Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Terrorism describes a consistent use of terror in order to create a state of fear that often implies the use of violence and coercion. The United Nations in 1994 defined terrorism as the following:

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

However, the term has not reached a definitional consent among the international community because its attribution heavily depends on whose point of view is being addressed. In fact, almost all aspects of the word are subject to disputations: terrorism may be considered as a crime or a moral duty, an offensive or a defensive strategy, asymmetric warfare for small organizations or the enterprise of state actors.

One of the reasons that possibly explain the difficulty in providing an analytic definition of terrorism is that its meaning is also discussed differently in overlapping and competing arenas of public discourse. In the academic field, scholars attempt to find a useful operational definition of terrorism for their research; in the context of the state, statements about terrorism are expressed in the forms of laws, judicial rulings, and regulations; in the public discourse, mediated by means of communication, terrorism tends to be dramatized; finally, in the marginal discourse of groups supporting political violence, terrorism is framed as a necessity, a last recourse, or a desirable form of social action.

There are still common traits in the numerous existing definitions: Terrorism is about politics, violence, and fear. However, the three elements seem to always overlap each other because one of the main analytical difficulties consists of not only clearly distinguishing between the political and the criminal dimension of terrorism but also between politics and violence. Politics, understood as an open competition for the acquisition, maintenance, and expansion of state power, may comprise elements such as violence and coercion, allegedly characterizing terrorism. In fact, it could be argued that in contemporary societies both consent and coercion represent a conditio sine qua non for the emergence, establishment, and reproduction of political power. The concept “hegemony,” for example, comprises both aspects.

Political Aspects of Terrorism

Regardless of its unclear semantic boundaries, terrorism is certainly political in both form and content. Content-wise, terrorism, like war, frequently wants to accomplish political objectives. Not accidentally, many terrorist groups organize themselves as political parties in order to represent their political interests in institutional politics. Form-wise, terrorism is in itself eminently political because of the particular use of violence. First, terrorists very often adopt political violence in order to politically challenge the monopoly of violence constituted by the state. Furthermore, many terrorist organizations consider political violence as propaganda by the deed or armed propaganda, according to which violence becomes the most rhetorically eloquent political communication.

Political violence, as an inherent characteristic of terrorism, leads to another characteristic: terrorism is designed to produce terror, physical, and psychological fears. Fear is indeed another quality which can be defined as political. Terrorism becomes a fundamental element of the “politics of fear” of both terrorist and counterterrorist strategies. In fact, if violence is political in its challenge of the Weberian definition of the state, fear, as apprehension and a sense of the unsafe, is political in its challenge of the modern contractualist understanding of the state (that is, the state as a social pacification project emerging from a common agreement among its citizens) and the disruption of an economic system funded on the systematic calculations of risks. Thus, terrorism becomes a political tool to dispute the validity of modernity projects of pacification in societies: the state and the civil society.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading