PS 230 final Flashcards
American terror groups
Right-wing: KKK and Christian Identity movement
Left-Wing: Anarchists, Weather Underground, and black panther party for self-defense
Single issue groups: anti-abortion violence, animal and Earth liberation fronts, Puerto Rican nationalist groups
Right Wing American Terror groups
KKK
Christian Identity Movement
KKK terror group
white supremacy (not a lot of influence today)
Christian Identity Movement
white supremacy (anti-government, anti-jew, and anti-minority.)
Left-Wing American terror groups
Anarchists
Weather Underground
black panther party for self-defense
Anarchists American terror group
No belief in government
Weather underground Amercian terror group
Leftist anti-Vietnam group, saw themselves as fighting against social inequality. Started out with riots and fights with police. After the war they died out
Black Panther Party for self defense
Formed in California in 1966, the general agenda was to protect black Americans from police brutality. Heavily armed police battles in the streets. They begin to further develop and do bombings and hijackings. Some leaders are more radical than others. Mainly died out in 1969, but they have resurfaced there are no the old black panthers and the new black panther party, and they don’t like each other.
Single issue terror groups in America
Anti-abortion violence
Animal and earth liberation fronts
Puerto rican nationalist groups
Early terrorist groups
Zealots, Assassins, Thugs, and Anabaptists
Zealots
in Israel- ended 73 AD
(anti-rome and want to force romans out. Carried out attacks on roman officials + supporters. #1 targets tax collectors of rome. Method- up close and personal, come up and stab you with a sword in the arm and run away.)
Assassins
11th to 13th century
(extreme branch of shia islam. Active in Persia (Iran and Syria) and they targeted Sunis, the other branch of Islam. Ani-suni wanted to throw off sunni leadership in Shia areas. Public and personal, attacked at close range with daggers. After they carried out attacks they did not even try to flee. They would sit and wait to be captured; they were committed to their cause.)
Thugs
11th century
(active in northern India until the British eventually destroyed them. Thugs would strangle targets with silk scarves, up close and personal. Mainly attacked travelers on the road. We really don’t know their purpose, after they killed them to rob them but it seemed to be based on control.)
Anabaptists
around reformation
(milennal sect. Targeted what they believed to be the antichrist. They defined that as protestants and sinful catholics that worked with protestants. They believed if they killed enough they would cause Christ to return.)
Anarchists
-anti government
-possibly first global terror group (broad reach)
-not coordinated, loose people who all agree on similar ideas who would take action.
-they have been very successful because they do not coordinate or form big groups so it’s hard to weed out cells
-assisnation was their main weapon:
French president sadi carnot
Spanish prime minister canovas
King umberto of Italy
Empress Elisabeth of Austria
President garfield and mckinley
Structure:
major branches/ divisions of UN
Secretariat, Security council, General assembly, World Court (ICJ).
Secretariat
International civil servants (people who work for UN)
Head of secretariat: Secretary - General of UN
-5 year term and 2 term limit
Elected
Security council
-military/ security issues
5 permanent members
-US, UK, France, Russia, China, winners of ww2
-Perk: Permanent members can veto any security council resolution
People complain because bc we will never vote for something that will ever harm us or our allies
-expansion
-Really hard to get things past the security council. Must be majority 9/15 and all 5 permanent members
10 non permanent members
-rotate off and are elected to two year terms and 5 of them are replaced every year. Regular change
General assembly
-legislature
-193 states
-Every state gets 1 vote
-Observers (representation but not state like holy catholics or palestinians)
Resolutions are Non binding. It can create norms but states do not HAVE to follow it.
World Court (ICJ)
-judicial body and states only
-optional clauses- can restrict areas where court has authority over you
Functions :
-settle disputes based on IR law
-advisory opinions: Court can rule on legality of something that hasn’t happened yet and hypotheticals. They will rule on it in advance. Only other parts of the UN can ask for it.
Members
-15 members elected to a 9 year term. Assembly and council vote for justices. Members rotate every three years, and you can be reelected. Membership is restricted by country. It can also expand when necessary in individual cases. In some cases they have to add a temporary member.
Goals:
Goals of ICJ
1) war avoidance
1st in charter
2) Human Rights
3) Justice/ International Law
4) Economic and Social progress
-ecosoc: economic and social council focuses on eliminating poverty, food shortages, education, gender equality.
Hamas
“Islamic Resistance Front”
Palestinian terror group
Goal- destruction of Israel and its supporters
Attacks too numerous to count. Every year all the time. Bombings, shootings, etc.
Suni Muslims
Stands out because: in 2006 they won an electoral victory (2007 defeated fatah (palestine organization) military) Fatah had control over west bank and Gaza but after the leader died Hamas took over and became legal government there. Also sparked civil war b/w Hamas and Fatah and Hamas won.
October 7th terror attacks against Israel (2023)
-Hizbollah (Hezbollah) “Party of God”
Group that keeps US national security up at night.
South lebanon and Sh’ite Muslim
Strong link to Iran (trained by elite soldiers out of iran and are trained, equipped, and financed by Iran.)
Evangelical Islam (concerned with the state of Islam and the need to spread Sh’ite beliefs)
They run the state. Doctors, schools, etc. are runned by them. They are a mixed group. They have conventional forces, both a military and terrorist organization.
Their target is israel.
Carried out undeclared war against Israel. Conventional war against Israel and earned a lot of prestige because they weren’t necessarily defeated.
Branches of islam
Sh’ite Muslim and Suni Islam
International law:
-”The body of rules and general principles of action accepted by civilized nations as binding on their actions.” (ICJ)
-International law is much more nebalious than it is made out to be. Domestic law you can read laws clearly, but there is no book for international law. It comes from many different places. No clear path in the international realm.
Sources for international law
Treaties, Consensus, Natural law, and writings of legal scholars.
No legislature and no single path. Multiple sources but none of them replicate law how we usually look at law. Very different in its creation
Treaties as source of IL
States establish international treaties to establish law. Problem becomes: what if your state doesn’t sign a treaty? Is it binding upon you or not? Generally it is not.
Consensus as source of IL
Everyone can agree that something is international law. No written form but there is an agreement. How wide the consensus must be is not well defined.
Natural law as source for IL
Derivives from moral law. The idea that you have moral laws. Things that we know morally are right or wrong. Two different paths:
Rational/logic/reason: logically derive good and bad behaviors and what is good and bad.
Religious traditions that decide international law.
Legal scholars as source for IL
Legal scholars can do research and then write an article to try to establish that something is a part of international law.
Two natural law paths
Rational/logic/reason: logically derive good and bad behaviors and what is good and bad.
Religious traditions that decide international law.
Start of modern terrorism
-dominated by left wing groups
radical socialist (against governments) used terrorism to weaken legitimacy of governments with the hope of eventually overthrowing
Fought to overthrow governments they deemed oppressive
ex: anarchist
Interwar years: 1920’s 30’s
-Shift from left learning to rise of right-wing terror groups
(fascism in germany and italy)
Post world war II:
Explosion of terror groups
-anti colonial groups in Africa and Latin America
(want to overthrow the imperialism power and have their own state)
-Leftist groups
Ernesto “che” Guevara in Latin America
Red army faction in Germany
Red brigades in italy
Weather underground in US (some of first urban orgs)
-all saw themselves as a marxist revolution
Late 1960’s early 70’s:
Growth of the terrorist international
-start to see different terror groups work together and help one another
-this greatly increased their effectiveness. They set aside differing belief to get larger goals
1990 decline of left-wing terror
-red army faction resigns- sent a letter to the german newspapers and resigned
(rare, usually hard to figure out when a terrorist group no longer exists)
-end of cold war
1968 Advent of Modern Terroism
(modern terror tactics)
-Very spectacular terrorism dramas
Very focused on gaining media attention Via tv
-Hijacks
Ex: quadruple of israeli planes
-Munich: massacre when a group called black September captured the male Israeli Olympic team.
(part of growth of terrorist international. Other groups helped them carry out the attack.)
Some experts thought there would be not terror groups after cold group but this was
wrong
Post cold war growth of terrorism
Restraint mechanism lost, Growing opposition to modernity and globalization, and Expansion of travel and communication technologies.
Restraint mechanism lost (post cold war growth)
states that supported them put limits on what they could do during the cold war so that war did not break out. So when soviet union was gone, they had all the resources but no one telling them they couldn’t do it anymore
Growing opposition to modernity and globalization (post cold war growth)
(fought against global modern society and economy. Strong groups rising up that had anti-global motivation)
Ex: Osama Bin Laden attacking global trade center
Expansion of travel and communication technologies (post cold war growth)
made it easier for terrorists to move from place to place and coordinate over social media. Easy to get to places faster and it is very easy to move money. Money can move between cells and it is hidden easier. Really expanded range and scope of groups.
Mistakes in defining terrorism:
- One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter (not true and not academic. Science is not based on feelings. Not based upon whether you agree or disagree with goals. Can’t be relative to views)
- You know it when you see it (not true, can’t have science based on instinct.)
- Terrorists do not see themselves as terrorists (not true. Terrorists know what they are doing.)
Why do we not have a single definition of terrorism?
- Politics
Typically states do not have one single definition because they do not want to be carved out as terrorists or have groups they support be considered terrorists.
(ex US and Iran)
Political battle to not have groups support be seen as terrorist. - Different Views
People/branches of the government have different views.
-FBI sees terrorism as a crime
-Military sees terrorism as war issue
If you want to be a leading force fighting terrorism, then you define it in a way that makes that happen.
Keys to good definition of terrorism:
- Calculated/deliberate/purposeful (done with intent, not accidental targeting.)
- Aimed at the innocent (targeting non combatants/ innocent civilians) (tactics may look similar, but it is WHO you are targeting)
- The goal is to reach a larger audience (trying to get the attention of a bigger group, carry out attacks for attention and to build fear.)
- Fear over material destruction (it is not about what they are destroying (infrastructure, vehicles), it is about destroying it and instilling fear to get them to do what they want.)
- Political goal (other ones are key, this one is debatable. There are different political goals that may not be considered terrorism)
Terrorism is NOT:
- Guerilla war
When you attack the military of the state, but don’t stand up and fight. You carry out an ambush, shoot or bomb then run away.
Difference: your military is fighting their military with a different tactic. Not terrorism. Sneaky does not mean terrorism. - Insurgency
A broad based movement amongst people to try and overthrow the government.
Looks like terrorism because insurgents are not military, but they are still targeting the military so it is not.
ALL ABOUT THE TARGET!
Terrorism is a
tactical choice.
-a deliberate decision
Groups decide how they will fight, and so terrorists decide their tactic is to target noncombatants.
Terrorism usually not their first choice. Usually results after other tactics fail.
Terrorists are
non-state actors, not military.
War crimes are
not terrorism
War crimes are distinct and cases where soldiers take actions that are criminal. While it sounds like terrorism because it targets civilians by the military, it is in a different bucket.
Ex: mi lai massacre: Soldiers ambushed and US platoon got pissed when they couldn;’t find military that did this so they leveled a village there and killed them all.
WHEN MILITARY DOES SOMETHING THAT IS NOT STATE POLICY
State terrorism
If the state orders a large-scale massacre.
States cannot be labeled terrorists by law because they have sovereignty. Instead, they can be labeled state sponsors of terrorism.
Ex: Iran and the houthis rebels
State leaders can commit war crimes and states can be state sponsored of terrorism, but not terrorism.
Why/Who becomes a terrorist?
Theories: Rational choice, Personal traits, social interactions, and two-step model.
Rational choice
If you have a goal, you choose a method that helps get to that goal. Terrorists have their goal, so rational choice says that they use the best tactic to reach their goal. Usually terrorism is their next or last choice. They try to use other tactics that don’t work so they move to terrorism.
-goal oriented.
-not crazy or aberrant. They are adapting to circumstances and using what works best.
Ex: weather underground started by holding protests and then started targeting people. Or the army of god couldn’t change abortion laws so they began blowing up clinics.
Terrorism is a sign of weakness because they can’t achieve objectives any other way.
Personal traits
-Jerrold Post “people with particular traits and tendencies are drawn disportionately to terrorist carries”
Something about them makes them move to terrorism.
Ex: Conflict ridden youths. (when you are young you have problems with authority and constant fights) many have clashes and 70% of men and 60% of women in terror groups have this background.
-This youth leads to alienation, depression, or antisocial behavior. (Gives you new fulfillment. So then you’re alone and the terror group comes along and makes you feel like you belong.) “Killing people to feel loved”
-Terrorism is the end itself (the group doesn’t believe in the goals of the group, but are there because they feel loved.)
Social interactions
-recruited by friends or family. (people become terrorists because of the company they keep.) The basis is that most people are recruited by friends and family members.
88% were recruited by close friend or relative
Two step model
Precondition - grievance
Being mad at someone about something, like being mad at a government.
Trigger event
Some big event happens that moves you from just being mad to you actually picking up a weapon and taking action.
Ex: Osama bin Laden didn’t like the US but didn’t do anything until US troops moved into Saudi Arabia into the holy land in Mecca, then he moved into action.
Timothy Oklahoma city bomber just didn’t like gov, but after WACO he actually moved into action.
(strongest model)
Women and terrorism:
-something more disturbing about women in terror groups
-women have long been active in terror
Terrors use women because they know they get more views when women are involved
Roughly 20-30% of terrorist are female
Leftist groups have more women than right
-number of women are increasing
Why do women join terrorist groups?
Love, demonstrating gender equality, not real women, and tactical advantages.
Love
Ex: study on kkk showed that they joined because their SO was a member of clan
Demonstrating gender equality
(feminist ideas encourage women to prove they are just as strong and capable as men)
Not real women
Women that joined terror groups have an imbalance with testosterone that makes them violent.
Tactical advantages
Women are less likely to be touched and expected to be violent, so we are less likely to search them.
Women can pretend to be pregnant and shape bombs like they are pregnant.
Easy to hide and less likely to be searched.
Major terror groups
red army faction, -ETA - Basque nation and liberty, Hizbollah (Hezbollah), Hamas, Al Qaeda, ISIS,
Does terrorism work?
Short term, yes their can be successes. Long term, no. Record does nor support that it actually works long term.
Two expectations:
-Irgun: jewish nationalist sect that was active in Palestine during the creation of israel. Very violent and accredited to being able to fight off british.
-National Liberation Front: algerian group that were able to drive french out of alregian.
Prisoners dilemma on final
2,2 cooperate, cooperate
Without repeated play, infinite time horizon, shadow of future- most logical thing to do will always be confess/defect.
With repeated play and it’s needed factors, most logical thing to do is cooperate because of benefits.
What do terrorist want?
To accomplish their political objectives or achieve a specific end.
Fundamental paradox of international law
-an attempt to impose rules of behavior on entities (states) that do not accept a higher authority.
-States by definition are sovereign and enjoy immunity. How can you put laws on and limit behavior on something that is sovereign?
leads to soveringty paradox
Paradox of sovereign immunity
Who does international law apply to?
States - you would think
-But the problem is that states are sovereign (sovereignty paradox), so international law applies to individuals.
-Individuals do not have sovereignty, and you can hold them accountable.
Paradox of sovereign immunity - what does it mean today?
- States have sovereign immunity
- Individuals who act in the name of the state do not have immunity
- But all acts of state are performed by an individual
- So states are no longer sovereign?
Resolution to sovereign immunity paradox
Idea of “acting in the name of the state”. If you are a representative you enjoy immunity as long as you are taking LEGITIMATE actions of the state. But if you break out and take illegitimate actions, you are subject to breaking international law.
Prevents government from being sued without it’s consent.
Legitimate vs Illegitimate actions
illegitimate actions: human rights violations, large scale massacres
Legitimate actions: conducting a war
This resolution of international law mirror’s
US Domestic Policy. For example, you cannot sue the federal, local, or state government unless they allow you to because they are sovereign. You cannot sue political or military leaders if they are carrying out legitimate actions.
-we are left in gray area with illegitimate and legitimate line.
Issues in international law
International tribunals, Corporations, Agreements to make domestic law
International tribunals
(setting up a court to deal with specific cases. No long standing tradition or court.)
-increased usage:
International criminal tribunal of yugoslavia to simply look at human rights violations.
-International criminal court - 1998 (efforts to create criminal court structure)
The US, China, and Israel did not join and did not sign a treaty to create a court. So it did not bind them into it. The US stayed out for political reasons and because the relevant crimes that can be covered by the court are not well defined. Henry Kissinger led this because of unclear crimes. We were also worried it would take over the role of US courts. The main reason is because we are afraid the war will be used against them during unpopular wars and target soldiers
Corporations
Ex: ford, diamond chrysler all accused of using slave labor to produce their vehicles. During nazi era, concentration camps participated in building their vehicles during holocaust. So the issue is should you punish them considering the people in positions and people in the stock are different individuals since it happened in the past?
Deuteronomy defense?
But then this could create a cycle where as long as they keep human rights violations a secret then they can profit off of them.
Agreements to make domestic law
1984 torture convention: outlawed torture international law via treaty.
What is interesting, was once you agreed to it and signed the treaty you had to change your domestic laws to match the definition of torture. Then this created a problem because how can the senate sign a treaty to change domestic laws that the house has no say in? So, can you force states to change domestic laws? No final answer on this
-What is also interesting, the torture convention made it where you can capture and try the perpertatrator for those actions even if they did not commit them in your state which goes against usual US policy.
Deuteronomy defense
corporations say that thou shall not punish the son for the sins of the father. You can’t punish them for past peoples actions.
Which dominates? Which one wins domestic or international law?
According to the US supreme court- international law.
(according to one single case which had to do with hunting. So many people question whether this is true precedent or has to do with an individual case because IL was trying to protect geese in that specific situation.
Human Rights:
-” a set of principled ideas about the treatment which all individuals are entitled to by virtue of being human.” (Schmitz and Sikkink 2002) academic
-”Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.” (Preamble, Universal declaration of human rights”
How to decide what should be a human right?
Deductive and Inductive
Deductive
Same as the natural rights tradition in IL. You can use reason and deduce logically what these rights should be.
Inductive
Examine all the rights listed around the world and come up with a list and decide which ones on the list should be counted as universal human rights.
many people criticize the inductive approach because
it is temporarily bound and has historical limitations as our human rights evolve. Deductive is more admirable because it asks what our rights should be.
Reasonable people disagree about
what should be a human right. It is easy to disagree about what should be a human right and what should not be.
Ideas on human rights change with
time.
Dwarf tossing: Clash of Human Rights ideas
If you go to a fair in Europe, you would line up and pay money to toss a dwarf. Europeans do this for fun. France determined that this behavior was a violation of human rights and they were treated less than human. Manwell wackenhiem was a dwarf that made his living being tossed. He sued France saying he had the right to choose his type of employment. He said France violated his human rights by ruining his employment. The US and HRA said that uploading human dignity was more important than his right to choose his job.
German forces women into prostitution: dignity vs work
In the east prostitution is legal, a woman can be offered a job in a brothel. A woman turns down a job in a brothel, so then Germany takes away her unemployment because she turns down a legal job. She sued and the court ruled against her and said since she turned down legal work she must lose her benefits.
Agreements:
Set of agreements and customs that most countries follow most of the time, that cover rights and duties of states.
-1948 genocide and universal delclarion of human rights: outlawd genocide and passed udohr. Heavily influenced by america.
-1952 rights of women: declaration of women’s rights
-1965 racial discrimination
-1984 torture and rights of children
-1998 international criminal courts: creation of court to look at issues
(Mirrors the movement in the United States.)
Why do human rights get violated?
Political explanations:
Threats, Regime Type, and War
Threats
If the state feels that it is under threat, it will lead or the government will become more likely to lash out and create violations. Time of danger causes us to stop thinking of what’s right and wrong, and they will justify it as self defense.
Human rights take a backseat when we feel threatened.
Regime Type
Different types of government are likely to commit abuses. Democracies less likely to commit human rights violations, nondemocratic states more likely. Regime type can also determine what type of human rights violation. In a democracy there are more disappearances, while authoritarian regimes try to create fear so they will do it in public.
Transitions: States that are transitioning to become democratic states are more likely to commit human rights abuses. Once they become a democracy, it will go down but the transition face can be dangerous.
War
Human rights abuses spike during war.
Why do human rights get violated?
Economic explanations
Resource scarcity and Globalization
Why do human rights get violated?
Political, Economic, and Culture/Individual explanations
Resource scarcity
states with fewer resources that are poor are more likely to use oppression and rely on human rights violations to maintain power and control.
Globalization
People argue that moving into globalization has either helped or hurt human rights.
Pro side: globalization has allowed for the expansion in belief in human rights. Foreign investors do not want to come into places that have human rights violations often. So states clean up human rights efforts to get more corporations.
Con side; Chomsky. Chomsky is a leader in a group that has a bit of a marxist bend that says that involvement with the capitalist makes you more likely to see human rights violations take place.
Why do human rights get violated?
Cultural and individual explanation
Ideology and Psychology
Ideology
Certain ideologies and cultural beliefs that are seen to increase human rights abuses. Any belief that dehumanizes some group of people will increase abuse. If I say you’re subhuman, then I don’t think you have human rights which set themselves up to commit abuses.
Psychology:
(Following orders or scapegoats) They find that some people are more likely to follow what our leaders tell us no matter what. Some will listen to authority and not question them no matter what even if it means committing human rights abuses.
Ex: Nazis following order
Ex: milgram study from ps210: Milgram study
-Psychologically, we scapegoat and don’t allow stuff to be our fault. Tendency prone to blame others show that they are more likely to commit human rights violations.
Immunity from International law
States by definition are sovereign and enjoy immunity. State immunity protects the state’s sovereignty and ability to act. Therefore, war and political decisions are legitimate actions and free from restrictions.
sovereign equality
all sovereign states are equal before international law despite asymmetries of inequality in areas like military power, geographical and population size, levels of industrialization and economic development.
Written into US charter 1945
sovereign immunity
the official exemption of a ruler or state from civil suit or prosecution. Prevents government from being sued without it’s consent.
Instead places emphasis on the individual. If you are a representative you enjoy immunity as long as you are taking LEGITIMATE actions of the state. But if you break out and take illegitimate actions, you are subject to breaking international law.
terrorism
premeditated, politically motivated violence, against noncombatant targets by subnational groups usually with goal to influence larger audiences
