Daniel Byman provides a handy guide to interpreting terrorism over the last century or so:
Terrorism has changed over time. David Rapoport, an influential scholar of terrorism, argues that we’ve seen four waves of terrorism so far: an anarchist wave at the turn of the last century; an anti-colonial wave that began in the 1920s and continued for four decades; a leftist wave that declined with the fall of Communism; and an Islamist wave that arose with the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran and continues to present, taking different forms, such as that of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, in the years since. These waves all featured different types of terrorism: anarchists assassinated prime ministers and presidents, leftists kidnapped industrialists and attacked military targets, and anti-colonial movements used terrorism as part of revolutionary warfare, along with guerrilla tactics and political mobilization.
It would be interesting to take a representative of each of these waves and ask them to re-characterize the activities used to distinguish each wave. Is it terrorism from their point of view as well? Or a justified war to throw off the colonial yoke? I just have to wonder if the word terrorism is being overused at this juncture, or if we’re really stuck with our viewpoints. Is there a universal term (or plural) for these activities, one which provides accurate descriptions and interpretive power, or are we inevitably stuck with our parochial viewpoints?
Whatever the answers, Daniel’s summary is a handy guide.
