Defining Terrorism: Part Two

At the beginning of the semester I thought that the United States State Department definition of terrorism was the best to describe what constituted terrorism. However, now after seeing many different cases that could be considered terrorism. the State Department definition no longer is the most accurate definition. The key elements to terrorism are obvious to many — violence, noncombatant targets, intention of spreading fear, and political aims. The problem with the United States State Department definition of terrorism is that it holds that only sub-national groups, not states themselves, can commit acts of terrorism. The State Department definition does not account for all scopes of terrorism. The State Department definition states the violence must be politically motivated, but does not mention instilling or spreading fear.  Terrorism can be defined as an edited version of the State Department Definition. Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. This definition of terrorism is exhibited by the cases of the Holocaust, the FARC, and even pirates.

One of the distinctive features of the Nazi state was its use of institutionalized violence . It's highly organized and well planned system of terrorizing the population culminated in the creation of the concentration camp . The first camp, Dachau, was established as early as March 1933. The camps were used to suppress the regime's political opponents and later to coerce various segments of society whose behavior did not conform to Nazi values. The camps also became a tool for the exploitation of the inmates by means of forced labor, as well as for the implementation of the Nazi racial policy, especially for its antisemitic policies. The Holocaust demonstrates all the characteristics of terrorism previously defined. The death of Jews showed the immense violence of the Nazi's against a population, while the political motivation was to further Adolf Hitler's power and agenda. Specifically, the Holocaust shows the "coercion" of civilian population by using the Jewish civilians in labor camps to progress the work of the Nazi's and doing so out of the fear of execution.

The range of where the terror is being applied to is not relevant in deciding terrorism however. The Holocaust was a horrific spout of terrorism that .... But an example of a smaller scale of terrorism which still brought about a violent outcome is The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The FARC has been responsible for horrific acts of violence throughout its five decades of existence. Operating mostly in the rural corners of the country, FARC guerrillas have long terrorized citizens with murders, kidnappings and the constant threat of extortion. In 2002, the FARC kidnapped presidential candidate Íngrid Betancourt, holding her hostage until she was rescued, along with three U.S. military contractors, during a raid in 2008. The FARC goes out of their way to endanger not only government officials, but also the general public. To protect their positions as well as their interests they reverted to setting up landmines and other explosive devices often placed in remote villages. While to some these maneuvers seem like only a tactical move, to the villagers and those that have to live in the same region of the FARC the landmines are a constant terror to their every day life. The FARC intentionally employs violence to get what they want politically, even if it means endangering the civilians that live around them.

These problems of politically motivated violence have led some social scientists to adopt a State Department view based not on criminality, but on the fact that the victims of terrorist violence are most often innocent civilians. Perpetrators of terrorism always claim to have noble causes and values, advocate that their goals are righteous and that are working as a freedom fighter, to justify their actions.

An even smaller scale demonstration of terrorism is from the Golden Age of piracy. Piracy wreaked havoc on the open seas during the late sixteen hundreds by a rogue group of civilians who did not want to be under British Rule anymore. The pirates might be seen as a rebellion who were choosing to live a free life out at sea but their actions of plundering and killing make them a terrorist group to civilization. The actions of the pirates were not political however, making their actions against the State Department definition of terrorism. Pirates fought and plundered for the desire of getting economic gain and the dream of a better life out from under rule of a government. The State Department again fails to justify violence against a population of people just because of a simple misconception of motive.

Another grey area from my first post this semester was who commits these horrendous acts against society? Depending on the definition of terrorism, the answer may change. The State Department’s working definition of terror singles out violence committed by relatively well-connected groups and directed against politically significant targets of other nationalities, especially of American nationality. Abiding to the US state department definition, non-state actors are the main perpetrators of terrorism. Non-state actors are individuals and groups that hold influence and which are independent of state governments in some regard. However, I now do not think that the field can be narrowed to non-state actors or state actors. By making a distinction on what actors commit terrorism, we alienate a whole faction of terrorists that may not only fit this one aspect of the definition.

The US State Department definition of terrorism is no longer the most effective way to look at terrorism because it holds that the violence must be politically motivated, but does not mention instilling or spreading fear.  There is the moral dilemma of situations that calls into question if an act is deemed justified, is it still terrorism even though its intentions were justified? By not defining every aspect, the country is able to have wiggle room in investigating possible terrorist connections and incidents that might otherwise slip by on a technicality in the definition of what terrorism is. The definition by the US State Department fails to cover all the facets of terrorism. The definition of terrorism by the US State Department definition can only be valid with modifications.

Bibliography

Bobbitt, P. (2008). Terror And Consent. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Momayezi, N., & Momayezi, M. L. (2017). Suicide Terrorism: Motivations beyond Religion. The Journal of Public and Professional Sociology, 1-18.

Rapaport, D. C. (2002). The Four Waves of Modern Terrorism. Anthropoetics, 1-19.

Sinai, J. (2008). How to Define Terrorism. Perspectives on Terrorism, 1-2.

Stampnitzky, L. (2013). Disciplining Terror. Cambridge University Press.

“The Reign of Terror.” The Reign of Terror : Terrorism - Oi, oxfordindex.oup.com/view/10.1093/actrade/9780199603947.003.0003.

United States Department of State. (2003). Patterns of Global Terrorism. Washington, DC: Office of the Secretary of State, Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism.

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. (n.d.). Retrieved May 1, 2018, from https://www.ushmm.org/learn/introduction-to-the-holocaust/ethical-leaders/background/causes-and-motivations

Thomas Drake’s Fight Against the War on Terror

Lauren Journet

Professor Shirk

Global Politics of Terrorism

25 April 2018

Thomas Drake’s Fight Against the War on Terror

On the topic of data surveillance, both domestically and internationally, it is unclear whether or not the methods are justified and effective. If the surveillance works to protect other people, the argument for justification and effectiveness is far more persuasive. But this is only justified if the rights of the people are not infringed upon, particularly those people on American soil. Thomas Drake began his time with the National Security Agency in 1989 as a software evaluator for contracting. It took until the year 2001 for Drake to be hired as a full-time employee of the NSA. His first day on the job was the morning of the September 11th attacks. His time with the NSA brought on a battle with the War on terror, specifically methods of data surveillance.

He was initially brought on the force with the job of keeping the NSA relevant, creating alterations across the board and was in the process of building a change leadership team. Soon after the attacks, the NSA asked all employees for any and all information they had. Nothing was insignificant and everything was analyzed as they persisted terminating the threat. Drake was tasked with finding the answers to the threat at large and making sense of the piles of data from the surveillance following the 9/11 attacks. He was told that the NSA had rejected a computation and analysis software called Thin Thread about one month before the attacks on September llth, prompting Drake to renew his connections to the system. With a two-page implementation plan drawn up, Drake recommended placing the Thin Thread software in the top 18 terrorist websites. Meanwhile, Drake found out that the NSA was using unclassified and unwarranted surveillance methods. In doing so, they were going against their oath of office.

The oath for the National Security Agency can be found online and reads as follows:

“I will support and defend…

the Constitution of the United States…

against all enemies foreign and domestic

that I take this obligation freely…

without any mental reservation…

or purpose of evasion…”

The primary statement from the above excerpt pledges that members of the NSA will keep the country safe from all enemies foreign and domestic. By using the software that breached the security and privacy of civilians, the NSA became a domestic enemy of sorts. The following statement pledges that members of the NSA are under oath with accordance of their will and do not have any intentions of going against their words and taking advantage of their privilege in serving the country. However, they knowingly and intentionally invaded the privacy of countless American citizens. Thomas Drake was doing exactly what the NSA was not in terms of their oath. He was supporting and defending the Constitution from domestic enemies while under oath without the purpose of evasion.

It should be noted that Drake acted in accordance with the legal protection laws for whistleblowers at the time. He worked alongside the legal protocols for employees of the government, as there protections for employees that detect any questionable activities. Working based off of what the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, Thomas Drake primarily listed a complaint to internal authorities. This included his bosses, Inspector Generals, and the House and Senate intelligence committees. Legally, Drake did everything right. But he was soon brought to trial and charged with espionage, the first American to receive the charge in about forty years. But so long as Drake pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor of misusing the National Security Agency’s computer system, the government agreed to drop all other charges against Drake, cutting out jail time. The judge finalized Thomas Drake’s sentence Drake with 240 hours of community service in addition to one year of probation.

The government’s abuse of surveillance is still a very relevant topic. While Thomas Drake was working with the National Security Agency, he fought for the rights of all citizens. He knew that the methods of data surveillance could only be justified and effective if they protected the people of America. He protected the right of all citizens, the rights that the NSA so carelessly infringed upon. And in doing this, he brought on a battle against the War on Terror.

Works Cited

“Former NSA Senior Executive Charged with Illegally Retaining Classified Information,

Obstructing Justice and Making False Statements.” The United States Department of

Justice, 15 Apr. 2010, www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-nsa-senior-executive-charged-

illegally-retaining-classified-information-obstructing.

“NSA Espionage Case: Thomas Drake Pleads Guilty to Computer Violation, Espionage Charges

to Be Dropped.” Tribunedigital-Baltimoresun, 10 June 2011,

articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-06-10/news/bs-md-nsa-drake-guilty-20110609_1_espion

age-case-drake-case-espionage-act.

Shane, Scott. “Former N.S.A. Official Is Indicted on Charges of Leaking Secrets.” The New York

Times, The New York Times, 15 Apr. 2010,

www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/us/16indict.html.

“The FRONTLINE Interview: Thomas Drake – United States of Secrets.” PBS, Public

Broadcasting Service,www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-

politics/united-states-of-secrets/the-frontline-interview-thomas-drake/.

Laying the Groundwork for ISIS

Laying the Groundwork for ISIS: The U.S. Invasion of Iraq

The United States invaded Iraq in 2003 in order to “Defeat … a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world” (U.S. Department of State Bureau of Public Affairs 2003).  Directly following this engagement new terrorist organizations, most notably the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), rose to prominence. The development of ISIS cannot be attributed to a single reason, but abuses within the American military prison system and the failure of Arab Spring have both enabled a foundation of extremist loyalty to form as the war in Iraq was underway.

After the invasion of Iraq, American military forces promptly refurbished the detention center known as Abu Ghraib to imprison and interrogate people suspected of collaborating with insurgency movements.  However, the site became notorious for its use of torture and other human rights abuses against prisoners being held. Sabrina Harman, an American soldier convicted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, frequently wrote letters describing her thoughts and actions while working as a guard in the compound.  She once detailed, “At first it was funny but these people [American soldiers] are going too far … I can’t get it out of my head … These people [Iraqi prisoners] will be our future terrorists” (Gourevitch and Morris 2008). Most of the detainees held at Abu Ghraib were innocent of the crimes they were accused of and thus subjected to needless torture and mockery.  While the majority of these people were not members of a terrorist movement at the time, this shared traumatic experience created a recruiting field for ISIS members after the war in Iraq ended. Fawaz Gerges wrote a book about the history of ISIS, and in this piece he explains that “Such experiences had radicalizing and transformative effects on detainees, who were not members of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and did not believe in its Salafi-jihadist ideology.  By the time they left prison many had become hardliners and subsequently joined AQI and other militant factions” (Gerges 2016). Despite the short period of American management at Abu Ghraib, a distinct basis was created where future members of ISIS could be recruited to expand the extremist organization.

Beginning in December 2010 a series of uprisings broke out across the Middle East and Northern Africa, collectively known as Arab Spring. The rebellions broke out with the main intention of overthrowing problematic authoritarian regimes within multiple Middle Eastern and North African states, many of which that had been backed by western democracies.  These revolutionary movements lasted until approximately 2012, yet the cumulative effect is continuously felt in the region. In Syria, Arab Spring destabilized the Assad regime and encouraged the spread of armed rebellion, as “The Assad regime responded to peaceful protests with severe repression. As the opposition took up arms, the regime escalated to artillery, airpower and chemical weapons” (Pearlman 2016).  A multi-faceted civil war broke out as a response to the harsh retribution, and internal political turmoil ensued. ISIS had been steadily growing and recruiting disgruntled individuals, many of which had been directly impacted by Abu Ghraib or oppressive regimes. The escalating conflict in Syria allowed ISIS to gain territory easily, as “The outbreak of the civil war in Syria also provided ISIS with a golden opportunity to expand its influence to a neighboring Arab country and gain strategic depth there” (Gerges 2016).  ISIS was thus able to vastly increase the scope of their movement that had previously been limited within Iraq. After these rebellions were suppressed, loyal revolutionaries turned to groups such as ISIS, who exploited the disgruntled population with promises of an end to tumultuous western influence within the region. United States involvement in Iraq gave the Arab Spring movement more traction and ultimately allowed for ISIS to recruit more civilians than what was previously possible before the rebellions.

As previously stated, the rise of ISIS cannot be attributed to a single cause, but it can certainly be tied to the inception of American military prisons and subsequent Arab Spring revolts.  The severe human rights abuses at Abu Ghraib created a breeding ground for future terrorists targeting the United States. Additionally, the Arab Spring revolts against unpopular government structures were a direct result of foreign intervention in the region, and when the protests failed the general public turned to militant groups such as ISIS for support in achieving their goals.  Individuals throughout Northern Africa and the Middle East had suffered at the hands of military prisons and harsh dictatorships, and ISIS leadership used these shared instances to recruit those who were especially disillusioned. These two aspects helped lay the groundwork for the emergence of ISIS and have influenced the reasoning behind both terrorist recruitment and motives for terrorist attacks.

Works Cited

Bureau of Public Affairs: U.S. Department of State. "Winning the War on Terror." September 11, 2003. https://2001-2009.state.gov/documents/organization/24172.pdf.

Gerges, Fawaz A. ISIS: A History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016.

Gourevitch, Philip, and Errol Morris. "Exposure." The New Yorker. March 24, 2008. https:// www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/03/24/exposure-5.

Pearlman, Wendy. "The surprising ways fear has shaped Syria’s war." Refections Five Years After the Uprisings. March 28, 2016. http://pomeps.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/POMEPS_Studies_18_Reflections_Web.pdf.

Dan Lavigne The Human Impact of Conflicts: The Forgotten Story (FARC)

Dan Lavigne

April 23, 2018

Global Politics of Terrorism

Political Science

The Human Impact of Conflicts: The Forgotten Story

            The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) formed in the early 1960’s as a guerilla group following a Marxist ideology. In a brief civil war of the late 1950’s the Liberal and Conservative parties in the country entered into a power-sharing agreement. They agreed to have forced alternation of power within the government, in which each political party would take turns running the government for four years, known as the National Front. This arrangement lasted until 1974 (Hanratty, 1988). Many of the country’s rural poor felt neglected by Bogata and filled in the gap forming a Marxist military group (FARC) that would best address their interests. After over 50 years of fighting a peace agreement was reached the FARC and the Colombian government.

In many cases the conflict may end but underlying issues in these societies remain. I argue that neglecting the remnants of conflict, acts as a form of negative terrorism that continues to harm society even after a peace agreement is signed. In “positive terrorism” (demonstrating violent actions) for example, actions are executed for several different reasons, including, but not limited to, shock value or spectacles like 9/11, or to a lesser extent, the IRA bombings of the 1970’s and 1980’s. Both were designed to play to the fear element of society. “Negative terrorism” by contrast is failure to remove such explosive devices in society.

Over the years FARC has shifted its image going from a Marxist group to one that has been primary focused on the sale of drugs. To protect their positions as well as interest they reverted to setting up landmines as one of the leading tactics of defense. Examples of this are seen in the Caquetá region of Colombia. Groups have established strongholds in the mountains and dense jungles, often with a single access point.  (VICE, 2013). In addition to these strongholds landmines and other explosive devices are often placed in remote villages, like the one found in Evelio Rosero’s work The Armies, to be discussed later. This causes fear within the community, as these landmines are often placed in areas where citizens walk or go to school.

            One such case involved a little girl by the name of Jamie Sanchez. She discovered a landmine accidently near the river while playing with her friends. It went off and they rushed her by boat and motorcycle to the nearest medical facility. She survived this incident and lives with a missing part of her liver and intestines. Through reconstructive surgery and a team of doctors they were able to create plastic “inners” for this little girl (Vice, 2013). In the video we can see the scars on this little girl has, a reminder of a conflict in which she does not remember the origins, nor in which she was directly involved.

In Colombia these explosive devices, though meant for one group ends up negatively affecting civilians in society. This includes landmines and other such devices in once-occupied FARC territories of Colombia. These landmines act as secondary collateral terrorism, killing or injuring non-combatants. Non-combatants are defined as people who are not engaged in fighting during a war. According to the documentary film “Colombia's Hidden Killers” by Vice, they note that since 1990 there has been 10,000 landmine victims. Many of these are farmers and ranchers in the region, once held under FARC.

The internal conflict in Columbia has seeped into the world of literature as well.  In Evelio Rosero’s work The Armies, published in 2007, he tells the story of this conflict. What is worth noting is that neither the conflict, nor the actors involved are named. The best way to describe the period of this novel, is to think in terms of film footage. The novel, from the perception gathered through the discussion, is like viewing only a few of those tiny frames denoting a six-month period. In this fashion the author alludes to the fact that it really does not matter when the reader enters, as this conflict has been going on for a long time. Using the publication date as a marker, the conflict with the FARC had been going on for more than forty years at that point. The author also illustrates ambiguity by not including formal chapters names in his work. In most traditional novels segments are divided by either chapter name or by providing numbers. One section ends, as another begins, as if time does not really matter.

The aim of this novel is to focus around the relationship of people in a small rural town, far from major population centers such as Bogota. One of the most interesting relationship is the one between the Professor, who has taught for many years, and the children of the town. This relationship speaks to the group that is most affected by these conflicts, children. The author uses both the Professor and the children to comment on the “passing the conflict baton” from one generation to the next, and the guilt his generation has. In one scene the professor finds an unexploded grenade in the grass. He expresses that he is “...riddled with shame…. [and how he] forgot about that grenade for months: the grass must have grown up around it, covering it… “(Rosero, 2007, 124). Symbolically the older generation had the opportunity to end the conflict but for whatever reason did not have the capacity to do so. The younger generation lives in the shadow of their mistakes.

Analyzing this scene at a psychological level provides more detailed societal construct.  In the same scene as the Professor tries to get rid of the grenade he tells the children to go “... away. ‘“...shout[ing] at them…. This will blow us all up.”’ They [the children] carry on, unperturbed, and it even seems that more children come out of their houses, interrogate the first ones in whispers, and remain at my back, implacable” (Rosero, 2007, 122). Conflict is all these children know. They are unafraid by dangers that lie hidden. Lastly, the Professor states outright that he feels, “...sorry for the children who have a hard road ahead of them, with all this death, they’re inheriting, and through no fault of their own” (Rosero, 2007, 51).  He believes that this conflict will draw out into the foreseeable future.

The common theme carried here is that conflict and tactics carry consequences that last long even the conflict has ended. Children are often the ones most affected by such scenarios as demonstrated here. Conflict became such a large part of society that the children did not know any better, not fully understanding the dangers of the explosive devices in each case. Leaving such devices still evoke terror in the community, as the community is left to deal with the consequences by military forces from decades before.

Works Cited

Rosero, Evelio. The Armies. New Directions Publications.  New York. 2007. Print.

“Colombia's Hidden Killers: Part 1/2 Documentary”. VICE. Jul 16, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKJblKuj84E

Dennis M. Hanratty and Sandra W. Meditz, editors. Colombia: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1988. http://countrystudies.us/colombia/26.htm

Is the FARC Peace Agreement on Thin Ice?

Columbia’s 52-year civil war killed 220,000 people and displaced even more. But on August 24th, 2016, after four years of painstaking negotiations in Havana, its government announced it had secured a peace deal with the FARC. The guerrilla army agreed to renounce armed conflict and embrace politics (Casey, 2016). More than a year has passed since the Colombian government and the armed group FARC signed a peace agreement, but the peace process is still fragile. It is one thing to secure a deal, but another to follow through on it. There are three overarching reasons why the peace may not continue for long: lack of government control, power struggles, and political upheaval. 

In many areas previously controlled by FARC, armed conflict is still ongoing. In some areas, the fighting has increased since FARC laid down their weapons, as armed groups are attempting to take control over strategic areas, natural resources and important drug routes (Casey, 2016). In many places, paramilitary groups have moved in, causing increased fear among the population. Violence has increased throughout the country, as has the number of local leaders being murdered (Casey, 2016). The FARC was just a placeholder and once they agreed to peace, other paramilitary groups were eager to fulfill their positions.

The FARC have fulfilled their obligations as laid out in the peace agreement: they have gone from being a guerrilla group to a political party (Valencia, 2017). The FARC have laid down their weapons and gone back to school. Many former FARC soldiers are nevertheless frustrated by the situation they are in because the promises to the FARC have gone unfulfilled. The peace agreement was decided in congress in November 2016 after multiple talks of reforming the agreement (Valencia, 2017). Several leading politicians have expressed the desire to make changes to the agreement, potentially putting the agreement as such at risk. In some parts of the country, Colombians witness increasing violence, and feel less safe now than they did before (Valencia, 2017). Many feel they have not been adequately included in the peace process, and therefore lack trust in the government.

Even though the Columbia government worked hard to get a peace treaty with the FARC, the government has proved to be unable to handle the aftermath. The government is still not able to guarantee the safety of the civilian population and has been criticized for not making safety a bigger priority (Valencia, 2017). The government claims it lacks the resources and capacity. This lack of security has not only impacted civilians, but also local leaders (Valencia, 2017). A large number of local leaders and human rights activists were killed in 2017. More than 78 known deaths were registered as murders, and at least 13 more deaths were suspected murders, according to the UN Refugee Agency (Valencia, 2017). Many fear that the number is even higher.

The struggle for land has been continuous throughout Colombia's history, and today, about two percent of land owners control well above half of the land. The implementation of the Victim´s Law from 2012, involving the return of land to people who were forced to flee, is slow because of a lack of economic resources and poor security (Valencia, 2017). The peace agreement facilitates giving land access to small farmers from the districts, as well as larger companies doing commercial farming (Valencia, 2017). The redistributed land is typically land expropriated from drug cartels or land without formal ownership (Valencia, 2017). A larger redistribution is not part of the mandate of the peace agreement but will remain a challenge for future governments (Valencia, 2017).

Bibliography

Casey, N. (2016, December 01). Colombia's Congress Approves Peace Accord With FARC. 

       Retrieved April 21, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/30/world/americas/colombia-

       farc-accord-juan-manuel-santos.html

Valencia, R. (2017, November 25). Colombia peace deal a year later: Violence and drugs surge 

       despite advances. Retrieved April 21, 2018, from http://www.newsweek.com/colombia-peace-

       process-year-later-violence-and-drugs-surge-despite-advances-722232

Al Qaeda and the Landscapes of the Jihad

Lauren Journet

Professor Shirk

Global Politics of Terrorism

13 April 2018

Al Qaeda and the Landscapes of the Jihad

The first chapter of the reading titled Landscapes of the Jihad by Faisal Devji offered many critical analyses of Al Qaeda. The author opens by discussing the location of the two lands- America and Afghanistan. Devji contemplates proximity, saying that America felt closer to member of Al Qaeda than Afghanistan seemed to American. He credits this belief to the globalization of al Qaeda (Devji 1). But the jihadist movement was not also as globalized as it had been. The physical distance between America and Afghanistan did not matter in the terms of globalization, as Al Qaeda reach was limitless due to determination (Devji 1). In this way, the members were truly more globalized than Americans, for America was a pinpoint on every person’s map. But the globalization has reaches further than the members of the two countries, having some overlap in the political spectrum.

The author writes, “This jihad is global… because it is too weak to participate in such a politics of control” (Devji 1-2). He draws a parallel between the political circumstances of the Jihad to the political circumstance of Palestine. The international terror as a result of the Palestinian cause and the legitimization of Palestine after such effects were two likely comparisons. (Devji 3). But Devji also contrasts the jihadist movement from past movements, stating that today’s jihad is different due to the increase of “ordinariness of such excesses, whose global effects exist outside the politics of control, and which are detached from its traditional categories, like that of statehood” (Devji 3). This has made the jihad’s actions transfer from political means to ethical means, as they have more control over lasting effects (Devji 3-4).

Following the ethical ramifications of the jihad, Devji continues his discussion during Chapter One by bringing Osama bin Laden’s speculations about the September 11th attacks to light. During an interview with a Pakistani newspaper the week after the attacks, Osama bin Laden was quoted saying that the people of the United States of America need to find the perpetrators of the attack within its own country. More or less, Osama bin Laden was hinting at the fact that members of the United States government and country in general could be held accountable for the attacks (Devji 5). Moreover, Osama bin Laden spoke on the the United States narcotic and drug issues, aligning this with the attacks in September. The jihad refused to claim full political responsibility for their actions. Osama bin Laden’s words, whether true or false, speak on the terms of the global effects ad ramifications of the September 11 attacks.

To conclude his first chapter of Landscapes of the Jihad, Faisal Devji speaks on the jihadist movement concerning the bombers and hijackers. He states that the country views these people as martyrs to their cause, as they “organize people only around common beliefs or practices” (Devji 19). The author continues by describing the psychological profiles of those who connect through the jihad movement, stating that the real parallel and connection derives from “the contingency of effects” (Devji 19). This too offers a great contribution to the globalization of the jihadist movement and of Al Qaeda as a whole.

Works Cited

Devji, Faisal. Landscapes of the Jihad. Cornell University Press, pp. 1-33.

Analyzing the United States Drone Strike Program

Analyzing the United States Drone Strike Program

      Since the terrorist organization al Qaeda began carrying out attacks against American personnel, the United States has strategized countless times on how to defeat these radical actors that have repeatedly threatened our ways of life.  President George Bush initiated the “War on Terror” shortly after the September 11 attacks, which includes broad goals such as to “Deny Sponsorship, Support, and Sanctuary to Terrorists ... Diminish the Underlying Conditions that Terrorists Seek to Exploit ... [and to] Defend U.S. Citizens and Interests at Home and Abroad” (National Strategy For Combating Terrorism, 2003).  As a result, the United States has been able to justify their use of torture, electronic surveillance, and organized drone attacks to name a few. While all of these methodologies have been critiqued and spoken out against, drone strikes have been at the forefront of debate because they have been used in such high volume since the declaration of the “War on Terror” and have a high probability for collateral damage.  Al Qaeda and other similar groups continue to pose a threat, and in order to end the conflict, the United States must revise their drone strike approach to rectify issues such as unintentional civilian death and unreliable intelligence.

      One main critique of the drone program is the unintended civilian deaths that become inevitable collateral damage when a drone is deployed.  Carrying out a drone strike on an area with human movement always poses a risk, and generally this includes the possibility of noncombatant casualties.  Brandon Bryant, a former drone sensor operator, has gone on record stating that “Drone operators taking shots at targets on the ground have little idea where the intelligence is coming from” (Scahill and Greenwald 2014).  This so-called intelligence is used in lethal operations, yet there are clear doubts about the legitimacy of this information by those tasked with the order to kill. A National Security Council spokesperson has also stated, “when there are indications that civilian deaths may have occurred, intelligence analysts draw on a large body of information ... to help us make informed determinations about whether civilians were in fact killed or injured” (Scahill and Greenwald 2014). If there is even the slightest possibility of civilian injury and death, the situation should be examined and reconfirmed as a target after this is taken into account.  However, it seems that the NSC only reexamines their actions after information about civilian death is brought forth. This system is clearly faulted, as the objective of drone strikes is to target those individuals who pose the most significant threat to the United States at the time. If civilians are killed and their cases are never adequately analyzed or rectified, further misinformation and confusion will arise when the target of the strike is found again months later, alive and well.

      Another point of contention with organized drone strikes is that they are often carried out based on unreliable intelligence such as geolocating by SIM card usage.  This is a common strategy employed by the United States; once the SIM card picks up a signal, the United States military can narrow the location of the SIM card and strike the area by sending a drone to the scene.  However, this technique has deep flaws and can be unreliable because there is no human intelligence involved, only electronic surveillance. Drone strikes are authorized when the SIM card of a specific phone is activated and an operating pattern is established, but it is more than likely that the target behind the SIM card was “unaware that their mobile phone is being targeted, [so they] lend their phone, with the SIM card in it, to friends, children, spouses and family members” (Scahill and Greenwald 2014).  The United States is prompted to send in a drone to kill the target while their location is known, but the vast majority of the time this location is only confirmed by the single cell signal. An anonymous JSOC down operator has spoken out against the tactic, stating, “It’s really like we’re targeting a cell phone. We’re not going after people – we’re going after their phones, in the hopes that the person on the other end of that missile is the bad guy” (Scahill and Greenwald 2014). This way of targeting terrorists is ineffective, as there is no way to confirm whether the intended target was killed, or if the person behind the SIM card was a connection to the target with no hostile intentions towards the United States.

      Clearly the tactics enacted by the United States are not effective, as these drone strikes have led to dozens of cases of civilian deaths based on unreliable intelligence from geolocating techniques.  These needless casualties often fuel tensions across the Middle East and tend to be a driving force behind why individuals join terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda. The “War on Terror” has been an American priority for over sixteen years, yet the tactics used to combat this conflict are wasteful, inefficient, and detrimental to the overall cause.  Revising the organized drone strike program is the most effective means to combat terror, as there are multiple aspects within the drone program that could be repurposed or cancelled in order to divert funding towards developing programs that protect citizens of other states in the same way citizens of the United States are defended.

Sources Used

Scahill, Jeremy, and Glenn Greenwald. "The NSA's Secret Role in the U.S. Assassination Program." The Intercept. February 10, 2014. Accessed April 12, 2018. https://theintercept.com/2014/02/10/the-nsas-secret-role/.

Analysis of "Messages to the World"

The collected speeches, interviews, web postings and other public statements of Osama Bin Laden provide reasons for his actions that, while morally and religiously questionable, could be accepted by people who shared his ideals. By examining the work “Messages to the World” we can gather more insight on Bin Laden and his reasoning behind his beliefs.

Bin Laden has an audience, and his words, as much as his actions, aim to convince others to embrace his view of the world. Without words Bin Laden's violence could not achieve its stated goals. Bin Laden does not claim to embrace violence for its own sake but rather, he claims he is fulfilling the twin duties of calling nonbelievers to Islam and defending the Muslim community from attack. For Bin Laden, actual violence is instrumental to his message. It is the interpretation of violence that is the very essence of his religious and political program. This reading goes into Bin Laden's development.

By 1997 Bin Laden had begun to abandon his deferential stance and assume for himself the role of "enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong," since Islamic scholars seemed incapable of fulfilling this traditional duty themselves. From here Bin Laden moved to try to replace the scholars, offering his own interpretations of Islamic texts and traditions. Bin Laden saves most of his criticism for Muslim leaders who he believes have corrupted Islam and serve as only figure heads for political interests. The Saudi regime comes in for special critique as causing acts of disobedience “worse than the sins and offenses that are contrary to Islam”. However Bin Laden goes on to argue that "the regime has gone so far as to be clearly beyond the pale of Islam, allying itself with infidel America and aiding it against Muslims, and making itself an equal to God by legislating on what is or is not permissible without consulting God". Statements like these against his own people make it no wonder that he had his Saudi citizenship stripped in 1994.

Following some other radicals, he frequently speaks of the war against Christians and Jews as an individual duty of every Muslim. But according to Islamic law, only defensive jihad is an individual duty; offensive jihad is a collective duty of the Muslim community, to be prosecuted only under the command of a responsible leader. It is understood that the law of jihad prohibits the killing of innocents but Bin Laden did not see the definition of innocents the same way.

Bin Laden denied targeted civilians, and in 1997 he condemned the United States government's hypocrisy in not calling the bombing of Hiroshima terrorism (Bergen, 2008). Over time, though, Bin Laden has come to endorse the targeting of civilians. For example, when asked in an interview whether the killing of civilians on Sept. 11 was justified, he argued that revenge killings of Americans were justified, and pointed out that Islamic law allows believers to attack invaders even when the enemy uses human shields. Bin Laden is explicit in his view that the current war is “fundamentally religious”; the enmity is “doctrinal”. His model for the restored Caliphate is revealed to be Taliban-governed Afghanistan (Bergen, 2008).

The writings of Bin Laden collected here show not only his rhetorical skills, but also trace his self delusions. One of these is that acts of terrorism against Americans bring an “enormous wave of joy and happiness” across the Islamic world. The second is that the defeat of the Soviet Union proves that the remaining superpower of the United States will meet a similar fate, as God wills. He shows no signs of remorse for the 9/11 victims, stating about the TwinTowers that, “It wasn’t a children’s school! Neither was it a residence” in contrast to what he sees as American and Israeli targeting of civilian Muslims.

The editor, Bruce Lawrence, believes that bin Laden’s terrorism is essentially a response to the West’s “much greater” terrorism. He quotes from Michael Mann: “Despite the religious rhetoric and the bloody means, bin Laden is a rational man. There is a simple reason why he attacked the US: American imperialism”. For Lawrence the equation is simple: remove this reason and bin Laden’s war will cease. We can see in this piece how Bin Laden’s views draw on and differ from other strands of radical Islamic thought. It also demonstrates how his arguments vary in degrees of consistency, and how his evasions concerning the true nature f his own group, and over his own role in terrorist attacks, have contributed to the negative perception of him by the public.

Bibliography

Bergen, Peter (2008). "Al Qaeda, the Organization: A Five-Year Forecast". Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 618: 14–30. JSTOR 40375772.

Osama bin Laden, Messages to the World, p.23-30, 106-129, 133-8.

Environmental Terrorism

Dan Lavigne

March 31, 2018

Global Politics of Terrorism

Political Science

Environmental Terrorism

            Environmental terrorism or eco-terrorism is a response to the negative effects industry has caused to the environment by their actions. This includes dumping of waste into rivers, clear-cutting forest, and overfishing in the world’s oceans. Leading groups who partake in activities include traditional environmentalist as well as those who wish to protect animal welfare. To understand whether eco-terrorism is effective as a strategy it is best to provide a working definition. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation “.... eco-terrorism as the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature” (Jarboe, 2002). This definition notes that eco-terrorism is environmentally focused and contains political elements and violence. These actions can be symbolic in nature. In this essay I will examine eco-terrorism as a strategy and argue why it not effective in terms of believes as well as for the environmental movement.

            The Earth Liberation Front, considered a domestic terrorist group in the United States since 2001, originated in the United Kingdom in the early 1990’s by Earth First!. By 1994 the group was found in mainland Europe. In the same year the Earth First! office in San Francisco advocated in the print of their journal a “.... recommendation that Earth First! mainstream itself in the United States, leaving criminal acts other than unlawful protests to the ELF” (Jarboe, 2002). This created a more militant arm of the environmental movement while maintaining its peaceful presence in other parts of society, such as print.

            According to the film “If a Tree Falls” by Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman the first documented case of violence was the case of Warner Creek located in Oregon. In 1995 the Forest Service decided to open the area for logging. Activist began to take a more militant approach to the situation by partaking in actions of sabotage. This is commonly known as “monkeywrenching”. The FBI defines this as “...acts of sabotage and property destruction against industries and other entities perceived to be damaging to the natural environment.” (Jarboe, 2002). These acts are designed to slow down the destruction of the environment by industry, in addition to forestry services. The goal is to get these parties to rethink their priorities. These acts also force these actors to allocate necessary resources elsewhere. Examples include pulling up survey spikes, embedding rods into trees to ruin the chainsaws, gluing locks on the equipment, as well as pouring sugar into the gas tanks, thus ruining the engines. In addition to these actions activist at Warren Creek also built trenches and a wall to block the access road, which was later taken down by federal agents after arrest were made.

            Two more episodes of lighter violence led to the eventual acts of terrorism by E.L.F. under Jake Ferguson and Daniel McGowan. These events included the tree cutting in Eugene, Oregon as well as the Cavel/West Horse Farm arson. In the first episode, Symantec wanted to build a parking garage for their employees. This required the cutting of forty trees. The city was scheduled to hold public hearings, but moves were made to cut down the trees the day before. Activist climbed these trees in protest, risking pepper spray burns. Many were arrested leaving the city on edge. The second scenario included the Cavel/West Horse Farm. This was a company that processed, wild horses into meat. Many felt this to be cruel and protested their actions for over a decade. The building was burnt down by an environmental group in an act of arson leaving Jake Ferguson to believe they should scale up operations like these. Arson was a way not only to stop businesses from polluting, but to draw attention to the cause as news agencies flock stories like these.

            The E.L.F. then became more focused on using arson to stop environmental degradation. To carry out these actions the used “.... improvised incendiary devices equipped with crude but effective timing mechanisms. The ALF/ELF criminal incidents often involve[d] pre-activity surveillance and well-planned operations. Members are believed to engage in significant intelligence gathering against potential targets, including the review of industry/trade publications, photographic/video surveillance of potential targets, and posting details about potential targets on the internet” (Jarboe, 2002). Everything here points to premeditation with intention to destroy property. The group later claimed actions for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal Damage Control Building Olympia Washington the Vail, Colorado, ski facility and the U.S. Forest Industries Office in Medford, Oregon (Jarboe, 2002). In addition to these cases the group was also responsible for the May 2001 University of Washington fire as well as the Jefferson Poplar tree farm fire. It later turned out that this facility used tradition hybrid methods of breeding trees that have been in practice for hundreds of years (Curry, Cullman, 2011). These acts show an uptick or escalation in militant environmentalism, a strategy which not gain overall support. 

            Despite actions to draw attention to the environmental cause, these actions did very little for the movement. The E.L.F. was marked as a terrorist organization by the FBI in March of 2001. Daniel McGowan and Jake Ferguson were later convicted and sent to prison for their actions, despite their fervor for saving the environment. In terms of arson as their modus operandi a strange irony exist. For a group concerned with saving the environment, God-knows how many chemicals were released into the atmosphere by arson. This along, with the splintering of opinions on whether to target people instead of just focusing on property signals a sense of inconsistency. Additionally, mainstream environmentalists were shocked by the actions taken by the group and did not want to associate themselves with these events, believing that in a democracy public protest are better at seeing change (Curry, Cullman, 2011). They did not view violence as a viable option.

            Lastly, in addition to lacking consistency in their actions, and progressing the environmental cause, they seem to have ignored the legal framework in which logging practices work. One logger noted that for every tree that is cut down, six more are planted. This is a little more nuanced. In Washington for example, the law requires company to act within a certain amount of time to begin replanting. It also “...requires 190 "vigorous, undamaged, well-distributed" seedlings per acre; east of the Cascades, it requires 150 such trees” (Frisman, 2002). Oregon has a similar policy where the amount “...of reseeding depends on how productive the property is. Two hundred trees per acre must be planted in the most productive areas, 125 trees per acre in moderately productive areas, and 100 trees per acre in the least productive areas (Frisman, 2002). Both states, where these arsons took place already have sustainable practices in place.

Works Cited

Jarboe, James. (2002). The Threat of Eco-Terrorism. [online] Available at: https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/the-threat-of-eco-terrorism

Curry, Marshall, Cullman Sam. If a Tree Falls. 2011. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmZkNNJqr1I

Frisman, Paul. 2002.Cga.ct.gov. (2018). REFORESTATION LAW IN OREGON AND SELECTED OTHER STATES. [online] Available at: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2002/rpt/2002-R-0832.htm