The following talk was given to a NOW meeting in Autumn 2004 by Irene Brennan
1. Brief Introduction to a Discussion: Some Thoughts on the Nature of Terrorism
Suggested definition of terrorism
Violence used against a civilian population in order to achieve military/political aims.
NB Such violence, utilized against a civilian population, is outlawed under international law
State Terrorism
At a global level, terrorism is more frequently employed by states against civilians, than by militias.This can take one or more of the following forms:
(NB These are just some forms of state terrorism - one might think of others)
Terrorism by Militias
Sometimes the term 'terrorism' is employed wrongly to describe militia attacks on occupying armies or on state organs that are utilizing terrorism against their populations. Eg. French partisans; Vietcong forces; ANC sabotage; Iraqi insurgents attacking 'coalition' military targets and state forces. To say that an attack is not terrorist is not to say that it is justified; additional criteria of military efficacy, political necessity and principles of international law must be applied. Sabotage of infrastructure is a 'grey' area in so far as such infrastructure might be vital for civilian well being, but is not terrorism in a case where a militia has wide support for such activities - eg ANC.
Attacks on civilians to inculcate fear and acceptance of militia authority
-
Eg. Some 'Shining Path' strategies ( But attacks on collaborators is a 'grey'
area and may be justified)
Attacks on enemy civilians in preference to enemy military eg Twin Towers
However:
Attacks to implement:-
Some Comments on the Terrorist Attack on the School at Beslan
The terrorist nature of the attack on Beslan
1. The attack was made on the most vulnerable section of the population - namely
children.
2. It constituted a type of ethnic cleansing - it aimed to wipe out the future
generation of Beslan
3. It was accompanied by psychological torture (threat of death) and physical
ill treatment (denial of water and food) and arbitrary killing
4. No attempt was made at mediation.
The previous state terrorism of the Russian Government in Chechnya (see below) can in no way justify this attack on a civilian population, largely comprising children.
Very brief history of Chechen insurgency
19th. Century, as the Ottoman Empire came under pressure from various national groups the Czarist Empire expanded southwards. To the south of Chechnya, the (Christian) Georgians and Armenians welcomed the overthrow of Ottoman power in the region and co-operated with the Russians, but pockets of Muslim populations were left, for example, in Chechnya and Ingushetia . Chechen leaders co-operated with the Turks in WW1 and with the Nazi armies in WW2. As a collective punishment, Stalin exiled the Chechens to Central Asia. They were allowed to return in the 1970s. By that time, many citizens from other parts of the USSR had settled in Chechnya, mostly in the cities and towns.
In the early 1990s, when Yeltsin was in dispute with the Parliament, Gaidar, the Prime Minister, made arms available to Chechen dissidents in order to undermine the power of the Speaker of the Duma, Khasbulatov, whose power base was in Chechnya. At that time, some influential Russian elites were in support of withdrawal from Central Asia and parts of the Caucasus. Khasbulatov opposed this and other government policies. The Moscow Government saw the Russians in Chechnya as oppositionist. Violence broke out in Chechnya, and also between the Christian North Ossetians and Muslim fighters from Ingushetia. .
However, Yeltsin altered course after the storming of Parliament, and tried to rein in the Chechens. This was unsuccessful. Yeltsin employed state terrorism in Chechnya. During this time, the centre of Grozny - a predominately Russian area - was destroyed by the Russian Army. The struggle in Chechnya was also exported by the Chechen separatists to Dagestan. This was funded, in part, by those who wished to disrupt Russian energy distribution. After Putin's rise to power, the repression centred mainly on the rural, Muslim areas. Under Yeltsin, this state terrorism was indiscriminate, ferocious and inept; Under Putin it was less inept and indiscriminate but just as ferocious. He intensified the attacks on Chechen separatists because he saw the Chechnya and the neighbouring areas as vital to Russia's oil and gas distribution from the Caspian Sea area, and vulnerable to US interference
In the middle 1990s, some of the Chechen separatist leaders had encouraged the involvement of Wahabi fighters in their struggle against the Russian state. Wahabis form a fundamentalist sect of Islam based in Saudi Arabia. Until the late 20th Century it was an unimportant strand of Islam, but with the backing of Saudi money it has become much more influential. Wahabi fighters have been active in Afghanistan, Central Asia, the Caucasus; they are now in Iraq.
By the early 2000s, the involvement of these fighters had split the Chechen separatist movement between those led by Maskhadov and those under the control of Basyrov. The latter worked more closely with the Wahabi fighters and appears to have been responsible for initiating the attack on the school at Beslan, which involved Chechen separatists, Wahabis and other groups, such as Ingushetian separatists.
END