In the chapter, " The Strategic Logic of Terrorism ," Martha Crenshaw examines how terrorism can be viewed as a political strategy. Some of the conditions for terrorism, which mark its political strategy, include the seeking of a radical change in the status quo, and the need to defend the privileges that are perceived to be threatened. Terrorism occurs when the policies of the government are seen to be extreme, and its demands involve the displacement of the existing political elites (Crenshaw, 2007) . In this aspect, therefore, terrorism does not only act as the oppressive opposition to the government but instead work towards attaining radical changes for the community at large. Contrary to what many people believe, sometimes terrorism occurs due to the failure of alternative solutions. Such failures include the failure of non-violent movements in bringing the much-needed societal change for the common good of its citizens. Terrorism also, in given occasions, follows the collapse of constitutionalism.
However, the question that then rises to challenge the morality of terrorism is its inability to work with the masses in achieving the purported common good it fights for. This inability exists to draw the line between extremists and terrorists, in the sense that extremisms find a way to include the general public in their agenda. Therefore, the existence of extremism does not necessarily resort to terrorism since extremist groups have distinguished themselves ass boycotts, while terrorists are characteristically marked with destructive means to pass their points across to the government (Muller & Opp, 1986) . Extremists, in most cases, are the elite, who have the financial capability and the knowledge, thus the ability to influence the masses. Terrorists, on the other hand, have neither the financial capacity nor conventional military power. Hence, they are perceived as weak and lack the social support they would otherwise need to put across their agenda.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Some of the factors promoting terrorism as an alternative form of opposition lie not only in the unlikelihood of other methods to work but also in need of quick fixes. Typically, terrorists do not have the patience to deal with the more time-consuming methods of resolution and opposition, mostly due to the urgency of the situation. On the other hand, terrorists operate in fear and hiding because they cannot match the government's superior resources (Crenshaw, 2007) . Oppressive forms of governance immerse wealth for themselves to establish their superiority and authority. Therefore, it is difficult for the opposition to match up to the standards set by the government. Terrorism thus acts as a response to an opportunity in the sense that they seek to paralyze the government by destroying its strongholds, limiting its ability to fight back and possibly win over the opposition. To this end, one would argue that the best bet against tyranny is terrorism.
One of the advantages of terrorism is that it attracts broader attention to the need for political change in society. Terrorism is more effective in not only attracting the attention of the government in question but also of a global audience, which would then pressurize the said government to deliver onto its people the changes they vehemently seek. Terrorism plays an agenda-setting function in the global front, for it sets forth the pace to which the government is supposed to answer to its citizens while highlighting the oppression innocent citizens go through (Muller & Opp, 1986) . From this point, it would be easy for the global humanitarian watchdogs to take over the course, placing trade sanctions and other similar actions against the tyranny. However, this is not always the case since, in most cases, terrorism has the hidden agenda of taking over political administration. This implies that while it may succeed in setting forth the agenda, it will equally limit the ascent to power of any other body.
References
Crenshaw, M. (2007). The logic of terrorism. Terrorism in perspective , 24 , 24-33.
Muller, E. N., & Opp, K. D. (1986). Rational choice and rebellious collective action. American Political Science Review , 80 (2), 471-487.
