This edited collection surveys how non-Western states have responded to the threats of domestic and international terrorism in ways consistent with and reflective of their broad historical, political, cultural and religious traditions. It presents a series of eighteen case studies of counterterrorism theory and practice in the non-Western world, including countries such as China, Japan, India, Pakistan, Egypt and Brazil. These case studies, written by country experts and drawing on original-language sources, demonstrate the diversity of counterterrorism theory and practice and illustrate that how the world ‘sees’ and responds to terrorism is different from the way that the United States, the United Kingdom and many European governments do. This volume – the first ever comprehensive account of counterterrorism in the non-Western world – will be of interest to students, scholars and policymakers responsible for developing counterterrorism policy.
Pakistan has achieved a number of important successes in its bid to curb domestic terrorism. 1 Some analysts have described the country's counterterrorism struggle as a success attributed to the predominant role of the military. 2 Indeed, the degree of security produced by the military-led counterterrorism (CT) campaign is noteworthy; it is equally true that this effort has concomitantly been subverted by other important actors in the social and political arena. 3 The prevailing environment can be conceptually termed as an
This book is about the public language of the 'war on terrorism' and the way in which language has been deployed to justify and normalise a global campaign of counter-terrorism. It explains how the war on terrorism has been reproduced and amplified by key social actors and how it has become the dominant political narrative in America today, enjoying widespread bipartisan and popular support. The book also explains why the language of politics is so important and the main methodological approach for analysing the language of counter-terrorism, namely, critical discourse analysis. Then, it provides the comparison drawn between the September 11, 2001 attacks and World War II and the attack on Pearl Harbor. One of the most noticeable aspects of the language surrounding the attacks of September 11, 2001 is its constant reference to tragedy, grievance and the exceptional suffering of the American people. The book focuses on the way in which language was deployed to construct the main identities of the protagonists. It demonstrates how terrorism is rhetorically constructed as posing a catastrophic threat to the American 'way of life', to freedom, liberty and democracy and even to civilisation itself. The book analyses how the administration's counter-terrorism campaign has been rhetorically constructed as an essentially 'good' and 'just war', similar to America's role in World War II. Finally, the book concludes that responsible citizens have a moral duty to oppose and resist the official language of counter-terrorism.
concerns topped the priorities of security in Japan, with terrorism coming in way down the list of concerns. However, in January 2015, news of a hostage crisis involving Japanese nationals held captive by the Islamic State (IS) in Syria was greeted by shock and bewildered surprise. Rolling media blanket coverage ensured that terrorism instantly rocketed up the security and public agenda. A typical news report suggested the brutal nature of the beheadings and videos provided a ‘shock to a country that can feel insulated from distant geopolitical problems’ and that Japan
Discourses on terrorism are not foreign to Colombian society. The word is used every day by politicians, state officials, academics, journalists, analysts and people in the streets. Every Colombian has grown up understanding that terrorism is part of everyday life. The people have been victims of a wide range of actors, including drug kingpins, paramilitary squads, guerrillas and even state forces. Car bombings, armed assaults in towns, assassinations, kidnappings and massacres are common themes in the daily news.
‘WAR ON TERRORISM’ is the most extensive
counter-terrorist campaign in history and the most important conflict
since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Its scope and expenditure of
resources are so great that in a few years it could soon rival the cold
war. In trying to make sense of this new historical era, there is a
temptation to focus solely on its most visible
لائحة الإرهاﺏتبعكم، بلّوهاواشربوا مَيتّها
(This ‘terrorism list’ of yours, soak it and drink its water; Hassan Nasrallah, widely broadcast speech, 25 May, 2013)
Lebanon, like many other places in the world, has known deadly attacks against civilian areas that carried specific political messages. But unlike most other places, especially in the West, Lebanon's political tradition has been mired with car-bomb attacks, targeted assassinations and deadly plots of various kinds. Sporadic security incidents have rocked the capital and several key
STAGE, IT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS that the official language of
counter-terrorism implicitly constructs the ‘war on
terrorism’ within the ‘virtuous’ or ‘good
war’ tradition (see Lawler 2002 ). Locating
the American response to the September 11, 2001 attacks in the bounds of
the overarching framework of the World War II meta-narrative for
For a state that regards itself as the intellectual heir to the French Revolution it is unsurprising that the ideas of ‘terror’ and ‘terrorism’ remain central to the controversies surrounding the nature of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 1 From an American perspective, the seizure of the US embassy on 4 November 1979 transformed Iran from an intimate ally into the leading ‘state sponsor’ of terrorism; an appellation that even the thaw in relations under the Obama administration has done little to change. 2 The revolutionary state
The definition of terrorism used in this chapter interprets it as premeditated use or threat to use violence against civilian and other non-combatant targets intended to create broader intimidation and destabilization effects in order to achieve political goals by exercising pressure on the state and society . 1 This definition of terrorism excludes both the use of force by insurgent–militant actors against military targets and the repressive use of violence by the state itself against its own or foreign civilians. This author