Terror Essay Revisited

In my initial essay regarding the definition of terrorism, I argued that the definition should remain along the lines of the U.S. State Department’s definition of terrorism while making minor modifications regarding the inclusion of state actors in the definition, and an understanding that something is terror only when it is being used as a tactic for political gain. In addition, I argued against the idea that terrorism had to be a reaction to one’s current order. After taking this class, I am slightly changing my overall argument to include the fact that terrorism is a reaction to the current order and therefore not a tactic. However, I am still going to maintain that terrorism is violence committed against non combatants by either state or non-state actors.  I chose not to believe that terrorism is a socially constructed concept, as argued by Stampnitzky. Given the currently loose definition of terrorism, it is easy for the word to be misused for political gain. I believe that strengthening the definition of terrorism, and ensuring that the public is aware of this revised definition will cultivate an environment where it is no longer possible for politicians to misuse the word terrorism. Learning about how actions that preceded the Earth Liberation Front and the Provisional Irish Republican Army turning violent, is what influenced my changed position. In both instances, these groups were standing up for what they believed in and were violently attacked by police forces. Both groups exemplify a reaction to their current situation through peaceful protest, and then an escalation of the methods of protest after being met with violence. For my revision I will be using the documentary If a Tree Falls: The Story of the Earth Liberation Front directed by Marshall Curry and the documentary Provos: The IRA and Sinn Fein, ep. 1: Born Again directed by Peter Taylor.

              Philip Bobbitt, in his work, “Terror and Consent: The Wars for the Twenty-First Century”, defines terrorism as opposition to or reflecting the current order and believes that terrorism cannot be considered a tactic because actions change. The current order that Bobbitt is discussing can be as broad as a global order, or as small as a regional order. Bobbitt looks through numerous historical examples of terrorism to explain how terrorism has evolved over time. He attributes the evolution of terrorism to changes that have occured in the world order. Given the numerous examples of nationalistic terrorist groups, it is difficult, if not impossible, to ignore how the actions of State’s, such as oppression, are directly connected to terrorist action. In addition, it appears as though terrorism is often a weapon of the weak. This can be seen as a reaction to the current order because, if they had more money and power, they may have been in a position where they did not have to resort to terrorism. Therefore, terrorism is not a tactic, so much as it is a reaction to the current way of life, most commonly a reaction to State persecution.

             In 1997, in Eugene Michigan, 40 old heritage trees were set to be torn down for the creation of a parking lot. At this point in time, while some arson attacks had already been committed by environmentalists, and many environmentalists still believed in Democracy and political change through peaceful protesting. Activists prepared to take to issue to the next City Council meeting to try and save the trees. This never took place, as the City of Eugene suddenly decided to start the demolition process a day before the city council meeting was supposed to be held. In response roughly 11 people went up into the trees in an attempt to stave off the construction workers for one day to allow the activists to bring their petition to the City Council. This turned out to be impossible as the police came in full riot gear and started to pepper spray the people in the trees. Crowds who had gathered to watch the unfolding events, started to tear down fences surrounding the trees in protest to the violence against their friends. These people were then tear gassed by the police. This dashed the hopes of many environmentalists who believed that working within the system was possible. Feeling as though their voices were not being heard, some environmentalists turned to arson and terrorism to spread their political ideas and raise their voice. They became known as the Earth Liberation Front. This terrorist group formed as a reaction to the current order in two ways. First they were reacting to the environmental degradation, most specifically intense deforestation. Then, as the police forces and governments cut off access to nonviolent means of protest, they reacted by resorting to methods of terror.

            While Ireland was granted independence 1921, a few provinces stayed under British control as they had a large English Protestant population. This area became known as Northern Ireland. Despite being the majority, Irish Catholics living in Northern Ireland were treated as second class citizens, had very few rights, few jobs, were poor, and families were often forced to share a house with at least 2 other families. In 1968 Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland took to the streets in a civil rights marxist peaceful protest, in an attempt to gain more rights and freedoms. However, they never saw these rights, and in some cases their houses were wrecked and people were beaten b y the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC). In 1969, growing tensions led to the Irish Catholics to attack the RUC, and the RUC to attack back. The Irish Catholic community felt as though they were personally being attacked and feared impending invasion. This escalation of events quickly led to the creation of the PIRA, which used bombs to target English infrastructure and eventually led to the death of thousands. Here the PIRA were responding to being oppressed and treated unfairly. When they acted peacefully they were attacked, and when they rebelled, they were met with more violence until they decided to resort to terrorism, deciding that it was the only way in which they could successfully combat their oppressors.

In both the instances of the ELF and the PIRA, the groups were reacting to current society through initially peaceful means. When they were met with violence and force they again reacted to the current order by escalating their measures. Therefore it can be determined that  violence that seems disproportionate and illegitimate leads to terrorism and an increase of violence. A reaction to violence is a reaction to one’s current standing in the world. These two examples, lead me to change my definition to include Bobbitt and an understanding that terrorism is brought about by the troubles of the time.