Free «Can the Desire for Political Freedom ever Justify Terrorism» Essay Sample

Terrorism should not be simply thought as politically motivated violence, perpetrated by “evil” individuals, as many naïve people continue to believe – terrorism is nothing short of being a true existential mode on the part of those who cannot think of their lives outside of life of communities, to which they belong. Therefore, suggesting that terrorism should not be considered as the legitimate form of warfare is the same as suggesting that states should not have waged wars on each other in the past, simply because, during the time of war people get killed. Thesis The desire for political freedom can never justify terrorism as military actions and war lead to deaths of innocent people and civilian population.

Governmental officials and representatives of such international organizations as U.N., believe that it is solely up to them to decide on what is right and what is wrong, and that it is solely up to them to utilize violence as the mean of enforcing “tolerance”. However, the members of ethnic and religious communities have a different perspective on the issue. And, there are many good reasons to believe that it is namely the “communities” that will eventually prevail in confrontation with “states”.Nowadays, the application of conventional social, economic and political terminology, to describe the realities of living in post-industrial world, can no longer be thought of as fully adequate (Perl, 2001). This can be explained by the fact that the process of Globalization is changing the very essence of socio-political reality as generations and generations of people before us used to know it. Such suggestion appears being especially applicable, within a context of defining of how concepts of “war” and “terrorism” interrelate with each other. Thus, it appears that; whereas, war continues to remain the ultimate tool of solving geopolitical problems, those who resort to military action as the most effective instrument of achieving their political goals, are being no longer concerned with observing the basics of international law – this is the actual origin of modern terrorism. This also explains the reason why, during the course of recent decade, the problem of international terrorism had acquired fully independent subtleties, while becoming a major headache for the governments of Western countries; whereas, as recent as thirty years ago, the existence of terrorist organizations was thought of as being simply the by-product of geopolitical confrontation between U.S. and Soviet Union (Martin, 2003).

Political freedom should not be achieved y means of deaths and sufferings of innocent people. Despite the fact that America’s war on single individual Osama bin Laden has been going on for eight years now, there is no end in sight to this war. Such situation appears being especially illogical, given the fact that it had only taken four years for America to defeat both: Germany and Japan during the course of WW2. And, it is only when Al Qaeda’s terrorist activities are being discussed within the context of “community” vs. “state”, that the true causes for this organization’s operational efficiency would become apparent. It is important to understand that, just as it is the case with traditional forms of warfare, the ultimate goal of “communal” warfare is victory (Martin, 2003). In open confrontation with Western countries, Muslim world would not stand even a slightest chance. Therefore, Muslim countries sponsor Islamic terrorism to undermine Western civilization’s integrity from within, with enforcers of “multiculturalism” in these countries acting as terrorists’ “moles”. And, as it has always been the case, throughout the history, when it comes to conducting warfare, its participants are being primarily concerned with winning, rather then with gaining the reputation of “legitimate combatants”. Hiroshima and Nagasaki may be referred to, other then merciless acts of terrorism on a truly global scale (Perl, 2001).

In sum, terrorism and terror groups commit “crimes against humanity” and increase military tension between the states. While confronting physically stronger opponent, it is only weaker individual’s willingness to kick “bully” in the groin, which would account for his chance of winning. As popular saying goes – victors write history. Winners are always “right” and losers are always “wrong”.


What Our Customers Say

Get 15%OFF   your first custom essay order Order now Use discount code first15
Click here to chat with us