of political violence, as Stohl suggests. 59 The idea is to instil fear in the audience of the attack. It is what 19th Century anarchist terrorists referred to as “propaganda by the deed”. 60 This consensus can be seen as providing a good step to understanding terrorism and counterterrorism, however, we must also acknowledge the debates that exist within the defining of terrorism.
Issues Related to Defining Terrorism
Agreement within terrorism has, as has been seen, attributed to at least a partial definition to aid in understanding it. Nevertheless, there is also a great deal of disagreement within the field. Schmid’s compilation of the 250 varying conceptions of terrorism can be seen as an example of the inconsistencies that exist within the field in attempting to define the term. The volume of literature on the subject area is undoubtedly high, but consensus upon what terrorism means is very difficult to come by. The foremost area of contention can be suggested to revolve around two key areas that directly relate to the policing and military models of counterterrorism. These two areas of contention involve debates regarding state terrorism and whether such a thing as ‘new’ terrorism exists. Advocates of state terrorism align to the belief that terrorism is a strategy that can be carried out by both state and non-state actors. Scholars such as Martha Crenshaw and Geoffrey Nunberg have alluded to the state’s capacity to carry out terror-related acts. 61 Others that argue in favour of the 59 Stohl, p. 46. 60 Rosemary H. T. O’Kane, Terrorism (Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited, 2007), p. 14. 61 Nacos, Terrorism and Counterterrorism , pp. 35–36.
25
Made with FlippingBook HTML5