Adrian M. Tamayo
University of Mindanao
The origin of International Terrorism
Terrorism is as old as history. It was used in order to justify the aim of a political and economic ends. It implements the most horrendous acts in the minimal number and resonating it in the mind and psychology of the people, making them not safe in their homes – thus terror. The presence can be traced into the long order of historical remnants. Associated with terrorism are the assassins who are feared individuals who carry death orders for a payment. However, the origin of the word is highly associated with a Muslim sect during the 8th to 14th who were feared because of their fierce killing using a dagger which carnage carried even during the day.
The members were noticeably chewing hashish that’s why they are called as hashashin . Another term that is closely related with the terrorism is zealot which is a Jewish sect in the first century which group was opposed to Roman Empire’s presence in Israel.
The most popular in the annals of recorded history is the “Reign of Terror” of the French Revolution where killing was rampant and were carried against the opposition to newly established setup of French democracy. Huntington (1993) described the period as war of people which established the State-led conflict where people participated in the war not due for a king’s or princes’ whims but on the general perception, belief, rights and honor of the people.
Terrorism defined
According to Chomsky (2001) as quoting the US Army Manual that “terror is the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to attain political or religious ideological goals through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear”. The French Revolution was so horrendously carried by executing death orders to individuals known to oppose the newly installed democracy. Sloan (2006) described it as rather having tinge of emotions, accordingly, “someone’s terrorist is somebody else’s freedom fighter”. Chomsky on the other hand satirically described that the act of terror is itself acceptable when it is carried by a strong state against people beyond national boarders in order to curtail threat of democracy or to establish a so-called “humanitarian regime”.
Notably, Nicaragua filed for unjustifiable “use of force” of the United States against the local Nicaraguans at the World Court and at the UN Security Council, the Reagan desisted the decision of the Court that Nicaragua must be compensated and must receive reparation due to the US intervention in the internal affairs, but the United States desisted the World Courts decision and also vetoed the decision of the UN Security Council.
The brute force used by the Reagan Administration against Nicaraguans, using the US – sponsored - terrorists targeting the “soft targets” or undefended civilians led into what Chomsky’s description of terrorism as “United in Joy” quoting the Wall Street Journal describing the outcome of thousands of citizens impoverished and other thousands deaths.
“Unjustified use of force”, “brute force” defines terrorism describing the small, uncoordinated networks of disgruntled individuals acting against the strong State. While if it is carried by a strong powerful state employing the same act of terror against a weak nation, then it is “United in Joy”.
Noam Chomsky described evolution of the act of aggression against US and the corresponding retaliation of the World Power against these aggressive acts as result of its military interventions in the many nations of the world. In the dawn of history the US used the most atrocious acts over two hundred of years, killing most of the inhabitants in Mexico, the Caribbean, and in Central America it sent soldiers to cross the high seas to conquer Hawaii and Philippines, killing many Filipinos during the Filipino – American war. The notorious “Jake Smith” converted Samar into militarized zone, literally making the place a “ghost town” that even an astray dog seen walking will be shoot.
The United States policy is to always bring war in another countries’ soil. It sent soldiers to Europe during the D-Day, sent armies Pacific and to Philippines. It interfered in the affairs of Vietnam, Korea, South Africa, China, and supported mercenaries in Algeria on the virtue of the Washington Policy of curtailing the proliferation of the communism in the world. But in all of implementing this Truman doctrine to cut the tentacles of communism in anywhere it spread, it always comes with killing. This was politically stated in support of freedom as “the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures”. The fighting was always somewhere else, it was others who were getting slaughtered. As Cromsky emphasized, the carnage will always be not in the soils of the US, not in the national territory .
