IL Facts: Terrorism in International Law: Is it what you think?

Public perceptions about terrorism in the decade since 9/11 stem from a habitual way of perceiving any foreign security threat in terms of specific, named countries or groups or the leaders of those countries or groups. This is particularly true of the US, but also true of its developed western counterparts across the pond. The public equates trans-national terrorism with Al Qaeda, Iran, extremist Islam or anti-westernism. Viewed through the lens of the mass media, what does or does not constitute terrorism is rather clearer than any discussion of the definitions in law or international politics might imply.

How would you define terrorism?

Personally, this Diplomat prefers a definition of “subversive acts or threats of violence with an intention to, directly or indirectly, coerce, intimidate or terrorise targets perceived to be in a position of authority or power by means of destroying public property or victimisation of innocent, unentangled or civilian people.”
However, defining terrorism is an extremely subjective and politicised activity. It entangles notions of what are or are not legitimate military targets, perpetuating the idea of the State’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force, and the fate of self-determination and freedom fighting globally. 

But what does the law say?

International law doesn’t have a definition of terrorism, nor is “terrorism” a crime. This is because “international criminal law is currently subdivided into international criminal law stricto sensu — the so-called core crimes — and crimes of international concern — the so-called treaty crimes“, also known as transnational crimes. It is due to this fact (and the Baxter Paradox*) that terrorism has not been addressed by customary law (with consensus).
However, the lack of a crime of terrorism in IL is significant as acts of terrorism are often remote or transnational, making them difficult to domesticise and therefore combat within domestic jurisdictions alone. This means that without international cooperation, made extremely difficult due to the aforementioned issues, terrorism continues unfettered by the international community as a whole.

2 thoughts on “IL Facts: Terrorism in International Law: Is it what you think?

  1. Best terrorism quote ever, when attempting to assuage the anxiety of the children in the sitcom “outnumbered”. (parent)-“There have always been terrorists … when we were younger it was the Irish who were terrorists” (child)- “what, like Graham Norton and Jedward?”. Daebh.


  2. In September 2013, a renowned expert on terrorism, Dr. Boaz Ganor of the Institute of Counter Terrorism (ICT), delivered a lecture on the need to define terrorism. His lecture, I believe should be available on the net. In case you are unable to access it, I will forward the same to you. You may add to your above post in the light of the address by Dr. Ganor.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s