Is terrorism a legitimate political strategy?

To answer this question we need to examine the definitions of “Terrorism” and “Legitimate.” Terrorism is defined in the English dictionary as. “The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons”. (www.dictionary.com). Legitimate is defined as “Being in compliance with the law; lawful.” (www.dictionary.com). By examining the two definitions it is clear to see that the two words are so different there is no way they could fit together, one being lawful and one being unlawful, however it is not that simple often Terrorism is employed as a strategy by political parties as well as just terrorist organisations to achieve their goals. An example of where political parties have employed terrorism, as a tactic is Sinn Fein in Ireland. Yet these political parties mostly continue to operate unhindered with its key members rarely being imprisoned or bought to trial. So the fact that so many Political Parties around the word employ terrorism as a political strategy must support the notion that terrorism is indeed a legitimate political strategy.

What is the purpose of Terrorism? Nearly all acts of terrorism are carried out for political reasons, whether it is to bring about revolution, or to bring a state to its knees and collapse, or to humiliate the targeted country and its people or simply for publicity. In recently years it has been the latter two that have been the most common reasons for terrorist attacks. With the advances in media news of an attack can spread round the world in seconds and offer those responsible massive media coverage, the 9/11 attacks offered media coverage on an unprecedented scale. Terrorists will argue that the use of violence is legitimate as they see their actions as a just cause, eradicating evil or corrupt regimes. Also Terrorist groups would argue that the state they are against uses violence and has an army and so they say they are at war with that state and in war anything is legitimate. Morozov saw Terrorism as “cost effective” as it used very small numbers of people but inflicted maximum damage. So Terrorism is a very effective strategy for the terrorist groups as it involves small numbers of their own people and they get massive results whilst brining attention to their cause, to them this justifies and legitimises their actions.

The Government of The United States of America does not follow this view. It produced a document in 2003 called “The National strategy for combating Terrorism” This document states that terrorism is “Premeditated, Politically motivated violence against non-combatant targets” (The 9/11 commission report Authorized edition, 2003. p.3) it also goes on to suggest that the terrorists who carry out these crimes are “misguided” in their belief that “Killing, kidnapping, extorting, robbing, and wreaking havoc to terrorize people are legitimate forms of political action.” (The 9/11 commission report Authorized edition, 2003, p.3). The document suggests the Idea, that the use ...