they close their eyes, ears, and mouth.

The catastrophes in Indonesia, well actually not only caused by nature, but also the people. Let say the scarcity of soybean, or the increasing price of oil and any others, you name it. Maybe if we take a look from who is the leader of our country, maybe we can conclude that the leader reflect the country would be.

The Indonesian President for instance. He is really a smart guy. No doubt, he was a gift and he was the best in the military school in Magelang. He's a military guy, he supposes to be decisive, tough, brave, and smart. the country supposes to be in a good way to become a great country. Even the ex prime minister of Australia Mr. John Howard came to his inauguration as a President of Indonesia.

In his first era, it went really well. I was as the student really thought he was the best for Indonesia. Until the second election 2009, he was still the most favorite candidate to become a President. And now 2012, 2 years ahead to the election, but the pressure from the people and the opposition really hard. It made our President really "galau" and he seems closing his eyes, ears, and mouth. Many problems come up, and he just stay quite, do little thing, not much.

Will he fall before the time comes? We can't predict that such a thing. But what we know right now, we need a superb leader. He serves the people and of course he has really great nationality. We are the people, must think cleverly, who will become the next president? Well, it comes back to all of you people. Choose wisely.

terrorism world

TERRORISM WORLD

By: Ali, Andi Ibrahim

Table of Content

1.     Introduction

1.1.                     Terrorism Definition

1.2.                     The Evolution of Terrorism as a Strategic Threat

1.3.                     Terrorism Nowadays

2.     State and Sub State Terrorism

2.1.                     State Terrorism

2.2.                     Sub State Terrorism

3.     The Cases of Terrorism

3.1.                     IRA (Irish Republican Army)

3.2.                     LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam)

4.     How to Counter Terrorism

4.1.                      Decapitation: Catching or Killing the Leader

4.1.1.  How Decapitation Ends Terrorism

4.2.                      Negotiation

4.2.1.  How Negotiation Ends Terrorism

5.     Conclusion

6.     References

1.    Introduction

“We must find out where the roots of terrorism lie.”
-Brent Scowcroft

I write this task, because this is really my passion to get to know deeper about the Terrorism from the beginning, until now. This terrorism issues are very interested to talk about. Many people don’t know about the terrorism itself. They only assume that, terrorism is a part of Muslim. Many west people perhaps argue like that. After 9/11 the perspective in the terrorism changed. The whole world assumes that Muslims are the terrorist, and they have to be destroyed. The Muslims had turned to a threat in this world.

I totally disagree with this. I am a Muslim, and if we take a look deeper about terrorism, maybe we can find the IRA (Irish Republican Army). Were they a Muslim terrorist? No they were not. They were Catholic. If a Muslim commits a criminal, they assume that Muslim is Terrorist, it is terrorism. But if the other commits crime, they say criminal.

In my country Indonesia, there are a lot of terrorism movements. The law enforcement in Indonesia assumed that the terrorism movements in Indonesia were the Al Qaeda network. The cases were such as bombardment in Bali, which it happened twice, book bombardment and many more. This is the task of the law enforcement in Indonesia and of course in the entire world, to counter the terrorism movements. We have to at least reduce the terrorist attacks and movements in order to bring peace in the world. Even it is really hard in my opinion, but we have to do so.

Terrorism Definition

Terrorism word came from Latin terrere which mean I frighten. Terrorism is the premeditated use or threat to use violence by individuals or sub national group in order to reach the political or social objective through the intimidation of large audience beyond that of immediate victim. Within the terror action, it must be use the presence or threat of violence and a political and social motive. Without violence or its threat, terrorists cannot make a decision maker respond to their demands. The terrorists use to be randomly when they execute their target, but actually it is only a way that makes the anxiety feeling in the society. They actually planned it well. For example the drive-by shooting, many people think that they attack randomly, but the terrorist have already thought, they well organized. That’s why they look like they bring fear, anxiety to all society.

Besides the violent and the political motives, a minimalist definition depends on three additional factors: the victim, the actor, and the audience. The victim? It is really controversy. Is an assault against the peacekeeper army a terrorist act? The Israelis say yes. It is a terrorist act. An assault against the passive military is also defined as a terrorist act. This is a little bit clumsy, because as a terrorist act is considering attacking the civilians.

Now we move to the actor. The actor in here is also present the controversy. If a State is using the terror tactics to attack its own citizens for example in the Stalin’s regime and the Saddam’s biochemical weapon, it is not a part of terrorism, it is a state terror. In this case, the actors are individuals or sub national groups. We cannot assume that the State is also including as the terrorism. The States also can assist the terrorist group through safe havens, funding, weapon, intelligence, training, and of course another assistances that the terrorist group need. We call that state sponsored terrorism. The examples of the state sponsored terrorism are Cuba, Iran, and Libya.

Finally we move to the audience. What does it means by the audience? The audience means that to whom the terrorist act is intended to intimidate. For example the drive-by shooting. The terrorist aims that act to cause the anxiety in the society. And also the bomb in the train. It considers that the bomb could planted in the train, it also makes sense that the aim of that act to bring the fear to the train users. Why the terrorist seek such a wide audience? Actually the terrorist’s objective is to parry the normal political procedures and to make a political change through threat and violence. By intimidating the many people it will make the decision makers do what the terrorist demands. For examples the suicide attack, the car bomb, and many other insanity that the terrorists do.

The Evolution of Terrorism as a Strategic Threat

Well actually the evolution of terrorism as a strategic threat has already explained in a glance before. The terrorism becomes a global trend for nowadays. In the recent story, terrorism has been consistently became a strategic threat. Terrorism can change the world. It is almost impossible to stop the terrorism campaign. Many group of terrorism are ridden by many politics group in order to over throne, or to fall the current regime.

They create the anxiety, fear to the society. The terror evolved to be one of the dangerous strategic threats in this world. All people are afraid of terror. The terrorism is hard to erase, because there are many conspiracies beneath.

Terrorism Nowadays

People afraid of terrorism, suicide bomb, drive-by shooting, the terrorist kidnap, hostage, and many acts they did. After 9/11, the terrorism came up. It became really hot news in whole world. The WTC, the highest building in the world was attacked by a plane. It caused the building tumbled down. At that time, the paradigm has changed. The Muslim world was assumed as the biggest threat by the west side. I remembered about the Rambo 3 movie. On that movie, the Muslim and the west was a good friend to fight against the Russia. Mujahidin, Al Qaeda, were a friend of America. But now, they just like stabbing a knife each other. Can we say this is also a clash of civilization because of the war between the west and the Muslim? Let we put it aside, because the Huntington’s theory is still controversy.

2.    State and Sub State Terrorism. 

State Terrorism

State terrorism was actually known as a state terror. Because the in definition up there, we cannot define a terrorism when a state as a sponsor to the terror act. And, how does distinguish the state terror and the violence. Declaring war and sending the military to fight other militaries is not terrorism. The using of violence to punish the criminal, who has been sentenced of violent crimes is also not terrorism.

Let’s take a look from the authoritarian states in twentieth century. The Nazi and the Stalin are the famous one of the examples of state terror. The authoritarian states committed to using violence and extreme threat against their own citizens. However many democratic countries are also capable of terrorism. For example Israel used terror against the populations of the territories it has occupied since 1967. The democratic countries may use the state terrorism for the populations outside the border, they are impossible to terrorize their own citizens.

Sub State Terrorism

The definition of the sub state terrorism: a small group within the state is trying to use violence to accomplish its own goal. In this case, the sub state terrorism has six purposes:

 

 1. social revolutionary

 2. national separatist

  3. religion fundamental

  4. new religious

  5. right wing

  6. single issue

 

The example of sub state terrorism base on the purposes:

1.      Social Revolutionaries            :           Rebel against corrupt old ways. For example das Baader     Meinhof gang in Germany.

2.      National Separatists    :           Trying to carry on the family mission. For examples Palestinian terrorists, Northern Irleanders.

3.      Religious Fundamental           :           They kill in the name of God. For examples Osama bin Laden, Abortion Clinic Bombers.

4.      New Religion              :           Cults defending new religions. For example Shinrikyo in Japan (sarin gas subway)

5.      Right Wing                 :           They see the government as the enemy and illegitimate. For examples Neo Nazis, Timothy McVeigh, Klu Klux Klan.

6.      Single Issue                 :           For examples animal rights, ecological terrorism (usually single people willing to kill) South Korean animal activist protest in Seoul.

3.    The Cases of Terrorism

IRA (Iris Republican Army)

The conflict was begun because the North Ireland Catholics believed that they were discriminated against in housing, welfare, education and employment by the protestant majority. In 1960s a catholic civil rights movement in the region led to political riot. The name IRA has been in use since the organization was founded in 1921. From 1969 through 1997, the IRA splintered into a number of organizations, all called IRA. They included: The Official of IRA, The Provisional of IRA, The Real IRA, Continuity IRA. The association of IRA with terrorism comes from the paramilitary activities of the Provisional of IRA which is no longer active.

From the 1970-1990s, the IRA received weapons and training from various international sources, most notably American sympathizers, Libya and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Connection between the IRA and Marxist-leaning terrorist groups, especially at their most active in the 1970s. These include: Basque separatist group ETA, Italian Red Brigades, German Baader Meinhof Gang, and Kurdish Workers Party. The Objectives of IRA was to create of a unified under Irish, rather than British rule. PIRA used terrorist tactics to protest the Unionist/Protestant treatment of Catholics in Northern Ireland.

The emergence of the Irish Republican Army has its roots in Ireland's 20th century quest for national independence from Great Britain. In 1801, the Anglican (English Protestant) United Kingdom of Great Britain merged with Roman Catholic Ireland. For the next hundred years, Catholic Irish Nationalists opposed Protestant Irish Unionists, so named because they supported the union with Great Britain. The first Irish Republican Army fought the British in the 1919-1921 Irish War of Independence. The Anglo-Irish treaty concluding the war divided Ireland into a Catholic Irish Free State and Protestant Northern Ireland, which became the British province, Ulster. Some elements of the IRA opposed the treaty; it was their descendents who became the terrorist PIRA in 1969. The IRA began its terrorist attacks on the British army and police following a summer of violent rioting between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. For the next generation, the IRA carried out bombings, assassinations and other terrorist attacks against British and Irish Unionist targets. Official talks between Sinn Féin and the British government began in 1994, and appeared to conclude with the 1998 signing of the Good Friday Agreement. The Agreement included the IRA's commitment to disarm. PIRA strategist Brian Keenan, who had spent over a generation promoting the use of violence, was instrumental in bringing about disarmament (Keenan died in 2008).By 2006, the PIRA appeared to have made good on its commitment. However, terrorist activity by the Real IRA and other paramilitary groups continues and, as of the summer of 2006, is on the rise. In 2001, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on International Relations released a report detailing connections between the IRA and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) going back to 1998.

LTTE (Liberation Tamil Tigers Eelam)

Tamil refers to the predominant ethnic group of northeastern Sri Lanka, and Eelam means homeland in the Tamil Language. The home base of the LTTE is in the Sri Lanka. The group finances itself and arms purchases in Europe, through a variety of illegal and legal means. The objectives of this group are the establishment of an autonomous Tamil entity in Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lanka government actually already began peace talk in 1985. But no solution was made until 2002, when they negotiated a ceasefire. The ceasefire was meant to last four years, and was reaffirmed by both sides in February 2006. Nevertheless, the LTTE resumed attacks in the spring of 2006. The situation rapidly deteriorated, and although neither side called off the truce, there was consisted fighting between the Sri Lankan military and the Tamil Tigers in the fall of 2006. Most observers of the situation are pessimistic about the prospects for a peaceful settlement in the near future, in a government dominated after 2005 elections by hard line Sinhalese nationalists. Jihan Perera, an Sri Lanka based analyst, said that "There is a question mark about the government's willingness to put forward a realistic proposal that would at least go halfway to meeting the Tamil people's aspirations, let alone LTTE aspirations" (in "Resumption of Sri Lanka War Tests Civilians' Endurance," by Somini Sengupta, New York Times,September 18, 2006).

Sri Lanka, an island in the Indian Ocean off the southeast coast of India, gained its independence in 1948. Ethnic Sinhalese Buddhists make up about three-quarters of the island's population; Tamils, both Indian and Sri Lankan, are the next largest ethnic group.  Most are Hindu. Tamil terrorism is rooted in conflict between the Tamils and the Sinhalese, who predominate in government. The Tamil Population began to agitate for secession in the early 1970s, following Sinhalese measures to establish their cultural and political dominance. For example, Sinhalese was made the only official language and Buddhism was decreed the official religion. In the 1970s, student groups and others turned to armed protest to press their case with government. The conflict escalated in 1983, when anti-Tamil riots in the capital, Colomo, killed thousands and displaced almost 100,000 residents. The moment was decisive for many Tamils, who lent large scale support to independence movements. According to some estimates, about 65,000 people died in the conflict between 1983 and 2002.

4.    How to Counter Terrorist

“Everyone’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s really an easy way:

Stop participating in it.”

-Noam Chomsky

There are so many way in order to combat the terrorism in this world. Maybe Mr. Noam Chomsky quote’s is also right. If we want to stop the terrorism activity, it can be started from a little thing like stop participating in it. Many leader terrorist asked a lot of people to join their group to create one condition that can bring fear and anxiety to all people in order to make changes in political condition or so on. There are 2 ways to counter terrorism, which are done very often.

Decapitation: Catching or Killing the Leader

Leaders of terrorist groups are often captured or killed in the final month of terrorist campaign. But the specific techniques of targeting vary, and long term effects of decapitation are inconsistent. While many campaigns end as a result, other barely falters and may even gain strength.

What decapitation means? Firstly, we must clarify what we mean by decapitation. Decapitation refers to the removal by arrest or assassination of top leaders or operational leaders of a group. Actually the states that decide to target the leader of a terrorist group must determine to arrest them alive or not.  Decisions about that may whether to capture or kill the chief may depend on local condition. Capturing the leader reflects the view that he is a criminal, lawfully, entitled to trial, killing him is threatening him as combatant , fair game for attack.

The Arrest of Top Leaders

Capturing a leader, putting him or her on trial and then presumably behind bars, emphasizes the rule of law, profile leaders as criminals, and demonstrates the appropriate application of justice. All else being equal, it is much better to arrest and put the terrorist leader in prison, so that his fate will be demonstrated to the public. When terrorism is primarily treated as a criminal offense, either by the state or the international system, the existing legal mechanism for responding to it and are reinforced.

Assassination or “Targeted Killing”

Holding terrorist leaders is difficult, and a potential liability for the state and its citizens. Should leaders of organizations that carry out terrorist attacks instead be identified, targeted and killed? Debates of ethics of agent of democratic states killing terrorist leaders have become increasingly public and spirited in recent years.

If a state or a government really does the assassination to the terrorist leaders, it will bring the real disadvantages to the government or to the states. It will be a backfire. The member of terrorist group will find for revenge, and the all the target, representatives, citizens or else are really vulnerable to get that terror. If a state really wants to kill the leaders, it has to think strategically, not only tactically. Because it can make a confusing part within the terrorist group. For example, if the leader is a charismatic leader may indeed be irreplaceable. The member of the terrorist group will mistrust to other member, and it can make a chaos within the group, because they try to find who was leaking the information to the enemy, and they will kill each other.

How Decapitation Ends Terrorism

On the basis record arresting leader is more effective in damaging a group than killing him. Killing the leader could be a backfire, resulting in increased publicity for the group’s cause and the creation of a martyr who attracts many new members to the organizations.

Negotiations

Democracies do not negotiate with terrorist. At least that is what many official claims. The idea of negotiation with group that deliberately kills civilians to advance their political goals is repulsive to most people. In fact, however, democracies do negotiate with terrorist. Virtually all democratic governments facing terrorist campaigns have been forced to negotiate at some point, and many have even made concessions, although of course there are differences in degree.

Why governments negotiate? Whether alone or in a coalition, states negotiate with terrorist groups for reasons that may not be obvious or admitted. These motives may be intertwined, even contradictory: negotiations are not the obverse of fighting terrorism through other means. For all parties, negotiations may be a type of interaction that is seamlessly connected to more violent form

How Negotiation Ends Terrorism

Negotiations are the best thought of as an essential elements in a broader range of policies to marginalize a group, as a conciliatory gestures or proposal change the dynamics of support; to exploit the differences, hive of factions, and enable members to leave or constituencies to turn elsewhere, to provide crucial information about how a group functions, and to reduce the degree and intensity of attacks over time, as groups lose momentum or make error. Negotiations carry with so much benefit; however, instantaneously ending the violence is not one of them. Given the small numbers off operatives needed for terrorist attacks to continue, negotiations do not typically end the violence alone, and it is foolish to promote expectations that they will.

Conclusion

Terrorism is one biggest threat in the world right now. Since the 9/11 tragedy, the terrorism came up and became a hot news. They bring fear, and anxiety to the society. They aim to political changes and others. Many ways can end terrorism. Government naturally responds to terrorism by trying to capture or kill the leader. Government also negotiates, but negotiation rarely ends terrorism by them, but agile diplomacy can be a strategic tool for managing the decline of campaign.

But it would be really hard to end terrorism, because it seems like impossible if in this world there are no terrorism. Or at least maybe the west paradigm can change. The west people still assume that Muslim is the terrorists. When the other committed crime, they said, they are criminal, but when Muslim committed crime, they are terrorist, it is really bias. There is no such a thing like that. So many cases was also called terrorism such as the LTTE, IRA etc. they are also terrorism. It is not fair, to say that Muslim is entirely terrorist. Because we are not terrorists. Who is terrorist anyway?

References

Cronin, Audrey Kurth. “How to End Terrorism”

Horgan, John and Braddock, Kurt. Terrorism Studies

http://terrorism.about.com/od/groupsleader1/p/IRA.htm

http://terrorism.about.com/od/groupsleader1/p/TamilTigers.htm

Enders, Walter and Sandler, Todd. The Political economy of terrorism. Cambridge University press