State Terrorism

State Terrorism

It has been a habit of many governments across the world to use repression against their people and other nations. Some governments have used different forms of restraints, including terrorism. Despite these widespread actions by governments, there has been little research on state terrorism done in the discipline of international relations. State terrorism, by definition, refers to acts of terror committed by a government or sponsored by a government (Magen, 2018).  State terrorism is committed for various reasons, including gaining control and power. State terror is used in causing mass movements of people from the regions in which they are located to other places. The consequences of state terror include an influx of refugees into foreign countries.

There are few examples of countries that have sponsored terrorist activities against their populations and external forces, including other states. Some of the terrorist groups that have caused problems over the past few decades have had the backing of some governments. Governments disguise behind such terrorist groups to achieve particular agendas against other countries or within their countries. Jackson (2011) argues that the definition of state terrorism is quite complicated.  He notes that many scholars have avoided the study of state terrorism because they do not want to equate it with non-state terrorism. Laqueur (1986) is one of the scholars that argue that terrorism should be analyzed based on the actors and not the action. It implies that the analysis of what is considered terrorism should be based on who has committed the act of terrorism rather than the act of terrorism itself. Although the motives of state and non-state terror actors may be different, the terrorism itself is not unusual because the main characteristics of terrorism are the same regardless of who is the perpetrator.

Going by the general definition of what state terrorism is, the actions of some governments on their people can be termed as state terrorism.  For instance, Hitler killed thousands of Jews in an attempt to get rid of Jews in Germany. The actions of the government at the time in Germany can be termed as an act of state terror. The suffering and the pain that the Jews went through is not different from the suffering and pain that other people who have been attacked by terrorist organizations go through.  They killed and maimed, they bombed, and they persecuted people who had not done anything wrong against them.

Bali bombings, Indonesia

In the year 2002, a deadly terrorist attack took place in Bali, Indonesia. The attack claimed the lives of 202 people from different nationalities. Two hundred nine people were also injured in the attack. The attack is believed to have been orchestrated by Jemaah Islamiyah, which is a violent Islamist group. The attack-involved detonation of three bombs: A suicide bomber carried a backpack-mounted bomb, a massive car bomb, and a much smaller device was detonated outside the U.S. consulate in Denpasar (Bresnan, 2005). An audio cassette was later found that purported to carry a recording message from Osama bin Laden who claimed that the bombings in Bali for retaliation for supporting the United States war on terror and for Australia’s role in East Timor’s liberation.

The three bombings that killed the people in Bali was planned and executed by terrorist groups. They were specifically targeting a large number of tourists from Australia. At the time of the bombings, many Australian teams were having their end of year party and holidays at the site of the blasts. The bombs were set to cause maximum casualties.  To begin with, the timing of the attacks and the business hours in the locations in which the bombs blew up.  The sequence of the three bombs going off was also planned to ensure that as many people as possible who killed or injured (Bresnan, 2005). The first bomb, which was in a backpack, was intended to draw people out and cause confusion before the second carbon, which was much more significant, blew up and killed most of the people.

The bombings in Bali were an act of terror committed by terrorists. Since the attacks occurred, several people have been arrested and convicted for planning and executing the terrorist attack (Tapsell, 2014). Some of them have been executed while some have been killed in shootouts. For instance, Imam Samudra, Amrozi Nurhasyim and Huda bin Abdul Haq were all executed by a firing squad in prison located in Nusakambanga Island.  Although the leadership of Jemaah Islamiyah had been accused of wanting to overthrow the government, there was no evidence that the bombings had links to an intention to overthrow the government.

Casablanca bombing, Morocco

In May 2003, deadly, synchronized terrorist attacks took place in Casablanca, Morocco.  The terror attacks involved 14 suicide bombers, 12 of whom managed to carry out attacks, while two were arrested. The suicide attack killed 33 people together with the 12 suicide bombers making it 45 people died during the attacks. The attacks were the worst terror attacks to have happened in Morocco (Maghraoui, 2008). The attack served as a reminder of the active underground Islamist movements in Morocco. They attack targeted Morocco’s centers of religious tolerance as an indication that the attacks were meant to cause religious intolerance in the country.

Apart from the fact that the attacks were well synchronized, they were quite unsophisticated. The attack shocked many Moroccans as they why not used to suicide attacks in the country. According to Maghraoui (2008), most of the people who participated in the attack died the Moroccan security forces concentrated their investigations on the Moroccan Islamic Combat Group (GICM), who were suspected of having a hand on the attacks. The Moroccan government also cooperated with the U.S. government in its investigations. Saad Houssaini Was believed to be the head of GICM, and he was arrested in 2007 since he was linked to the Casablanca attacks.

Similarities between the two Attacks

The terror attacks in Bali, Indonesia, and Casablanca, Morocco, have some similarities. Terrorist groups operating within the affected countries orchestrated both attacks. The attack in Bali Indonesia was associated with Jemaah Islamiyah, which is an Islamic militant group that is working in Indonesia.  The assaults in Indonesia targeted mainly foreigners in the country.  Sports teams from Australia that were having their holidays in Bali were identified as the main targets for the attacks.  The attacks were considered retaliatory attacks against Australia for their role in East Timor’s liberation (Tapsell, 2014). The strike ended up killing more foreigners than locals kill since the main targets were foreigners. On the other hand, the attacks in Morocco also killed the locals and a few foreigners from Belgium, France, Spain, and Italy.

The attacks in Indonesia and Morocco involved suicide bombers. The bombers used unsophisticated explosive devices. The nature of the attacks indicated that they had been planned domestically with terror groups that had links to external terror groups (Dakwar & Goldstein, 2004). Jemaah Islamiyah had ties to Osama Bin Laden led Al Qaeda while GICM had links to terror groups in Afghanistan as some of the group’s operatives had traveled to Syria and Afghanistan within the past few years. The attacks were also similar in the sense that they targeted to kill as many people as possible.

Differences between the Two Terror Attacks

As has been noted above, the Terror attacks in Bali and Casablanca had similarities.  They also had differences mainly in terms of their targets. The attack in Bali targeted foreigners, and it was specific to Australian citizens.  The attack in Casablanca targeted religious centers of tolerance, such as the Jewish cemetery and other Jewish religious centers. The strike in Bali was retaliatory, while the attack in Casablanca was meant to cause religious intolerance in the country (Maghraoui, 2008). The differences in the two attacks are also in the number of casualties.  The by the attack claimed 203 lives while the Casablanca attack claimed 45 lives, 120 of whom were the suicide bombers.

An Al-Qaeda associated group claimed the Bali attacks.  On the other hand, Dakwar and Goldstein (2004) posit that no terror group claimed the bombings in Casablanca, although the arrest of two suicide bombers who were not successful in carrying out the attacks may have helped to understand the terror groups that they were affiliated and their motives. The Terror attacks have also different in the sense that the actions taken by respective governments were different.  Morocco decided to cooperate with countries such as the U.S. In dismantling terror groups that were forming in the country.  On the other hand, Indonesia worked on its own and brought several suspected perpetrators of the terror attacks in Bali to book.

Global Effects of the Incidents

Terror activities sponsored by the state elicit a lot of global reactions. At the moment, terrorism is a global phenomenon, which is highly prevalent in regions such as the Middle East, Europe, and Latin America, and almost every other part of the world. It is now a day-to-day act happening to innocent citizens in their countries. Different factors cause terrorism, and they include politics. Politics is an exemplary factor that can cause a group of people to terrorize another group or even rebel against their own country. There is no doubt among economists that wars, terrorism, and political instability have a significant adverse effect on the economies in which they take place. State sponsorship of terrorist activities by counties such as Syria has elicited a response from various international sources, including the United Nations Security Council, the United States, and Israel, among other players.  International humanitarian bodies have also raised concerns about human welfare crises that are experienced due to acts of terror. In the last five years, there have been hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing Syria, for instance, due to the conflict in the country. Some of the violence experienced in the country is perpetrated by the government, which has made its citizens to flee their country and to seek refuge in other European countries and North America.

In other countries such as Sudan, hundreds of thousands of residents of the region fled during the genocide that took place there and went into Chad and other African countries to seek refuge.  Events in Darfur caught the attention of the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague. The court opened a file on the case. It has issued warrants of arrest of some of the perpetrators, including the former president of Sudan Omar Al-Bashir.  The genocide that happened in Darfur also drew many criticisms, two African leaders who seemed to be quiet as hundreds of thousands of people were killed, maimed, and others managed to flee their homes (Jumbert & Lanz, 2013).  The African Union has since vowed to respond better to the search process to avoid extreme human suffering, as was the case in Darfur.

Acts of terror by the state to encourage other terrorist groups to continue with their terror activities be in relationship with the government. When a government uses terror to push for an agenda within its borders, it encourages other groups within the countries and outside the country to respond to the Acts of terror by the government with terror. The result is increased acts of terrorism around the world. According to LaFree, Dugan, & Miller (2016), many terror groups have been emerging within the last few years due to state-sponsored terror.  These groups emerged to protect themselves against the states.  In some cases, once the initial mission of the group is achieved, they turned into dangerous terror groups that join other international terror groups and commit atrocities around the world.

Governments use militia in the state-sponsored terrorism, and once they are through with such groups, they neglect them. Such groups turn into dangerous terror groups that engage in acts of killing and maiming.  As noted earlier, they also are vulnerable and can be approached by international terror groups such as Al-Qaeda to join them and fight for their misguided cause (LaFree, Dugan, & Miller, 2016).  Therefore, states must not perpetrate acts of terror either against their citizens or against foreign entities. The government should use the military and other law enforcement forces within their laws.

Terrorism has been synonymous with the Middle East for a very long time. Many terror groups coming from the region have been a source of significant concern for the United States. Friendly countries in the area are strategic partners in the fight against terror. However, the revelation that Osama Bin Laden had been living in Pakistan and the country’s authorities did not inform the U.S. has called into question the sincerity and usefulness of some of the allies in fighting terror.  Nonetheless, cooperation with countries in the region allows the U.S. to plant its spies in the states and get useful information on terrorist activities (Al Sarhan, 2017).

It is worth noting that the U.S. has also been accused of contributing to the mushrooming of terror groups. For instance, the rise of ISIS has been attributed to the invasion of Iraq without a plan of what was going to happen after the ouster of Saddam Hussein. Some of the terror groups that emerge in such a manner have been used by countries such as Iran to commit state-sponsored terrorism. Therefore, the U.S. must develop an elaborate plan on how it can cooperate and empower friendly countries to be on the frontline in fighting terror. There has been fear among some countries in helping the U.S. in the war against terror as it makes them targets of the terror groups. Some states also use the small terror groups that form within their borders to commit acts of terror against their foreign adversaries.

A recent act of terrorism by the Syrian government was the use of Chlorine gas against a rebel stronghold in Idlib.  Such an action by a government even on a rebel group is considered an act of terrorism because the results of such action are similar to what happens when terrorists attack in the same manner.  The government is supposed to arrest and charge criminals.  When a government uses chemical weapons to kill those perceived to be rebels and denies it, it is a sign of terrorism.  The Bashar al-Assad regime has been accused of many atrocities, most of which the U.S. claim are war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Effectiveness of State Terrorism

The use of state terror does not support the achievement of state interests.  In most cases, insurgent groups grow stronger, and they may gain support from other sympathetic groups from within or without the borders of the country. Therefore, the result is usually a constant cycle of war between the states and militia groups that form in the country. In cases such as Sudan, the SPLM grew stronger and continued to fight with government forces (Jumbert, & Lanz, 2013). The objectives of the government are using state terror may be achieved, but thousands of people end up being killed, and thousands more made to flee their country.

In the familiar case of Syria, there has never been peace in the country, and hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria are in different countries in Europe and North America.  Terrorism at the international level serves no purpose as most countries around the world have policies of not negotiating with the terrorists. Terrorist activities in the Middle East that have been sponsored partly by the authoritarian regimes have not yielded any positive results in terms of resolving the Gaza conflict. The differences between Palestinian and Israeli continue and the only possible resolution can only be reached through dialogue and not terror activities.

The motives of terror activities by the state-sponsored organizations are more than just gaining political control in a country. They also intend to gain political influence in other countries. Terror related activities by groups affiliated with some countries cause some severe consequences with their terrorist activities in other countries.  For instance, the actions of Hamas in the Palestine-Israel conflict have critical implications in how the dispute could be resolved.  State terror by some governments, such as the one that took hundreds of lives in Sudan, is different in terms of the motives. The motive of the war that was instigated by the state was partly ethnic cleansing. The Al Bashir regime wanted to ensure that the ethnic community that resided in the Darfur region was intimidated, and its influence on matters of national importance reduced.  Therefore, governments use militant groups in some cases against their people mainly to gain political control over a region and to stop a rebellion that they may be facing. State terror, by its definition, is common in most African countries, but they are rarely referred to as state terror.

The international community tends to isolate countries identified as sponsors of any terror activity, whether domestic or foreign.  For instance, most states have severed their ties with countries such as Syria, classified as a sponsor of terror both domestically and internationally. Sudan, under the leadership of Omar Al-Bashir, had few allies. The former president had a warrant of arrest and, as such, avoided traveling outside his country for fear of being arrested in a foreign country and taken to The Hague.  According to Bandyopadhyay and Younas (2018), state-sponsored terrorism achieves no meaningful goal other than isolating a country and its people from the rest of the international community.

Finally, the democratization of the countries that are prone to using state terror needs to be pursued as a priority. However, it is essential to avoid forceful removal of autocratic regimes as it happened during the Arab Springs. As has been seen in the past, most of the countries that were affected by the Arab Spring are not in a better situation than they were when they had autocratic leaders. Getting authoritarian leaders out of power needs a strategy that will ensure the country remains better off after gaining democracy. Democracy can also help with fighting terrorism and state terror. Involving citizens in leadership and governance can be a very successful strategy in limiting state terror activities.

References

Al Sarhan, A. S. (2017). The United States Foreign Policy and the Middle East. Open Journal of Political Science, 7, 454-472. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2017.74036

Bandyopadhyay, S., & Younas, J. (2018, January 9). Impact of Terrorism on Developing Countries: St. Louis Fed. Retrieved from https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/fourth-quarter-2017/impact-terrorism-developing-countries.

Bresnan, J. (2005). Indonesia a great transition. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Dakwar, J., & Goldstein, E. (2004). Morocco: human rights at a crossroads. New York, NY: Human Rights Watch.

Jackson, R. (2011). Contemporary state terrorism: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.

Jumbert, M. G., & Lanz, D. (2013). Globalized rebellion: the Darfur insurgents and the world. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 51(2), 193–217. doi: 10.1017/s0022278x13000177

LaFree, G., Dugan, L., & Miller, E. (2016). Putting terrorism in context lessons from the global terrorism database. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Laqueur, W. (1986) ‘Reflections on Terrorism’, Foreign Affairs, 65: 86–100. (2003) No End to War: Terrorism in the Twenty-first Century, New York: Continuum

Magen, A. (2018). Fighting Terrorism: The Democracy Advantage. Retrieved from https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/fighting-terrorism-the-democracy-advantage/.

Maghraoui, A. (2008). Morocco’s Reforms after the Casablanca Bombings. Retrieved November 2019, from https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/21592.

Tapsell, R. (2014). By-lines, Balibo, Bali bombings: Australian journalists in Indonesia. North Melbourne, Vic: Australian Scholarly Publishing.