Universally, there is no particular definition of terrorism. This is because the term is emotionally and politically charged (Cooper, 2001). As a result, various government agencies and institutions have often come up with their particular definitions. Moreover, the word’s terms of use thus requires an agreement to determine legitimate its use when referring to violent acts. Additionally, the contemporary use and label of the word “terrorist” highly related to lack of morality and legitimacy. It has been over 70 years since the UN was formed but the global organization has failed to define the term “terrorism”. The main reason given is that it fears that it might lead to linking and profiling problem especially with religious groups (Saul, 2005). Furthermore, the organization failed to draft the description of the term due to the stalemate with the Organization for the Islamic Corporation (OIC), which in turn seeks to define “terrorism” by excluding the activities of the involved parties during armed conflicts including foreign occupation scenarios. Keeping in mind the motive and sponsor of the threat, I would describe terrorism as “a threat and unlawful use of violence particularly against a state or the general public through a political motivation. Terrorism should be appropriately described by national and international institutions by considering possible implications to various religious institutions and movements. A proper description should also cover the motive of the event and the sponsors that funded the act for it to be reliable and effective.
References
Cooper, H. H. (2001). Terrorism: The problem of definition revisited. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(6), 881-893.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Saul, B. (2005). Definition of “terrorism” in the UN Security Council: 1985–2004. Chinese Journal of International Law, 4(1), 141-166.
