International Terrorism - Mid

Terrorism

1 . Compare and contrast several definitions of terrorism . Include definitions held to by government agencies as well as by scholars . Which definition do you find to be most accurate ? Why ? Also , by extension , why do you discount the definitions you find deficient

Different groups have different notions and ways of defining terrorism The U .S . Code defines terrorism as a "premeditated , politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents "Terrorism by Any Definition " 2002 ,

. A18 . The US Federal Bureau of Investigation on the

other hand regards terrorism as an unlawful use of force and violence to intimidate or coerce , the objects of which include governments , and civilian population (Ronczkowski 2004 . The U .S Department of State and the Department of Defense in the same regard define terrorism as violence that may be perpetrated with the intent of intimidating , included among the possible targets , the government

Scholarly definitions on the other hand have some discrepancies with the of terrorism given by government agencies . The one given by Laqueur (1987 ) considered terrorism as the illegitimate use of force to achieve political objectives (Lutz Lutz , 2004 ,

. 9 ) without necessarily the government as the target of violence . A collaboration of the works of Hoffman (1998 , Kushner (1998b , and Claridge (1996 which became bases of the definition of terrorism in the book Global Terrorism likewise share the same perspective

Terrorism involves political aims and motives . It is violent or threatens violence . It is designed to generate fear in a target audience that extends beyond the immediate victims of the violence . The violence is conducted by an identifiable organization . The violence involves a non-state actor or actors as either the perpetrator , the victim of the violence , or both . Finally , the acts of violence are designed to create power in situations in which power previously had been lacking (i .e . the violence attempts to enhance the power base of the organization undertaking the actions (Lutz Lutz , 2004 ,

. 10

Given the s by the government and scholars of terrorism which are alike in the concept of the use of force , violence and intimidation , the objects of acts of violence have different implications . The view of governments and states comprises the notion that terrorism is perpetrated by men who do not adhere to government rules . As such , separatists , revolutionaries and guerillas are often referred to as terrorists . Scholarly opinions however consider actors irregardless of political inclinations , who perpetrate fear and violence for a cause , as terrorists . As such , in the opinion of the government groups that cause violence and fear to achieve a political condition but are recognized and endorsed by the government or its officials are not terrorists . Scholarly definitions on the other hand may qualify these groups as terrorists when violence and intimidation became the tool to attaining their cause

From such comparison of the definition of terrorism by the government and scholars , the definition of the scholars can be considered more accurate and fair . Defining terrorism...