Terrorism Defined

This is the first in a series of posts that will deal with terrorism.

If you want to enter a never-ending fracas, just come up with your own definition of terrorism and jump in. Even though terrorism has been used since the beginning of recorded history, it’s still a bear to define.

So where does the term terrorist come from anyway? The Latin word terrere means “to frighten.” The French word terrorisme brought the usage forward in time. The word is associated with the regime de la terreur, (the Reign of Terror, circa 1793 – 1794). Those who implemented the orders of the regime, which included mass executions of “enemies of the French revolution,” were called terrorists. The term has stuck.

At any point in time there are more than one hundred definitions of terrorism circulating about. Reading the various studies that try to arrive at a universal definition will put one to sleep. I have and they did. I read one that said there are twenty-two definitional elements that have to be considered. But after all of the back-and-forth the only tiny point of agreement between the scholars that I could find is this: terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence.

The UK and its former colonies define terrorism tightly. I’ll get to that in a moment. But first, I have to punish you with the U.N.’s meandering, politically correct definition. This is it: An anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby - in contrast to assassination - the direct targets of violence are not the main targets.

Most of academia accepts this toothless definition then adds to it such verbose concepts as "message generators" and 'violence based communication processes." As if “anxiety-inspiring” isn’t enough to make even a Billy goat puke!

Here’s the deal, like pornography, one knows it when one sees it. The same holds for terrorism. Watching a grainy video tape of some innocent guy getting his head cut off with a dull butcher knife by mutant thugs pretty much says it all. I guess lopping off a head would be considered a “message generator.”

These are my preferred definitions. The FBI uses: “Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." Crisp and clean.

The Department of Defense says terrorism is “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” This one has the three elements that are found in each terrorist act --violence, fear, and intimidation—and each element produces terror in its victims.

What’s the big deal with the definition? Well, there has to be an agreement among the front line folks about what is or isn’t a terrorist act. Everyone has to be on the same page, just like the terrorists. And without this understanding no cohesive battle plan to combat terrorism can be drawn. The definition is the key stone that holds the plan and the folks that implement it together.