Different Types of Terrorism - Essay Example

? Analyzing different types of terrorism al affiliation Terrorism has been a common phenomenon in the world sincepeople started using violence to protect their interests against perceived enemies. Many scholars have shed more light on various terrorist attacks that have been carried out in the XX and XXI centuries, in an attempt to illuminate the changing face of terrorism. However, not enough attention is given to the divergent forms of terrorism and the fact that different terrorists have different reasons for carrying out terror attacks. By focusing on the analysis and comparison of state, left-wing versus right wing, and religious terrorism, this paper will elucidate on these types of terrorism and help explicate on how one act of terrorism differs from the other. Analyzing Different Types Of Terrorism Introduction Based on the execution and effects of terrorist behavior, acts of terror do not just happen; they are well thought and planned. All terrorist behavior is based on extremist beliefs and intolerance towards contrasting interests (Martin, 2009). Although almost all acts of terror are based on political motives, extremism is very divergent depending on the belief systems of the concerned terrorists, thus the existence of different types of terrorism. Left-Wing Versus Right-Wing Terrorism In almost all political systems, there are conflicting views on how the system should be run. There are those factions that support the preservation of traditional values, while other factions advocate for new methods of administration. According to Martin (2009), right-wing extremists are those who believe that the values that led to past glory have been eroded by enemy culture. As a result, rightists often use aggressive measures to preserve these cultures and cement their status. On the other hand, left-wing extremists act aggressively towards establishing a new order by first destroying the current system. Most leftists believe that they have been oppressed by the existing regime, thus the need to create a just and fair regime. Ideally, leftists consider themselves the voice of the oppressed and engage the rightists in aggressive politics in order to establish a new system. Consequently, rightists respond through terrorist violence in an attempt to safeguard the ideals and order of the group. Pitcavage (2001) gives the example of the militia movement, a paramilitary rightist group that arose in the United States during the 1990s. This movement advocated for the right of every individual to own a gun in order to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. The militia movement claimed that the federal government was creating a conspiracy to rob citizens off their rights and exercise more control over them. To this end, the rightist believed that the government through the police unit was creating security incidents and using the same to increase government power over the people. Moreover, the militia believed that the United States government was colluding with the United Nations to establish a tyrannical regime under the “New World Order.” Generally, the militia movement would act with hostility towards the federal government. The militias would attack U.S military bases believed to be training troops from the United Nations. In addition, the militias would manufacture illegal weapons and use the same to confront federal authorities (Pitcavage, 2001, p. 971). Martin (2009, p. 254) gives the example of the “Battle of Seattle” that was organized in 1999 by leftists to protest against globalization. The leftist protestors believed that globalization would limit the role played by each culture in the world, thus bringing about anarchy. However, according to Martin (2009, p. 254), left-wing terrorism has been gradually decreasing since the end of Marxism. State Terrorism State terrorism occurs when states decide to act violently towards international or domestic adversaries. In the international arena, a state may choose to use aggression and violence to safeguard its ideological, economic and more essentially, political interests. In terms of domestic terrorism, the state may result to using violent means to maintain internal security. In either case, the government is usually in total support of intimidation and suppression of its perceived enemies (Martin, 2009). The state uses government agencies such as the military and other unofficial paramilitary personnel to repress anyone deemed a threat to the state’s interests or security and order. Martin (2009, p. 117) gives the example of the apartheid rule in which the South African government started killing anti-apartheid crusaders. Death squads known as Askaris were formed to assassinate leaders of the African National Congress (ANC). The government also enlisted the services of a violent organization formed by Zulus to instigate ethnic and racial violence against ANC sympathizers. By the time apartheid ended, it is estimated that the police had killed more than 11,000 people (Martin, 2009, p. 117). In another case, Davenport (2005) cites the move by the United States government to repress the actions of the “Republic of New Africa” (RNA) from 1968 to 1973. Based in Detroit, the main goal of the RNA was to secede from the United States and establish its own self-government. This was an obvious danger to the security and unity of the United States. In response, the government carried out massive raids and arrests of RNA suspects (Davenport, 2005, p. 132). Government agencies would monitor every activity of RNA suspects. Basically, black Americans were randomly arrested and their privacy violated. Religious Terrorism Terrorism in the name of religion occurs when supernatural powers are believed to have sanctioned the use of violence to protect a particular faith. Terrorists who act in the name of religion do so in the belief that they will be rewarded in the afterlife for having fought for their faith. Most religious extremists use the name of religion to advance economic, cultural and political violence. In contemporary society, according to Martin (2009, p. 176), most religion-based terror attacks are instigated by radical Islamists. According to Sharpe (2000), the Identity Christian Movement has been prompting religious violence across the United States for many years. In the years leading up to the 2000s, this religious extremist group believed in the supremacy of the white race and engaged in paramilitary activities against the government. Adherents of this faith believe that the white race is the chosen one of God and that the current Jews are not the ones mentioned in the Bible. Followers of this faith also believe that all non-whites, government agencies, and non-protestants should be treated with aggression in order to consolidate the position of the whites. In the 1980s, followers of the Identity Christian Movement engaged in bombing of buildings, railroads, and clinics in which abortions were conducted. The movement was also linked to the 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City (Sharpe, 2000, p. 618). Another example of religious terrorism is provided by Martin (2009) when he cites the 1995 bombing of a subway system in Tokyo by members of the Aum Shinrikyo cult. During the bombing, approximately 12 civilians were killed and many others injured (Martin, 2009, p. 200). When the sect was raided, police discovered a weapon store where chemicals that were to be used for bombing were hidden. How Similar Are The Types Of Terrorism? All the types of terrorism discussed above are similar in the sense that they do not spare innocent civilians form violence. In fact, religious and left-wing versus right-wing violence both target civilians in order to capture the attention of their perceived enemies. The above types of terrorism are also similar in the sense that they believe that violence is the only means towards achieving and protecting their interests. Additionally, all these types of terrorism hold that their actions will lead to a better society than the existing one, thus the need to get rid of the latter. Differences In The Types Of Terrorism The types of terrorism discussed above differ in a number of ways. Whereas state and left-wing versus right-wing terrorism are both catalyzed by economic and political reasons, religious terrorism is based on deity and teachings on faith. State terrorism is different from the other two judging by the fact that government agencies support state terrorism while they fight against left-wing versus right-wing and religious terrorism. For his reason, state terrorism is likely to be more violent since the state has at its disposal a lot of resources to use towards achieving its cause. Conclusion Terrorism cannot be vindicated no matter what the cause and case. There are several ways of solving differences without consequential violence. Dialogues and nonviolent negotiations are among many ways in which rival groups can resolve their issues and spare blameless civilians from terror attacks. References Davenport, C. (2005). Understanding Covert Repressive Action: The Case of the U.S. Government against the Republic of New Africa. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(1), 120-140. Martin, G. (2009). Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues. New York: Sage Publications. Pitcavage, M. (2001). Camouflage and Conspiracy: The Militia Movement from Ruby Ridge to Y2K. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(6), 957-981. Sharpe, T. (2000). The Identity Christian Movement: Ideology of Domestic Terrorism. Journal of Black Studies, 30(4), 604-623. Read More