WRTG112 UMUC Impact of New Terrorism in Contemporary World Research Paper
Question Description
The New Terrorism
How new is the “³new”³ Terrorism and what impact does it have on the contemporary world?
Introduction
In the recent past, scholars of Peace, International Relations and History have sought to create distinctions between Old Terrorism and New Terrorism. While there are several definitions of terrorism, in this paper, terrorism is treated as an act of violence or intimidation, which is majorly targeted on many civilians living within a specific geographical region. As a practice, terrorism has been evolving rapidly. The manner in which terrorism was being executed more than five decades ago is much different from the manner in which terrorism is being practiced today. Because of the advancement in various technologies of war, the approach to terrorism has witnessed a significant change. Today, terrorists have access to a wide range of war technologies, and this has made terrorism an incredibly challenging phenomenon to states. Today, states are dealing with groups which are technologically and technically equipped, and their attacks can have adverse effects on targeted populations. For example, terrorists have access to chemical weapons and advanced technologies of rocket missile launchers which they can use or make long-range attacks. In this regard, terrorism has become an incredibly complex affair, and the acts of terrorists are capable of having adverse effects on populations. However, the dichotomy of new versus old terrorism is not to be understood in these lenses of the evolving approach to terrorism. However, the changing ideas, mission, belief and values and desired goal of acts of terrorism are the hallmarks of the differences between the old and the new terrorism. Old terrorism is viewed as acts of terror which were used by extremist groups to pass political messages, especially to states.However, the new terrorism is hinged on some vague and almost always conflicting religious and philosophical foundations. In new terrorism, extremist groups believed that they have some values which they feel need to be adhered to by all people.For instance, a group of people may have religious beliefs which they may feel need to be followed by all persons. The people who do not subscribe to these ideas and beliefs usually face the full wrath of the terrorists. While there are different motives between the old and new terrorism, it is essential to understand that their effects on society have not changed. Both of them lead to massive losses of life, property as well as the destruction of the moral fabric of society.
The old terrorism
The primary feature of old terrorism which differentiates it from the new terrorism is its use as a political weapon. In the old terrorism, terrorists used violence as a way of communicating political messages. It could be practiced domestically or internationally.Domestically, when a group of radicals feel that the government is not acting in their best interests, or when they feel that the people are acting in excess of their authorities, they will use terrorism a way of communicating their displeasure (Crenshaw, 2008). In this way, the terrorists hope that through their violence, they believe the government will blink first and act in accordance with their demands. For instance, it is possible that a group of people may want the government to stop a particular program such an as disarmament in a certain region. In rejection of such a policy, it is possible that individuals who are opposed to it may use violence to arm-twist the government to drop such a program.
In the old terrorism, just as it is in the new terrorism, the primary intention was not to cause harm but to be heard. The people thought that by harming or killing other people, the government or the people in authority would get to hear their concerns. In many instances, the old terrorism was used as a weapon of last resort. Ordinarily, the terrorists had lengthy communications to the government regarding what they want to be done. However, in the instances when the people felt that the government was not going to listen to them at any cost, they would resort to the use of violence and intimidation to force the hands of the government (Wilkinson, 2014). It is essential to note that there are instances when terrorists kidnapped some people and asked the government to act in a particular way to prevent the killing of these people. In such circumstances, the government is placed in a great moral dilemma whether to violate its policies and do what the terrorists want and protect the lives of the people or ignore the terrorists, an action which may lead to the loss of innocent lives.
In the old terrorism, the conflict was primarily between the terrorists and the government. Members of the public were not a party to the conflict in many instances. The members of the public were only introduced into the conflict as