"Terrorism" is surrounded by terminological confusion in criminology because there is no clear definition of the term. Terrorism lacks a universal coherent definition and is frequently used in propagandist terms. A large part of the definitional problems of the term are the large range of competing definitions. Criminologists argue that without a clear definition, terminological confusion that exists could effect how to properly respond to terrorism. The definitional problems that exists are the wide range of competing definitions, literal inappropriateness of the term itself, definition by identity of the target and act, definition through reference to the identity of the perpetrator, and the problem of related phenomena to acts of terrorism (English, 2009).
Some criminologists argue that terrorism is a political act committed by a member of a foreign culture for religious or political causes.This notion completely discounts any acts of terrorism committed by "home-grown" terrorists. A perfect example of this would be the bombing in Oklahoma City. The bomber, Timothy McVeigh, was a U.S. citizen who served in the U.S. Army who detonated a truck bomb seeking revenge for the government's actions in the Waco Siege. McVeigh was a militia movement sympathizer and committed an act of terrorism without being a member of a foreign terrorist organization or a foreign culture.
The best literary definition I have seen for terrorism can be attributed to Robert English. It should be noted that Dr. English is a professor of politics, and not criminology. English (2009) states that terrorism involves:
"heterogeneous violence used or threatened with a political aim; it can involve a variety of acts, of targets, and of actors; it possesses an important psychological dimension, producing terror fear among a directly threatened group and also a wider implied audience in the hope of maximizing political communication and achievement; it embodies the exerting and implementing of power, and the attempted redressing of power relations; it represents a subspecies of warfare, and as such it can form part of a wider campaign of violent and non-violent attempts at political leverage".
While no definition of terrorism will ever be perfect, Dr. English has demonstrated that his definition establishes a strong foundation to properly respond to terrorism. Since in order to respond to terrorism, we must be actually able to define it universally.
English, R. (2009) Terrorism: How to Respond. Oxford, New York. Oxford University Press.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment