Terror

It generally terrorism and resistance on ethical criteria, the resistance to be used, unlike terrorism a legitimate objective. This distinction is developed by Maurice Duverger, he said, the resistance is claiming the right to self-determination and resistance to oppression, while terrorism is organized crime. Resistance or partisan war is used as a means of pressure to put an end to an occupation or a violent bid. Some examples of supporters of war and resistance: the different currents during the Second World War as the Franks snipers and supporters (FTP) which will gather to form the French Forces of the Interior (FFI) that de Gaulle organizes a united front of resistance to the Nazi occupiers and France of Vichy, the Algerian war as a war of independence against France, which was set up in acts of terrorism on the part of the secret army organization [ OAS], or more recently in Britain with the struggle of Northern Ireland.

Jacques Derrida still recalls clearly that the definition of terrorism depends on the ability to distinguish different types of wars, and armed fighters, according to analysis of Carl Schmitt referring in this regard.

It states:

“A critical reading of Carl Schmitt, for example, would be very useful [...] to take into account, as far as possible, the difference between the conventional war (declared and direct confrontation between two enemies, in the great tradition of European law), the “civil war” and “war supporters” (in its modern forms, although it appears, Schmitt acknowledges, from the early nineteenth century). “

It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between acts of resistance and acts of terrorism because the different terms refer to a form of legitimacy supposed political goals in part to justify acts of violence. The perception of legitimacy will vary widely depending on the protagonists and observers which complicates the establishment of an objective definition and universal acceptance of the concept of terrorism. One case even more complex that is part of the news is that of Iraq, where various trends of Islam are at war and some creeping armed groups resorting to violence against Iraqi civilians and foreigners. Considering resistance to the occupation of their country by the United States of America the perpetrators claim to find in this statute justification for their actions. If against refusal to grant this status resistance or denial of the political objective (not considering that Iraq is occupied) or because it is considered that the extreme violence used is beyond any form of justification, on talk of these acts of violence as acts of terrorism. Thus, the designation of terrorist underlying complete illegitimacy of these actions while the definition of resistant underlying legitimacy to resist the invader. This idea would be more intelligible in the whole of the relationship between “terrorism and propaganda.”

Filed by Premium Blogger at 1:51 pm under Concept of Terrorism, Terrorism, Terrorism and Resistance  Tagged Concept of Terrorism, resistance, terror, Terrorism, terrorism and resistance
No Comments