terrorism

what is political radicalism?

ideas/methods to produce rapid and dramatic change in the social or political order

how is terrorism different from gangsterism and guerilla warfare?

terrorism is fueled by an agenda whilst guerilla warfare + gangsterism is just a different type of army

what is collective responsibility?

terrorists claim that civilians who die in terrorist attacks pay the price because they are complicit in what they deem the “wrong” side

what are the five key strategies to terrorism?

intimidation, attrition, provocation, spoiling, and outbidding

what are the strategic goals of anarchism, radical socialism, extreme nationalism, and religious fundamentalism?

• anarchism seeks borderlessness

• radical socialism seeks to destroy capitalism

• extreme nationalism seeks a nation-state

• religious fundamentalism seeks to intertwine religion and the state

how can the goals of anarchism, radical socialism, extreme nationalism, religious fundamentalism be reached peacefully?

the groups can protest, petition, win elections, etc.

terrorism book definition

violence by nonstate actors to achieve radical political goals

domestic terrorism

pursues mostly domestic political goal, such as dismantling a government or changing state policy

intl terrorism

challenges intl stability by threatening a state or a region

extradition

removal of a person from one state to the state where they committed their crimes in order to face charges

what can happen when a government names a group a terrorist?

they can justify their illegal actions under the premise of counterterrorism (1972 olympics)

counterterrorism

long term policies and specific short term measures to prevent and combat intl + domestic terrorism

what concept is terrorism rooted in?

the assumption that it is almost impossible to defeat a state/intl organization in an open battle

networks

loose collectives of terrorists

coercion and extortion

use of force and threats of force to compel others to comply with demands

who was the first cyberterrorist convicted in the US?

Ferizi 2016

intimidation + attrition

shows strength and willingness to destroypro

provocation

they welcome government interventions/reactions to keep things unstable

spoiling

aim is to expose enemies weaknesses and inability to stop terrorismout

outbidding

helps demonstrate willingness to kill, intimidate, and appear undefeatable

anarchism

seeks to create a borderless, peaceful society of free communes in which people generate and distribute the wealth without government control

extreme nationalism

seeks to create a nation-state

radical socialism

seeks to destroy capitalism and liberal democracy in the name of social and economic equality

religious fundementalism

set of beliefs and behaviors based on strict adherence to a religion

caliphate

global muslim state

cyberwarfare

security that invovles deliberate targetting of cimputers and networks of sovereign states, IGOs, NGOs to achieve political goals

cyber weapon

variety of stats that cna disrupt or destroy computer netwrok operations

what are the four dimensions of cyberwarfare?

1. state-to-state conflict where state a targets state b’s networks

2. governments will hire companies/individuals to attack enemy computer systems

3. NGOs and private businesses will hire those same people

4. cyberattacks can be planned in advacne

denial of service (DOS) attacks

make an organization/network unavaliable to its users

cyberterrorism

use of the internet by terrorists to threaten or cause significant harm

when did IS first make the shift to global warfare?

US and Russia in the cold war

autonomous weapons

robots programmed to destroy and kill

artificial intelligence

a computer capable of performing tasks that usually require human cognition, emotion, and action

artificial intelligence warfare

use of AI systems and devices for military applications

what is public democracies role in combatting terrorism?

put preemptive policies in place

what is the main point of the criminalization of terrorism?

to allow states to install counterterrorism in whatever (illegal) way they deem fit

preemptive policies

actions taken against terrorists before they strike

realists on terrorism

• pro punitive military operations against states harboring terrorist groups

• argues symmetry exists in a stable world

• says failure to response to past attacks leaves room/will encourage more

criminalization of terrorism

considers terrorism a form of criminal behavior both domestically and internationally

liberalists on terrorism

• argues foreign occupation, chronic unemployment, injustice, and inefficiency contribute to radicalization

• says politics that gradually fix those issues would help stop terrorism

• believes government should not be able to limit the rights of its citizens in the name of counterterrorism

public diplomacy

achievement of political goals by engaging with local communities and elements of civil society

who does not like AIW?

marxists (amongst others) because AIW is very expensive and if only rich states have it, that leaves room for oppression and violence against poor states

why are people wary of AIW?

• humanitarian reasons- AIW does not have the emotions of humans and will kill without remorse

• strategic reasons- AIW would not only be used by govts, but terrorists

• geopolitical reasons- because of the required $ to have AIW, many states (poor) would not be able to have it, creating a large divide

what are the three pillar of terrorism?

1. we see a profound problem

2. we know who is responsible

3. violence is the answer

how do the three pillars of terrorism apply to the basque conflict?

1. the civilians felt their rights were violated

2. they deemed the Franco Regime responsible

3. groups rioted and were violent

we see a profound problem

terrorists generally believe some massive injustice is occuring

we know who is responsible

terrorists think their target is the sole thing responsible for the perceived injustice, no ifs ands or buts

violence is the answer

terrorists believe violence is the only way to bring attention to the injustice

constructivists on terrorism

• believe as perceptions change, so do politics

• says counterterrorism is the result of social construction and that its based on ideological beliefs

• claims not every case of injustice is terrorism

basque conflict

1930s Franco Regime eradicated Basque autonomy and choice, leaving the civillians to fill out the three pillars of

marxist/conflict theorists on terrorism

• argues terrorism is a kind of political struggle against oppressors

• some think terrorism is an inevitable consequence of the inequality in the world

what are common characteristics of the terrorist profile?

trick question, there are none

why dont terrorists turn to the political process if their goals are largely political?

because they believe violence is the only answer

if terrorism effective of political change?

no it is not effective of political change

what have been the three waves of terrorism?

1. 1800s anarchism

2. 1960s anticolonialism + nationalism

3. 1980s antiwestern sentiment

rehabilitation

process of assisting someone engaged in radical acts return to the community

“new” terrorism

intl terrorism post cold war (target more civilians, very global, smaller and less organized gorups)

individual level of terrorism

• no singular profile as to what a terrorist is (though it usually men)

• not all terrorist are “disturbed",” many think they are genuinely doing the right and good thing

• many terrorists are largely influenced by their environment/group pressure

state level of terrorism

• many argue that spending a lot of money on counterterrorism is counterproductive since thats what the terrorists want (a big reaction)

• many terrorists groups (esp in latin america + middle east) have turned to the political system

• says authoritarian reigmes are NOT more effective than democratic regimes in restraining terrorism

  • democracies to tend to be better at withstanding terrorism longer though

global level of terrorism

• typically states/givt refuse to negotiate w terrorists, unless their demands are specific and limited then thye fold

• terrorism leads to delay in solutions of intl conflicts and social problems

can we define terrorism?

no we can not define terrorism

should we try and define terrorism?

yes we shouldwhat

what are the implications of pursuing a comprehensive definition of terrorism?

we want to make it illegal

why is terrorism important to IR?

• we need to know what it is to make intl law

• we need to justify our policies

• we need to legitimize the military actions of counterterrorism

terrorism pre 9/11

each intl institution, federal agencym and state agency had a different definiton of terrorismpos

terrorism post 9/11

went from no definition to a universal definition coined by the FBI

what are the assumptions/rationale behind terrorism?

• its a method of last resort

• there is a collective responsibility on those deemed “wrong”

• terrorism is justified as an act of retaliation

“popular” groups

hamas, al qaeda, jemaah islamiyah, hezbollah, shinng path, jundallah