Terrorism in Perspective

Terrorist attacks are not defined as “armed conflict” since the so-called combatants are not identifiable nor do they represent a nation or wear uniforms in combat. The internet and cyberspace capabilities make it possible for terrorists to facilitate their activities from anywhere in the world. The question begs : can terrorism ever be justified.

The liberal scholars advocate the moral and legal requirements for the recognition and protection of terrorist groups with justifiable aims (colonization, land reform, anti-racism etc.). The argument is that terrorist groups with just aims should be accorded the same recognition as ordinary States (the international right to self-determination).  The more conservative approach is that any form of protection accorded to terrorists must be limited by defined exceptions to such recognition. A prime example of such limitations would be curbing these rights in the event of the failure of terrorists to observe proportionality (the cause of the terrorist must be justifiable and proportional to the extent of harm inflicted).

Recent publications on the subject suggest that separating the just causes of terrorism (if these exist) from questions about the morality of terrorism makes a difference to the global understanding and perception thereof. In a terrorist conflict where there is no clear battlefield and the identity of the warring states reduced to ideology bound sides, the condemnation of the terrorism should only be undertaken after analyzing the objectives of both sides. For example the State under terrorist attack could be a dictatorship of the cruelest kind and the terrorist attacks leveled against such regime serve the greater good.

However international Laws governing security issues can arguably never attain sufficient political consensus as varying states endorse diverse and conflicting ideologies, cultures, religions, economies and degrees of human rights. The modern era has seen an alliance of the major powers (United States, Britain, France, Australia etc.) which shifts the balance of power to such alliance to the disadvantage of lesser States which aside from international security differences usually themselves face problems within their own national security and economies.

Additionally the Information Age and cyber transcendancy empower terrorist organisations to operate from any geographic location. The modern reality of plural societies with many diverse cultural and religious groups poses a threat to traditional democracy. The obstacle with such a plural system would be that the rule of law requires one defined set of laws within a state whereas the plurality of culture and ideology demand different sets of rules for different people. In the final analysis terrorism will remain as the demonstrative voice of those that either fight for a just cause against a larger force or those that feel ostracized from their society.