Terrorism is one of the major ways to carry out violence either to prove a point or just to cause harm. Since 9/11, terrorism has been on the increase and the lack of a firm definition does not help solve the issue. To understand the ultimate purpose of terrorism, this essay will be looking at the concept of terrorism and why violence has to be used to prove a point in a state. It will also be looking at how many states are able to maintain their stand after a terrorist attack (using US and 9/11 as an example) as well as the destabilization it has caused in the state. Finally, it will argue how their goal may be the ultimate end for the attacked state.
IS TERRORISM A STRATEGY OR A TACTIC?
These two terms are often mixed up and misunderstood and it can be argued that it is one of the causes to no definite explanation as to what terrorism is. A tactic is a plan made and followed to get a desired result, strategy on the other hand is the use of the plan made (tactic) to achieve a goal. Brett Daniel defines these two in a simpler way; strategy is often called the ‘what we want to accomplish’ while tactics is referred to as the ‘how we are going to accomplish it.’ From the above definition, terrorism is a tactic used by a group of individuals to advance their beliefs and gain more power within a state (strategy).
CONCEPT OF TERRORISM
Since the 9/11 event, terrorism has been becoming more rampant and violent in nations of the world. Getting to the bottom and providing a solution has also been increasingly difficult and one of the main reasons is the lack of a confound definition. “Terrorism in the most widely accepted contemporary usage of term, is fundamentally and inherently political. It is also unavoidably about power: the pursuit, acquisition, and the use of power to achieve political change (i.e. terrorism is the use of violence or the threat of violence used in pursuit of a political aim)” . Terrorism can be seen as a political act when the main aim or intention is to make their point known or gain access to more power. “Clausewitz' statement that war is a continuation of policy by other means is taken as a cliché by terrorists. They merely eliminate the intermediate step of armies and warfare, and apply violence directly to the political contest.” . The question is in a civilised world why does violence have to be involved when proving a point to the head of state or government?
On the subject of terrorism, it all comes down to who has been killed. In fundamental terms, if the intention is for civilians to be killed in a war then that is a criminal offence, (when the motive of group A is to attack group B to make group C do what group A wants) then terrorism can be seen...