and fear of the population. In formulating an effective counter-terrorist strategy, the construction of a universal definition of terrorism is needed. The subjectivity of the term, however, ensures that this is, by no means, an easy undertaking.
American aversion to counterinsurgency is deeply ingrained in the American way of warfare. Since the 1940s the US Army has trained, equipped, and organised for large-scale conventional operations against like adversaries. They have traditionally employed conventional military operations even against irregular enemies. I hope to show that America’s conventional supremacy and in particular their approach to war may prove to be counterproductive in this new century of small wars.
The conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Basque Country have attracted a great deal of research on the macro-political, economic, social and conflict management parameters but there has been little research on the evolution and changing nature of ethno politics in regards to the radical ethno nationalist parties; namely Sinn Fein and Herri Batasuna
The policies of the Bush Administration and the conduct of the United States and its allies in counteracting the threat of terrorism have received a wealth of criticism, much of which has been aired publicly. This essay focuses on a critique that does not see much light beyond academic literature: the successful construction of a terrorist threat which has legitimised a war in its name.
Following the September 2001 attack on America’s ‘World Trade Centre’, the ‘causes of terrorism’ has been a subject of intense investigation and speculation. Despite the educated and generally wealthy backgrounds of the 9/11 hijackers, poverty has been cited by numerous world leaders and respected academics as a central and direct cause of terrorism in the twenty first century. However, recent studies have suggested that there is little or no direct causal link between poverty and insurgent terrorism.
This essay will critically examine research trends in terrorism studies from 2000-2007[4] by systematically evaluating the articles that appear in the two foremost journals in the field, Terrorism and Political Violence (TPV) and Studies in Conflict and Terrorism (SICAT). In doing so, it will attempt to update Schmid and Jongman’s Political Terrorism, last revised in 1988, and Silke’s ‘The Road Less Travelled,’ which surveyed terrorism research from 1990-1999.
“Never despise your enemy, whoever he is. Try to find out about his weapons and means, how he uses them and fights. Research into his strengths and weaknesses” asserted Field Marshal Prince Alexander V. Suvorov in 1789. In executing the most spectacular terrorist attacks in history in September 11th 2001 this is certainly what al-Qaeda did. To respond, the United States military must recognise the unconventional nature of its new opponent and greatly broaden its conception of threats and the means to counter them.
“The terrorist attacks of the September 11th 2001” have, as Len Scott and Peter Jackson assert, “brought intelligence issues to the forefront of both official and popular discourse on security and international affairs.”[1] Not since the Japanese strike on Pearl Harbour in 1941 has an ‘intelligence failure’ had such ramifications on the United States intelligence agencies, and upon the global intelligence community. The aftermath of the terrorist atrocities visited upon the United States in 2001 has led to numerous commissions and reviews regarding the organisation and conduct of the US intelligence agencies, and the manner in which data is managed and disseminated.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
