Terrorism & counterterrorism
Yvanka Verberne, s2806940
Lecture 1: What is (counter)terrorism? 01-11-2021
What is terrorism?
Two main observations:
1. No commonly accepted definition exists
2. Highly politicized debate
a. ‘terrorist’ is everyone we don’t agree with?
More than an academic problem:
(counter)terrorism can affect entire populations
Nuanced & critical approach key to informed citizenship
The definitional debate
Ongoing since field’s inception
Negative connotations ‘terrorism’
Subjective; freedom fighters v terrorists
Too infrequent to generalize?
Results:
Condemnation rather than description
Terrorism as a definitional weapon;
o Prescribes and rules out policy responses?
o Normatively influences research agenda?
Difficulties of building upon others’ research
2020 Global Terrorism index – measuring the impact of terrorism
Small example how definition can have a big impact
On definitions
What is a definition’s purpose?
Descriptive
Clear demarcations
Objective and neutral
Various types (legal, governmental, academic)
How can they impact research?
How can they influence debate?
intersection of perspectives from Law & Criminology, Public Policy & Governance
Little consensus on defining terrorism.
1
,What about elements of a definition?
1. Violence, force
2. Political
3. Fear, terror emphasized
4. Threat
5. (psychological) effects and (anticipated) reactions
6. Victim-target differentiation
7. Etc. (Schmid & Jongman, 1988)
Clarity through comparison
Terrorism v insurgency (goals, organisation requirements, rel. to populace)
Terrorism v organized crime
o Organizes crime = financial
o Terrorism = political oriented
Terrorism v terror
o State
Terrorism v war
o Terrorism is one of many ways in which you can make war
Schmid’s 2011 definition of terrorism
“Terrorism refers on the one hand to a doctrine about the presumed effectiveness of a special
form or tactic of fear-generating, coercive political violence and, on the other hand, to a
conspiratorial practice of calculated, targeting mainly civilians and non-combatants,
performed for its propagandistic and psychological effects on various audiences and conflict
parties’
victim vs target
Terrorism as violent communication
Attack on Theo van Gogh, November 2004
Some of the letters written by the attacker
The more horrible your action, the better able as terrorist you are to keep the attention to you
Different kinds of terrorism
Emphasis on the historical discipline
Left-wing
Marxist / Leninist, revolutionary, struggle for a class-less society. Defined terrorism
1960s-1980s
Right-wing
Mistrust of government, conspiracy theories, racist, neo-fascist, highly conservative,
religious. 22 July trailer
Nationalist / separatist
Self-determination, anticolonial, strong driver insurgency
Stateterror
Large-scale violence to intimidate or control poopulations. Numerous examples, e.g.
Europe, Latin-America. Film: Das Leben der Anderen
Religious
Revolutionary, millenarian, reform or destruction, (other)wordly goals
Criminal
FARC? Taliban? IRA? Mob-activities?
Single issue
2
, Not focused on a particular ideology, but a particular grievance
Lone actor
Individuals who plan, prepare & execute attacks in isolation
Cyber
The increasing importance of the Internet
There are more number of Attacks and Plots in the Right-wing, but the focus stays at
religious it is changing; attack at mosques gave more insight to the right-wing
More than just jihadists alone
Contemporary terrorism is about more than jihadism
Emphasis on jihadism explained / justified by their deadliness
Danger of another ‘failure of imagination’
Conclusion
1. Terrorism as a quintessential ‘contested concept’
2. Familiarity with the definitional debate as key learning outcome
3. Schmid and ‘terrorism as demonstrative violence’
4. Terrorism is not exclusively a non-state activity and knows many forms
5. Counterterrorism as a continuum of interventions
Lecture 2: Political Violence and State-Terrorism, 03-11-
2021
Critiques of Terrorism Research argues that post 9/11 scholarship:
Is ahistorical
Treats terrorism as emerging in a social vacuum
Lacks-multi-level analysis
State-centric
Focuses on secondary rather than primary data
Is policy oriented
Advantages of Social Movement Theory
Relocates terrorism within its social and temporal context
De-exceptionalizes terrorism
Underlines its temporal fluidity; political violence does not stay the same
Counters ahistoricity and lack of context of terrorism research
Integrates macro, meso, and micro level explanations
Brings the state into focus
Brings international movement dynamics into focus
Social Movement theory, an interdisciplinary study that seeks to:
1. Explain why social mobilization occurs
2. Explains how social mobilization manifests
3. Explains potential social, cultural, and political consequences of social mobilization
The approach rejects classical approaches such as:
Collective behavior theory;
3
, o When lot of people together, people start feeling invisible. No longer
constrained by power of state.
o Riots
Mass society theory
o Societies became big + complex, wide societal system.
o family, church diminish in importance > rise of terrorism
Relative deprivation
o When people look at others, and believe they got it better then them. They get
angry and rebel.
o Try to get the bigger slice
Social movement theory
SMT finds its roots in the growth of social movement activity in both Europe and the United
States during the 1960
‘Deprivation’ was not seen as a viable explanation anymore.
Instead, structural approaches examined how the social and political context enabled or
hinder protests
Social movements define
“collective challenges [to elites, authorities, other groups or cultural codes] by people with
common purposes and solidarity in sustained interactions with elites, opponents and
authorities.” He specifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and
advocacy groups.”
“a set of opinions and beliefs in a population which represents preferences for changing
some elements of the social structure and/or reward distribution of a society.”
“(1) the formation of some kind of collective identity; (2.) the development of a shared
normative orientation; (3.) the sharing of a concern for change of the status quo and (4.) the
occurrence of moments of practical action that are at least subjectively connected together
across time addressing this concern for change.”
Tilly defines Social Movements
Tilly is professors crush => EXAM!
Tilly’s work emphasizes how dynamics of social protest are tied to their political, social and
economic context.
Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances, displays and
campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others.
Tilly argues that there are three major elements to a social movement: (but we only look at 2)
1. Campaigns; a sustained, organized public effort making collective claims of target
authorities.
a. Actors; claim-makers, object of claim, (protestors vs company)
2. Repertoire; employment of combinations of techniques of political action
Repertoires of Contention: “Arrays of contentious performances that are currently
known and available within some set of politics actors”
4
Yvanka Verberne, s2806940
Lecture 1: What is (counter)terrorism? 01-11-2021
What is terrorism?
Two main observations:
1. No commonly accepted definition exists
2. Highly politicized debate
a. ‘terrorist’ is everyone we don’t agree with?
More than an academic problem:
(counter)terrorism can affect entire populations
Nuanced & critical approach key to informed citizenship
The definitional debate
Ongoing since field’s inception
Negative connotations ‘terrorism’
Subjective; freedom fighters v terrorists
Too infrequent to generalize?
Results:
Condemnation rather than description
Terrorism as a definitional weapon;
o Prescribes and rules out policy responses?
o Normatively influences research agenda?
Difficulties of building upon others’ research
2020 Global Terrorism index – measuring the impact of terrorism
Small example how definition can have a big impact
On definitions
What is a definition’s purpose?
Descriptive
Clear demarcations
Objective and neutral
Various types (legal, governmental, academic)
How can they impact research?
How can they influence debate?
intersection of perspectives from Law & Criminology, Public Policy & Governance
Little consensus on defining terrorism.
1
,What about elements of a definition?
1. Violence, force
2. Political
3. Fear, terror emphasized
4. Threat
5. (psychological) effects and (anticipated) reactions
6. Victim-target differentiation
7. Etc. (Schmid & Jongman, 1988)
Clarity through comparison
Terrorism v insurgency (goals, organisation requirements, rel. to populace)
Terrorism v organized crime
o Organizes crime = financial
o Terrorism = political oriented
Terrorism v terror
o State
Terrorism v war
o Terrorism is one of many ways in which you can make war
Schmid’s 2011 definition of terrorism
“Terrorism refers on the one hand to a doctrine about the presumed effectiveness of a special
form or tactic of fear-generating, coercive political violence and, on the other hand, to a
conspiratorial practice of calculated, targeting mainly civilians and non-combatants,
performed for its propagandistic and psychological effects on various audiences and conflict
parties’
victim vs target
Terrorism as violent communication
Attack on Theo van Gogh, November 2004
Some of the letters written by the attacker
The more horrible your action, the better able as terrorist you are to keep the attention to you
Different kinds of terrorism
Emphasis on the historical discipline
Left-wing
Marxist / Leninist, revolutionary, struggle for a class-less society. Defined terrorism
1960s-1980s
Right-wing
Mistrust of government, conspiracy theories, racist, neo-fascist, highly conservative,
religious. 22 July trailer
Nationalist / separatist
Self-determination, anticolonial, strong driver insurgency
Stateterror
Large-scale violence to intimidate or control poopulations. Numerous examples, e.g.
Europe, Latin-America. Film: Das Leben der Anderen
Religious
Revolutionary, millenarian, reform or destruction, (other)wordly goals
Criminal
FARC? Taliban? IRA? Mob-activities?
Single issue
2
, Not focused on a particular ideology, but a particular grievance
Lone actor
Individuals who plan, prepare & execute attacks in isolation
Cyber
The increasing importance of the Internet
There are more number of Attacks and Plots in the Right-wing, but the focus stays at
religious it is changing; attack at mosques gave more insight to the right-wing
More than just jihadists alone
Contemporary terrorism is about more than jihadism
Emphasis on jihadism explained / justified by their deadliness
Danger of another ‘failure of imagination’
Conclusion
1. Terrorism as a quintessential ‘contested concept’
2. Familiarity with the definitional debate as key learning outcome
3. Schmid and ‘terrorism as demonstrative violence’
4. Terrorism is not exclusively a non-state activity and knows many forms
5. Counterterrorism as a continuum of interventions
Lecture 2: Political Violence and State-Terrorism, 03-11-
2021
Critiques of Terrorism Research argues that post 9/11 scholarship:
Is ahistorical
Treats terrorism as emerging in a social vacuum
Lacks-multi-level analysis
State-centric
Focuses on secondary rather than primary data
Is policy oriented
Advantages of Social Movement Theory
Relocates terrorism within its social and temporal context
De-exceptionalizes terrorism
Underlines its temporal fluidity; political violence does not stay the same
Counters ahistoricity and lack of context of terrorism research
Integrates macro, meso, and micro level explanations
Brings the state into focus
Brings international movement dynamics into focus
Social Movement theory, an interdisciplinary study that seeks to:
1. Explain why social mobilization occurs
2. Explains how social mobilization manifests
3. Explains potential social, cultural, and political consequences of social mobilization
The approach rejects classical approaches such as:
Collective behavior theory;
3
, o When lot of people together, people start feeling invisible. No longer
constrained by power of state.
o Riots
Mass society theory
o Societies became big + complex, wide societal system.
o family, church diminish in importance > rise of terrorism
Relative deprivation
o When people look at others, and believe they got it better then them. They get
angry and rebel.
o Try to get the bigger slice
Social movement theory
SMT finds its roots in the growth of social movement activity in both Europe and the United
States during the 1960
‘Deprivation’ was not seen as a viable explanation anymore.
Instead, structural approaches examined how the social and political context enabled or
hinder protests
Social movements define
“collective challenges [to elites, authorities, other groups or cultural codes] by people with
common purposes and solidarity in sustained interactions with elites, opponents and
authorities.” He specifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and
advocacy groups.”
“a set of opinions and beliefs in a population which represents preferences for changing
some elements of the social structure and/or reward distribution of a society.”
“(1) the formation of some kind of collective identity; (2.) the development of a shared
normative orientation; (3.) the sharing of a concern for change of the status quo and (4.) the
occurrence of moments of practical action that are at least subjectively connected together
across time addressing this concern for change.”
Tilly defines Social Movements
Tilly is professors crush => EXAM!
Tilly’s work emphasizes how dynamics of social protest are tied to their political, social and
economic context.
Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances, displays and
campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others.
Tilly argues that there are three major elements to a social movement: (but we only look at 2)
1. Campaigns; a sustained, organized public effort making collective claims of target
authorities.
a. Actors; claim-makers, object of claim, (protestors vs company)
2. Repertoire; employment of combinations of techniques of political action
Repertoires of Contention: “Arrays of contentious performances that are currently
known and available within some set of politics actors”
4
