Defining and Redefining Terrorism: a Sociological Perspective

 
15.12.2014
 
University
 
Michel Wieviorka (EHESS, Paris)

Renowned French sociologist Michel Wieviorka gave a lecture in the EUSP’s Golden Hall. Mr. Wieviorka is a professor at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences (EHESS), in Paris.

Terrorism changes from decade to decade as its basic goals, ideologies, participants, and meanings are modified. In the 1960s and 1970s, so-called “domestic” terrorism took place. At that time, terrorist organizations presented themselves in ideological terms as a combination of far right (or far left) views and nationalism. Organizations such as the Irish IRA or the radical-leftist Basque ETA functioned actively in these years. Basque terrorists were inspired by a mixture of Marxism and nationalism, and their struggle took place on three fronts: for workers’ rights, for independence of the Basque Country from Spain, and against the Franco dictatorship. In these years, young people, united in radical leftist terrorist groups, operated under the banner of the struggle for workers’ rights in Germany, and ultra right and ultra left terrorism proliferated in Italy.

In the context of the changes that terrorism had undergone, it’s important to note two important characteristics of terrorist activity. Terrorism is rational — it is based on a well thought-out strategy and is not reducible to madness. It is always a shrewd, ideologically loaded project. Terrorists speak on behalf of nations, classes, and various social groups. A following pattern exists: the more terrorists use violence, the more the meaning of their struggle becomes artificial. For example, after the fall of the Spanish dictatorship, during the years when the industrial power of Basque Country was on the decline and the number of workers there sharply decreased, the primary goals of Basque terrorist activity came to naught. With increasing levels of violence during the years of crisis, the organization had actually ceased to struggle for the interests of the working class: the meaning behind its activities was eliminated.

Around the 1970s came the internationalization of terrorism, and radical protest movements arrived on the scene. One of these was the Palestinian terrorist organization “Black September.” This organization was subject to manipulation by other state parties, and therefore the meanings of its activities were artificial. As a result, there arose an increased scale of manipulation.

The 1990s saw the transformation of terrorism into a global rather than local phenomenon. Terrorism based on leftist ideas gave way to radical Islam. Today terrorism has taken on a religious dimension and the goals of terrorists are no long tied to nationalism or working-class interests: the phenomenon has become cosmopolitan. Terrorism is spreading throughout the Near East, and Al-Qaeda has become the largest and most influential terrorist organization in the world.

Describing the particularities of the contemporary stage of terrorism, we must define “pure” terrorism, or terrorism in its ideal form. “Pure” terrorism has a maximally rational actor operating within a totally artificial set of meanings. Such organizations and movements were few. Perhaps the only recent example of pure terrorism is the terrorist act that took place in the United States on September 11, 2001. After this Al-Qaeda lost its position as the center of global terrorism, and a new era began.

Today, terrorism has become all the more effective in developing strategies of rational action. Terrorists have an excellent grasp on modern technology, as well as financial means. The meaning of their activities has become even more artificial, and participants often kill themselves, having been manipulated by cynical leaders. Terrorism of the post-Al-Qaeda stage is linked to self-destruction and suicide, with a decrease in value of human life.

To understand the current situation it is important to answer the following question: what propels people on the path of terrorism? Wieviorka believes that terrorists are often people who haven’t found their place in society; they are excluded from it and don’t have the chance to change their situation. Social problems in society have become an important source of such modification: many single and marginalized people have left France to join terrorists in Syria.

Old forms linked to expressing the demands of nations, ethnic groups or social classes often co-exist with “pure” terrorism: a prime example of this is the Nord-Ost hostage crisis Moscow. On the one hand, the Nord-Ost terrorists were comprised of a national minority acting on behalf of their people — but on the other, they were marginalized by society.

In this light, according to Wieviorka, modern terrorism is directly linked with war and armed conflicts and often propagates within a state formed within the borders of another; this can lead to the prospect of the state-terrorist. Modern terrorism is thus an absolutely rational but totally meaningless activity for quasi sates and marginalized individuals.

Sofia Lopatina