from lat. terror - fear, horror), ideology and politics of intimidation, suppression of political opponents by violent methods; violence or the threat of its use against individuals or organizations, as well as destruction (damage) or threat of destruction (damage) of property and other material objects, creating the danger of death, causing significant property damage or the occurrence of other public dangerous consequences carried out for the purpose of violating public safety, intimidating the population, or influencing the adoption by authorities of decisions beneficial to terrorists, or satisfying their unlawful property and (or) other interests; an attack on the life of a statesman or public figure, committed in order to terminate his state or other political activities or out of revenge for such activities; attack on a representative of a foreign state or an employee of an international organization enjoying international protection, as well as on official premises or vehicles persons enjoying international protection, if this act was committed with the aim of provoking war or complications international relations . T. can be resorted to both by state power that establishes a totalitarian, authoritarian dictatorship in the country, and by various informal structures and organizations that seek to suppress the will and neutralize the activity of certain social or national groups of the population through threats and acts of violence. Escalation of terrorist activities at the end of the twentieth century. is largely associated with the intensification of aggressive nationalism and gives rise to numerous acts of ethnic violence. Technological terrorism, the use or threat of use of nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons, radioactive and highly toxic chemical and biological substances, as well as attempts by extremists to seize nuclear and other facilities that pose an increased danger to human life and health, in order to achieve political or material goals. Measures to prevent possible acts of technological terrorism include: determining the most likely actions of persons who have set the task of using nuclear, radiological, chemical or bacteriological weapons; identifying signs of terrorists preparing to commit crimes using radioactive, chemical, highly toxic or bacteriological materials, etc. Lit.: Fundamentals of the Sociology of Terrorism. Collective monograph. M., 2008; Drozdov Yu., Egozaryan V. World terrorist... M.: Paper Gallery, 2004; America: a view from Russia. Before and after September 11. M., 2001; Antonyan Yu.M. Terrorism. Criminological and criminal legal research. M., 2001; Budnitsky O.V. Terrorism in the Russian liberation movement: ideology, ethics, psychology (second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries). M., 2000; Geopolitics of terror (geopolitical consequences of the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001). M., 2002; Karatueva E.N., Ryzhov O.A., Salnikov P.I. Political terrorism: theory and modern realities. M., 2001; Kozhushko E.P. Modern terrorism: Analysis of the main directions. Minsk, 2000; Fonichkin O., Yashlavsky A. September 11, 2001: The first day of a new era. M., 2001; International terrorism: origins and counteraction: Materials of the international. scientific-practical Conf., April 18-19. 2001: Sat. Art. edited by E.S. Stroeva, N.P. Patrusheva. St. Petersburg: Secretariat of the Interparliamentary Council. Assembly of the CIS Member States, 2001; Morozov G.I. Terrorism is a crime against humanity: (International terrorism and international relations). M.: IMEMO, 2001; Pidzhakov A.Yu. International legal regulation of the fight against modern terrorism. St. Petersburg: Nestor, 2001.
Terrorism is a global threat. He strikes not only at Russia, but also at many other countries of the world. Despite this, many countries still maintain a policy of double standards towards Russia, condoning the growth of terrorist activity in our country.
Terrorism is now the greatest threat to the sovereignty and integrity of Russia. Any Russian could become a victim of a terrorist attack. Terrorists do not and cannot have any other goals than sadistic, commercial or dirty political ones. These goals may be no less global than those of the fascists 65 years ago. Terrorists realize their goals using the most brutal methods, striking civilians.
Against the backdrop of intensifying terrorism (about 250 terrorist attacks were committed in the country in 2004 alone), there is also an intensification of nationalist and religious extremist movements, which are a breeding ground for terrorists. Society and the state must together declare a crusade, a war against terror.
There can be no negotiations with terrorists. They must be completely and everywhere destroyed. As soon as the authorities show weakness and follow the lead of the terrorists, the losses for Russia and for every Russian will be much greater, which ultimately can lead to disaster. There can be no concessions to terrorists, bandits and separatists.
Why should we get involved in the fight against international terrorism? I think that Russia must first of all deal with terrorists within the country.
RUSSIA DOES NOT GET INVOLVED in the fight against international terrorism. A war of terrorism has been declared against it. Russia was the first of the great European countries to experience the blows of this war, long before New York, Madrid and London.
The international terrorist alliance has long become a reality, and an adequate response to international terrorism can only be given through the joint efforts of the world community, relying on UN instruments and international law.
Terrorism is fueled by extremism. Young people, drawn into extremist actions of a radical political nature by irresponsible leaders, create fertile ground with their “innocent” actions for even more destructive terrorist methods of achieving political goals.
A tough fight is needed against the practice of double standards, with attempts by some of Russia's Western allies in the anti-terrorist coalition to choose enemies among terrorists, rewarding others with the title of fighters for national freedom.
It is completely unacceptable when European officials try to put a spoke in Russia's efforts to fight terrorists on its sovereign territory, calling for them to sit down at the negotiating table with criminals who have long represented no one but themselves.
If terrorist aggression is being carried out against Russia, then why are we not fighting abroad?
POWER STRUCTURES of Russia are repelling international terrorist aggression directed against the country on Russian territory. However, Russia is fighting terrorist aggression abroad as well. The form of such struggle is participation in the international anti-terrorist coalition.
It is not at all necessary to send your troops to Afghanistan or Iraq to fulfill your functions in the global fight against terrorism. Moreover, sometimes the thoughtless use of force leads to a surge in terrorism: the United States did not listen to Russia and European countries when starting the campaign in Iraq, and as a result, terrorism received a new impetus.
International terrorism is fueled by unresolved conflicts. For example, Russia's role in achieving peace in the Middle East is so great that our opponents are ready to engage in direct provocations. Such a provocation against Russia was the arrest and conviction in Qatar of two Russian citizens on charges of a terrorist act in which one of the former leaders of the Chechen separatists, Yandarbiev, was killed.
Even the richest and most prosperous countries in the world are unable to confront the global threats and challenges that humanity faces at the beginning of the 21st century alone. The united front of states confronting these threats today has already become a real factor in world politics.
Isn’t it too early for us to introduce jury trials and other, obviously alien, costly and ineffective ways for us to evade punishment? Society is not yet ready to punish criminals, and these obstacles will only hinder the authorities.
BOTH THE STATE and society have their own part of this task.
For the state, this is, first of all, the principle of equality of all before the law, a fair trial and the inevitability of punishment. It is the inevitability of punishment that is important; the severity of punishment in itself is not capable of stopping the criminal.
However, not a single law enforcement system is capable of coping with crime in conditions of indifference of society, which entails the population becoming “accustomed” to committing crimes, especially domestic and economic ones, reducing the overall level of moral demands, weakening intolerance towards offenses and offenders.
In a free and fair society, every law-abiding citizen has the right to demand reliable legal guarantees and government protection. Therefore, the most important task is to build a free and fair society in which there is an atmosphere of mutual trust between the population and the law enforcement system. Only in such an alliance can crime be defeated.
Excellent definition
Incomplete definition ↓
Terror (intimidation, fear-mongering) –
- a method of waging war to subjugate the population of the attacked side (and not its organizational or military structures), consisting in a deliberate demonstration of extreme cruelty (not determined by direct necessity and not distinguishing between the guilty and the innocent, i.e. making the entire population hostages).
Terrorism in its modern incarnation –
- a method of forcing the attacked side (usually superior in strength) to make decisions necessary for the terrorist side, consisting in the deliberate demonstration and maximum use of the advantages of its complete unbound by universal moral norms - by which the more civilized attacked side is supposedly bound. Specifically, this results in moral blackmail of the attacked party: one or another form of use of hostages (persons not guilty of the conflict), responsibility for whose lives is transferred to the blackmailed and should force him to make these decisions.
Terrorism of the 19th – early 20th centuries, in particular of Russian “bombers” -
- a method of waging war against the existing social regime, which consists in demonstrating a complete rejection of the rule of law and is expressed in lynching punishments of officials (who largely become hostages of the regime and the goals of terrorists). Given the general belief of those terrorists in the absolute priority of public interests over individual ones, people who were not at all responsible for the existence of the regime, for example, the servants of these officials or random passers-by, could become such hostages.
To carry out sovereign terror, or to commit terrorist acts alone, means -
– to force into submission through fear, for example, through demonstrative crimes.
Any violence, therefore, is already “terrorism” - even if they simply “terrorized” you in the entrance with brass knuckles, extorting your wallet. But terrorism itself is called terrorism that is in one way or another connected with politics or administration. Here violence not only violates the correct social order, no matter how one imagines it, but puts itself in its place; This -
- outright arbitrariness, violence that does not bind itself to any obligations, as a means of putting pressure on power or even usurping and displacing power.
A lone terrorist or a group, through the unbridled savagery of their crimes (“terrorist attacks”), achieve the decisions they need from the legitimate authorities (their own state or someone else’s). Terrorist power, or tyranny, trampling natural ideas of justice and punishing those who are simply unlucky (for example, organizing repression on grounds in which a person is not free, such as nationality or class) - “keeps the so-called “population” in fear and exercises his tyranny over him. The chain of crimes by which a government waging war for itself, say a revolutionary or occupation power, forces people to obey - this is terror or “repressive” terrorism.
Here it is clear that the most characteristic feature of terrorism, in contrast to any other political violence - a feature that is becoming more and more obvious -
- to fight opponents, violating not only the accepted rules of this struggle, but demonstratively using as one’s advantage a complete disconnection from ordinary moral norms in general.
How special case- to win not in direct struggle, but by forcing the enemy to yield to the demands of humanity, which you yourself resolutely renounce. –
In everyday life, this willingness to benefit from an opponent’s obviously higher morality than one’s own is called meanness. Indeed, if one had to name the worst meanness on earth, it would be a modern terrorist attack.
However, the current most malicious terrorist opposes universal morality not with simple personal self-interest, like an everyday scoundrel, but with an idea, ideology, most often his own only true religion. A synonym for such terrorism, or ideologically based terrorism, is extremism. This -
– maximum use of the advantages provided by the non-binding of the ideology professed (by the fanatic) with universal human values.
The archaic “God” is not bound by any universal human values (this “God” is inherited by the “idea”), for he himself (she herself) establishes his values for a person. If so, what kind of cruelty towards an infidel or a heretic is not allowed, is not holy? What could stop the inquisitor, and what can stop the current fundamentalist?
The notorious “the end justifies the means” as a true slogan of extremist terrorism means: faith (in Allah, in the communist Tomorrow, in the Third Reich, etc.) is above humanity. That is, a holy deed can also be something that not every scoundrel will decide to do. Ideological and, in particular, religious terrorism is the logical conclusion of the denial of humanism, as the priority of “unideological” universal values (life and good neighborliness) over any “higher”, ideological or divine ones.
But further. Most fully embodies the moral and psychological essence of a terrorist action hostage taking. This is where terrorism, as they say, “found itself”! Truly presence hostage, explicit or implicit, is a sign of a terrorist attack. Using as a victim, a living weapon or a human shield people who are not involved in his goals, who may not even know about them, the terrorist goes, as they said, not only beyond the limits of the rules of struggle, but beyond the limits of any morality in general. Morality remains exclusively the business of the attacked; it is this, if not animal fear, that should force him to surrender - this is the essence of the technique. Say, a hospital is captured; You are civilized people, you feel sorry for people, but we don’t care. So fulfill the conditions...
We can say that terrorism is
– moral blackmail different types, from primitive intimidation with examples of their cruelty over hostage-victims to sophisticated blackmail, when the attacked is forced into submission mainly by his own conscience or pity - figuratively speaking, when the very morality of the attacked party is taken hostage.
Romanova Olga Nikolaevna
(13.05.1976 - 24.10.2002)
voluntary victim of terrorists
(events on Dubrovka, Moscow)
Photo from the website In Memory of Olga Romanova
. “The victims of terrorists are innocent People!" – More than the innocent – those who are not involved – because those who oppose terrorism are also right and innocent. But the terrorist must show absolute freedom from conscience. Let those who were ready to justify the separatists in almost everything (that was the mood of Russian public opinion) probably die under the ruins of residential buildings in Moscow or Buinaksk, and let Muslims also die in American skyscrapers - it doesn’t matter...
. (Sympathy for the Chechen separatists was, and still is, almost a rule of good manners - despite the fact that neither the ideology, nor the methods, nor the personal composition of their leaders clearly give the slightest reason for this. I see the main reasons for the emergence of this sympathy two. The first is the traditional distrust of our intelligentsia in power, inherited from previous times. The second and most important is the barbarity called “conscription” or “universal conscription.” After all, children who are completely unfit for this craft have to be sent to fight the abreks, so One can’t even dream of fair assessments under these conditions.)
It is interesting that outside observers are also imbued with the psychology of terrorism - placing moral responsibility solely on the person being attacked. They say, for example, that Americans should not bomb Taliban positions during the holy month of Ramadan - they must respect other people's religious feelings! Normal logic dictates that the devout Bin Laden could have looked at the calendar and set the date for the explosion of New York skyscrapers so that the infidels would not be able to darken the holiday for good Muslims with retaliatory bombings. But it turns out that the infidels themselves must take care of this!
The Taliban complain that Afghan civilians are dying under American bombs (however, the figures cited are an order of magnitude lower than the victims of destroyed skyscrapers). It’s surprising that the Taliban understand the category itself – “civilians”. But no one is surprised why the Taliban themselves did not worry about Afghan civilians: it is absurd to oblige terrorists with their conscience.
The “Islamic communist” Dudayev made his own people hostage to his personal lust for power, but the blame for the torment of the Chechens is not placed on him (I personally have not heard), here – “bribes are smooth”...
It is clear that firing at regular troops from residential buildings is not military, but terrorist actions, taking one’s own civilians hostage. True, from the point of view of the extremists themselves, no one has the right to remain outside of ideology - neither old people, nor women, nor children - “civilians” do not exist for them.
Guerrilla warfare inevitably takes civilians hostage and therefore must be classified as terrorism. Except for the case when the enemy is the first to start a war against civilians (like Hitler with his planned genocide).
The victims of bombed planes and houses are executed hostages, hostages of terrorist targets.
About the principle adopted in Israel not to enter into negotiations with terrorists, even those holding hostages. – A terrorist is a blackmailer of the worst kind; he deliberately puts the attacked person in conditions of a moral conflict. Any way out of a conflict is terrible, but you should choose the one that promises an arithmetically smaller number of victims; There is no good solution, but there is the least evil. If the terrorist attack is not isolated, and a long-term terrorist war has been declared, the principle under discussion is obviously correct.
. (“If the enemy does not surrender, he is destroyed” - sounds creepy because it is not specified: which enemy is the one which attacked, or the one on which attacked?.. The aggressor makes an enemy out of his victim and, not seeing in him any desire to surrender, destroys him. This is exactly what the Bolsheviks did with the masses of hitherto considered law-abiding citizens, declaring them “class enemies.” – But a terrorist is precisely the enemy who made himself such by being the first to start a war without rules. So, if our writer had said “if a terrorist does not give up and the safest thing to do is to destroy him, then this is what should be done” - there would be no argument. Another option is “if a terrorist does not surrender, you must make concessions to him (surrender yourself)” - this is the slogan of the terrorist himself.
Of course, you can capitulate for the sake of the lives of the hostages, but this act of capitulation will not have any legal or moral force - let them go, but immediately give chase.)
. Hunger strike, as a clear case of moral blackmail - an act that is at least half terrorist. If the person subjected to such an “attack” is 100% right, then he is not obliged to yield; however, a “terrorist” who has taken himself hostage is hardly ever completely wrong... The authorities have the right to ignore a hunger strike with purely political demands, just as they have the right to use special forces against ordinary terrorists - because political decisions are not the private matter of presidents or prime ministers.
About state terror. – In essence, no mass repression can be considered a struggle with opponents(and thus be at least partly justified), but only by reprisals against hostages(hostages of the goals pursued by such a state), only by pure crime - for guilt can only be individual.
This can be seen especially clearly in the example of Stalin’s repressions. Most of the victims were loyal communists and Stalinists, who often had special services to the regime; They were arbitrarily made guilty by the Soviet government, which had sacralized itself. And it was scary and convincing. – But the same applies, of course, to Hitler: what opponents of his tasks could Jewish or Gypsy children appear?..
By the way, soldiers of all belligerent parties in a war are direct hostages of the aggressor state. The physical elimination of a single criminal in power who is starting a war or other evil—formally an act of terrorism—looks more logical and even, if this word is appropriate here, more humane than a honestly accepted and waged war. But there are problems here (the main one: who are the judges?), which there is no place to go into here.
. “International terrorism” - if a definition is needed - terrorism, secretly or openly fostered by some states in relation to others. In general, all terrorism is directed against everything human (crime against humanity).
The assassination of Caesar or the attempt on Lenin’s life is terrorism only in the narrow sense of “violence against a political opponent in power,” which violence both Brutus and Kaplan could, moreover, justify by the fact that their victims themselves were the first to neglect the rules of political struggle. Although the law, given arbitrarily by the authorities, was violated, it was not without formal grounds and, most importantly, without involving in the matter the hostages of this struggle, people who were not involved.
The attempt by Vera Zasulich on Trepov, who ordered a humiliating execution for a disrespectful student prisoner: this also seems to be terrorism. In the sense that she was forced by the authorities to remember her conscience by force, by crime. However, Zasulich contrasted the written private laws, which the mayor did not violate, with the universal basic law of absolute human dignity; it was an incident that could only be resolved by a jury, which acquitted the terrorist. – Here you can argue about the adequacy of her self-inflicted punishment for the crime committed, talk about the danger of precedent, etc., but the decision of the jury still leaves satisfaction.
. ...In general, the idea of the Russian revolutionaries was to oppose the formal-legal untruth of power to the terror of justice (as they understood it), to oppose the bad state order by force with the highest moral order. After all, no uniform should free you from conscience! The scoundrel (that is, the one who presented himself as a scoundrel) in power was not allowed to hide behind the rules he had invented “for himself,” and the terrorist attacks were the execution of decisions of a special revolutionary court. It was, so to speak, moral terrorism. Morality was also emphasized by the indispensable self-sacrifice of the “bombers.”
The worst flaw in the conduct of these revolutionaries was not even that their judgment was doubtful, while the value of life is absolute; not that the law was violated and this opened the way for the worst disaster, arbitrariness. It was associated with the fact that justice as a path to future happiness for everyone was perceived by them as higher than simple justice in relation to to each here and now - so that along with the kings and officials, coachmen, lackeys, and passers-by fell under the bombs. The individual became a hostage to a situation, a political struggle, to which he himself was not involved. (Not to mention that the tsars and officials themselves were in many ways hostages of the situation, the state structure.) And then the beginning of malicious terrorism, this worst of crimes, as we know it from Moscow or New York.
No matter how unpleasant it may be to provide arguments for conservatism, we must admit that every existing order, even a bad one, has some right to self-defense - because coups put too many people in the position of hostages, making them guilty without guilt.
Not every revolution, in principle, is terror (just as not every forceful action is violence), but none, obviously, can avoid it.
The damned question of “noble terrorism”: is it possible bad law contrast good outrage? (Despite the fact that bad law Same arbitrariness, only codified, but good outrage there is, apparently, law good, which in principle cannot be codified?..) - There is no answer to this question, except perhaps: “impossible, except in cases where it is necessary.” Moreover, a mistake along this path is equal to a crime, and an unforgivable one.
One way or another, the principle “there are no good terrorists” itself can and should be accepted as law. Because the good achieved through terror is debatable at best, and the evil is obvious.
With a noble (perhaps, let’s say!) goal, terrorism justifies its vile means: from noble terrorism to vile terrorism is not even a step...
. “Is the idea worth something,” they ask, referring to suicide bombers, “for which people sacrifice their own lives?”
Should we understand this question as: “such an idea can’t be bad”?..
Well, if only we agree to consider as good and kind that which contributes to life, its preservation and evolution, then I answer: all world practice shows with terrifying clarity that the ideas that stimulate maximum self-denial among the masses are the worst. All these are ideas, or “ideals” that sacralize a certain human community (religious, national, communist) due to the devaluation of the individual, that is, precisely, due to the devaluation of life itself. Self-interest is not as criminal as ideals are. What is fanatical in people is the herd, the “public”, but humanity is personal and humane and requires bloody self-sacrifice only in exceptional cases.
This is how it is from the objective side.
But even from the subjective side, obvious self-denial - refusal to live - is not yet evidence of the good impulse behind it. I’m not talking about the fact that a person can make mistakes, take bad for good, but specifically about his feelings, subjectively good or evil. So, suicide in its ordinary case is an act of denial, devaluation of life, and, most importantly, not only one’s own, but, first of all, life in general; Although this act deserves regret and compassion, its psychological and moral impulse is precisely vindictive and evil. It is known that a person with suicidal tendencies should not be allowed to drive public transport - if such a person decides to ruin a life that has disgusted him, most likely he will not leave it to those who like it. A suicide, morally and psychologically, commits end of the world- kills the world with itself.
As for those and others like those who flew the ill-fated Boeings on September 11, their psychology is apparently a combination of the herd spirit sanctified by the “idea” and the herd that devoured the individual with natural anger, “fighting spirit,” plus dullness of imagination and some, mainly vanity, incentives. And the “idea” itself, theoretically not worth a penny, practically costs exactly as much as humanity has to pay for its terrible manifestations.
(By the way: Bin Laden did not commit suicide and did not reveal himself to the Americans, although this could have neutralized their reaction. But an idea was his...)
. ...Also, the question “what is the reason for the current rampant international terrorism” sounds strange. What do you say, what is the reason for meanness?.. However, one can answer: here meanness is sanctioned by a “super valuable idea” - ideology. Another thing is the reasons for the increasing influence of this ideology (archaic religiosity). These reasons, apparently, are the increased economic and military strength of socially backward states and groups.
(Attempts to explain terrorism as desperate acts of the hungry poor against the rich who have eaten them are clearly dishonest: how much does a terrorist attack cost? And war?..)
. ...The situation has been determined: the world is not divided between some “superpowers”, but is split into more or less civilized and more or less criminal. And the “third world war” is already underway, but there is rather an exchange of gangster and police actions. How will it end? We must hope, “God won’t give it away - the pig won’t eat it”...
Terrorism and totalitarianism. – Totalitarianism is the non-recognition of morality other than the “only correct” ideology, in other words, the non-recognition of the values of life and human coexistence in themselves. And therefore terrorism (like the Socialist Revolutionary) and terror (like the “Reds”), at a time of ideological struggle for dominance, is the most natural manifestation of totalitarianism.
Strictly speaking, totalitarianism has triumphed (having founded the state) and remains the same terrorism, extremism - only no longer hijacking planes and not torturing women in labor in provincial hospitals, but building fighters and bombers in factories and holding all their subjects hostage; here terror is exercised by “legitimate” power. And also for totalitarianism there are no guilty or innocent - reprisals against innocent people, so-called repressions - this is a kind of “order”.
Can we compare the well-known phenomenon of sympathy between hostages for “their” captors (who, apparently, love the very opportunity to stay alive) with the indispensable adoration of the subjects of totalitarian states for “their” system and leader?..
. “How can one believe in this bloodthirsty deity and his absurd paradise, where as many women and bucks as you want (according to the testimony of one of the Palestinian suicide bombers, in paradise, among other miracles, 70,000 dollars were waiting for him) in order to kill for him and death!" “What’s more amazing is this: how you have to not love anything in this world, not feel sorry for it, how stupid and evil you have to be, so that such an obviously worthless mirage would be able to motivate you to do something like this!”
Planting a bomb somewhere at a train station: looks like mischief, but with subsequent tragedy. The dumber the performer, the more, subjectively, it looks like mischief for him...
For “telephone terrorists” (like students disrupting exams with their calls), I would introduce an article “hooliganism imitating a terrorist attack.” So that, after all, “as for hooliganism.”
Technological progress has increased the scale of tragedies and crimes, and has made chance and human baseness immensely dangerous. A savage could kill himself by falling from a palm tree and terrorizing his neighbor with a stone. Nowadays, hundreds are dying in a plane that crashed due to someone’s oversight, and someone’s mental and spiritual misery can destroy thousands and millions.
The archaic deity subjugates souls with fear, paralyzes the will of the individual, which is considered inherently vicious; "mass repression" with which it convinces trembling creature in its absolute power - floods, retribution of children for the sins of their fathers, etc. - his usual modus operandi. The end of the world, the Last Judgment, is, so to speak, a spiritually terrorist idea. That’s why every new self-proclaimed god like Asahara, Krivonogov or Koresh certainly begins the instillation of “God’s fear” with eschatology, and, as a rule, tries to realize the apocalypse in practice. This is “religious terrorism” in the precise sense of the word. As for the terrorism of fundamentalists, which parodies divine terrorism, there is more politics in it, here religion is only a pretext, a tool.
(Should we believe in the exceptional piety of the Soviet generals Dudayev and Maskhadov? There was a smell of power, and piety, an “idea” appeared.)
No gain is worth the life one has to risk in war; no, for nothing else but for the idea - that is, for the power of those who animate and subjugate the masses with this idea - no one fights, it is only for it that the savage man makes his human sacrifices. And not because he believes so, but because he does not want to think, and, as a result, cannot live without obedience. All wars are essentially religious...
If we take the most monstrous atrocities of terrorists, one thing stands out: they are truly irrational, bringing obvious harm to their authors and their goals. This is so obvious that it gives food to nightmarish (and cannot withstand calm criticism) suspicions regarding intelligence services the injured party, be it Russia, America...
Really. Explosions in Russian cities erased the fruits of the separatists’ victory in the first Chechen campaign and ruined the real possibility of international recognition of “Ichkeria.” Bin Laden's actions in America and his support by the Taliban left the civilized world no choice - to destroy the Taliban power in Afghanistan or not to destroy it. For those who remember here about some satanic intelligence services, I will continue: just as on the eve of the war, Stalin’s terror hit, say, military specialists and military leaders loyal to the regime, and fascist atrocities deprived Hitler of his main support - the opportunity to pacify people in the occupied territories. And just like Asahara and others like him, with their self-made doomsdays, sign sentences for their sects and for themselves.
So how can this be explained? – Yes, because calculation in human behavior is never the main thing. The main thing, no matter what the materialists say, is self-interest. Both Basayev and Bin Laden simply did what was right for them I want and like it to do, what should they do Interesting. The absolute power is what attracts this type, and in nothing is the power of a man over a man more manifested than in the ability to instill mortal terror in him and kill him. What is there - power manage(administer)! - Can you imagine Basayev dealing with teachers and pensions?.. That’s the power straighten out(torture and kill whoever you want) - this is power! This is what the terrorist manifests, turning secret inclinations into a terrible reality.
The Terrorism Brief will give you a quick overview of these violent policies and help you prepare for class.
“Terrorism” report on life safety
Terrorism is a policy based on the systematic use of violence and intimidation.
Types of terrorism:
- Based on the nature of the subject of this activity, the following are distinguished:
- Individual or unorganized. A terrorist attack is carried out by one or two people (for example, Vera Zasulich, Dmitry Karakozov, Ravachol).
- Collective or organized. The terrorist attack is planned and carried out by the organization. This type of terrorism is the most widespread in the world (IRA, Al-Qaeda, ETA, Socialist Revolutionaries).
- By purpose:
- Nationalist, which pursues national liberation or separatist goals.
- Religious, which is associated with the struggle within the same faith or different religions among themselves (Muslims and Christians, Catholics-Protestants). Their goal is to undermine secular power by establishing religious power.
- Ideologically social, which pursues the goal of partial or radical change in the political and economic system of the country in order to attract public attention to an acute problem (fascist, anarchist, Socialist Revolutionary terrorism).
The researchers identified special forms terrorism. This:
- Terror
Threat and direct use of force strong point weaker to the side.
2.Left terrorism
Formed under the influence of left-wing radical views. The terrorist attack is seen as a form of class struggle.
3.Leaderless terrorism
This is when independent or small groups, individuals, commit terrorist acts.
Fight against terrorism
Experts distinguish 2 strategies to combat this phenomenon - “conservative” and “progressive”. The “conservative” strategy stipulates the unconditional destruction of any manifestation of terrorism and its supporters. Those who wish to cooperate with the state in the fight against this problem are encouraged by protection and even financial assistance.
But the “progressive” strategy implies certain concessions to the demands of terrorists - payment of ransom, moral and territorial concessions in the form of recognition of the values of terrorists, recognition of their leaders as negotiating partners.
Causes of terrorism:
- exacerbation of contradictions in the economic, ideological, political, social, legal and ethno-national spheres
- the reluctance of certain groups, individuals and organizations to use the generally accepted system of life and the desire to obtain all advantages through violence
- the use of terrorist methods to achieve economic, social and political goals.
We hope that the report on the topic “Terrorism in the Modern World” helped you prepare for the lesson. You can supplement the essay on the topic “Terrorism is a threat to society” in the form of comments below.
One Russian journalist expressed the opinion that terrorism is hatred: man against man, man against humanity. Whatever this social concept is called, the same conclusion still emerges: a terrorist is an enemy of humanity. As long as they exist in our world, no one can feel safe, because the number of terrorist attacks is growing every day at a tremendous speed. According to statistics, the actions of these bandits occur every two to three days in the world, and these illegal actions only bring death.
The concept of "terrorism"
Translated from Latin, the concept of “terror” means fear and horror. Based on this, terrorism must be understood as a social phenomenon, the purpose of which is to intimidate the enemy and suppress him by all possible ways, up to and including physical destruction. Historically, terror is not only about intimidation, its essence is reflected in moral and physical impact. A terrorist is a subject who performs certain actions aimed at intimidation and violence. The subjects of this violence can be an individual, an organization, a group of people, or simply random passers-by who are in no way connected with the purpose of committing a terrorist attack, but simply find themselves in the wrong place. Most often, bandits associate these people with the entire society, some government agency or social structure. Individuals (or groups of individuals) who commit these terrible acts most often have the goal of destabilizing the situation in the country or in society. A terrorist is a person who wants fear and distrust of the authorities to drive people to revolutionary measures and influence the decisions of government officials. Fear and misunderstanding of the situation can cause the outbreak of war with another state, civil war, a strong desire for independence.
Terrorists are not just individuals. Illegal, intimidating activities can be carried out by huge organizations and groups, including with the funding and support of entire states.
The essence of terrorism is an illegal activity, therefore it has a number of certain characteristics:
- This activity entails great danger, having the direct intent to cause death to one, several or a large number of people.
- It has a public nature of execution. This act should become known to a large number of people.
- The purpose of illegal actions is the direct desire to create an environment in which fear and depression reign.
- When carrying out actions, bandits, while influencing some, pursue the goal of influencing completely different people.
If we compare the concepts of “terror” and “terrorism”, we can say that the first concept is broader, more massive, and a large number of people suffer from terror.
International terrorism: its subjects and significance
International terrorism is directed against individual states or a certain circle of citizens. Its main goal is to seriously disrupt the normal activities of the state and undermine the stability of its relations with other countries. Its subjects are entire countries, citizens of a particular nationality, government entities, politicians or diplomats. This type of terrorism is called the economic version of war. This method is the most effective: people die, the country’s economy and its position in the world are undermined, and everything happens with minimal military costs and sacrifices on the part of those who organize and carry out everything.
The main principles of this type of banditry are:
- All military means for committing a terrorist act are located on enemy territory, that is, purchased on this territory.
- Those persons who are engaged in subversive activities are located in different parts of the enemy state, they are difficult to detect, because most often the bandits legally reside in a given country.
- Organizers of terrorist attacks are also difficult to find because a network leadership system is being created to manage them, in which it is difficult to reach the very top.
The main tools of terrorism, both international and domestic, is psychological elevation over the enemy, because the organizers always have a clear and thoughtful plan, and it is very difficult to discover what blow will be struck in the future.
History of terrorism
If we trace the emergence of terrorism, we can conclude that it appeared a very long time ago. That is, violence directed against people appeared a long time ago, and the generally accepted concept arose only in the twentieth century. Its first manifestation, according to some historians, is the partisan movement in some Latin American countries. A group of people, after the dispersal of the partisan movement in these countries, began to act, carrying out several subversive acts, which were later called “urban guerilla.” In the early 60s, a similar action took place in the Israeli army. During these years, Palestinian terrorists blew up military equipment, hijacked planes with passengers, then blew them up, seized vehicles with hostages or occupied buildings with people, created sabotage in crowded places. For decades, the country was gripped by a wave of terrorism and extremism. In the same years, similar manifestations began in Western European countries, when the so-called Italian “red brigades”, ETA separatist groups in Spain, and the Republican Army in Ireland appeared. The list of terrorists is very long. The most terrible of them is Osama bin Laden, who was eliminated in early May 2011. This number 1 terrorist brought a lot of evil and tears to this world, destroying many lives. His name was associated with a huge number of crimes, explosions and attacks. He has been wanted since 1998. The following known terrorists are named: Ayman al-Zawahiri, who organized the "Egyptian Islamic Jihad", Adam Gadahn, Daniel Andres San Diego, an alleged participant in the organization of bombings of office buildings in the United States, Ali Atwa, who is involved in air piracy, airplane bombings, hostage-taking, Fahd Mohammed Ahmed al-Kuso and many others.
Types of terrorism
This social phenomenon is classified according to several criteria. If we consider it geographically, we can distinguish between international and domestic terrorism.
Depending on the motive for carrying out illegal actions, they distinguish between political, religious and national.
The most manageable, according to many historians, is its main direction, which is considered to be the expression of dissatisfaction with the existing political system within the state. This type of banditry appeared the very first. Government agencies have generally learned to cope with such gangster groups with dignity. Those that have existed for many years are beginning to die down: senior leaders of active groups are already serving their prison sentences, and the new generation is not so dangerous and professional. Political terrorist actions have a rather limited nature; they can be influenced not only by government bodies, but also society as a whole.
National terrorism is the illegal actions of a group of people aimed at creating their own independent state. Groups that want to create their own separate state structure arm themselves and try to defend their interests using weapons. In this case, terrorism is financed at the expense of other states, structures, people who are interested either in creating a new political system, or in seriously undermining the economic or social sphere of the existing one, against which the bandits’ actions are directed. Often the basis for financing is not only the political side, but also the financial one. Over the last century, the most striking example of national terrorism is the struggle of the Kurds advocating the creation of a new state of Kurdistan, which took place on the territory of four states at once: Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria.
Another example is the struggle of a group of people in southern France and Spain, the so-called Basques, who wanted to become completely self-sufficient. In Great Britain, members of the IRA - the Irish Army - who are trying to create an independent state with the help of terrorist attacks were called nationalist terrorists. A certain manifestation of this type of terror, according to some part of society, is the struggle of the south-eastern part of Ukraine for the opportunity to create its own federal unit as part of another state. The most terrible type of this social phenomenon is considered to be the one that is based on religious views. Religious fanatics are ready to easily give their lives in the fight for their ideals. The main manifestation of this type of terror is the Palestinian struggle that takes place in Israel. Speaking about the leaders of gangster groups, it is necessary to highlight the already destroyed Osama Bin Laden, who laid down his life to create a worldwide This terrible man was able to unite a large number of people who became a threat to the innocent lives of others, collect huge sums of money to organize the fight, and establish a rescue fund " Al-Qaeda." Suicide bombers, for whom nothing is sacred, were trained under his auspices. They are united only by a common goal.
Suicide bombers
Suicide bombers are controversial among experts. There are many approaches to this concept. A well-known specialist in the field of studying the essence of terrorism, A. Merari, believes that general concept this definition does not exist. It is impossible to put all suicide bombers under the same brush. A suicide bomber may be a normal person, but under the influence of certain factors, views and beliefs, he is ready for self-sacrifice. Recruits are responsible for training such individuals. First, they find a person with a suitable psychological portrait, then they process him and gradually lead him to perform certain actions that take the life of not only the suicide bomber, but also large quantity of people. All this, in their opinion, is done in the name of a common goal, most often this is religion. In second place is nationalism.
A suicide bomber can also be a person whose brain is clouded by national or religious ideas. This is a kind of tool in the hands of the leaders of terrorist groups, who, as a rule, do not understand the true goals of their actions, but believe that they are doing it for the benefit of humanity.
Another specialist who studies the concept of “suicide bomber,” Aarkus, has a different opinion. According to his teachings, there are two types of suicide bombers. The first type includes precisely religious or national fanatics, and the second includes artificially created suicide bombers who, under the influence of religion or national views, are capable of self-sacrifice.
But Professor Ross from an American university, studying the psychological side of the actions of a suicide bomber, argues that their formation is influenced by various factors, both social, psychological and national. Favorable conditions for the development of terrorism are social problems existing in a certain society, the development of democracy, a predisposition to suicide, the cult of kamikaze, fear of not being in demand in life and society, aggression, feelings of guilt towards others and much more.
Forms of terrorism
The phenomenon of terror has various shapes manifestations. All of them are taken into account when drawing up criminal legislation. The division into forms is made conditionally, since often a terrorist act is a combination of several forms. Most often there are mixed forms - for example, the seizure of vehicles with people. In this case, several actions are combined: taking hostages and seizing vehicles.
One of the most common and dangerous forms of terrorism is the use of explosive devices to cause maximum harm. Terrorists have a wide variety of weapons, including explosive devices. These can be homemade bombs or factory-made ones. The reasons why bandits use them are clear: when they are used, the damage caused is colossal. Homemade devices do not require significant costs, in addition, you can use remote control them, which increases the level of security of the terrorists themselves.
The second most important form is hijacking by air, sea or other, including railway. This form is often combined with the explosion of a hijacked vehicle, so it leads to numerous casualties, especially if the hijacked vehicle contains many passengers.
This form of terrorism, as an act, consists of several stages: first of all, capture and subsequent hijacking. Seizure is the taking over of transport by force. A terrorist is a criminal who uses force against both the crew of a ship or aircraft and passengers. Basically, after seizing a vehicle (vessel), criminals change their course of movement, choosing their own direction.
Hostage taking is considered the third form of terrorism, although it is combined with other forms. Hostages in theory are people who are forcibly held in a certain place as guarantors of compliance by government or other persons with the demands of terrorists. Hostage taking, as a form of this type of banditry, has the following objective data:
- planning a capture with determining the purpose of the action;
- search for accomplices in crime;
- finding the necessary means to achieve the goal;
- determining the location of the seizure, studying the presence of security, means of communication between guards, the time and direction of their movement;
- committing acts aimed at capturing and illegally detaining people;
- making demands;
- terrorist negotiations.
A rather serious form is psychological terrorism, which is moral violence against people. This is psychological blackmail, the use of lethal force or violence.
IN modern society cyber terrorism has emerged, which is a deliberate criminal attack on information that is processed by computer equipment or programs and is important to the public or the state. This form can also harm the health and life of the population.
The State of Terrorism in the World
This topic has become very relevant in last years. The news is simply filled with facts about terrorist attacks. It seems that all the terrorists in the world have begun to actively act, achieving their political, national or religious goals. Experts associate the main reason for the activity of such organizations with times of crisis in Europe and in the world. Any terrorist operations can lead to the destruction of the existing regime. Terrorist militants seize entire territories, shoot down planes and do other terrible things. Human lives become weapons to achieve national or religious goals.
The situation with terrorism in Russia
In Russia, the topic of terrorism occupies a lot of space in the daily news. in Russia occurred immediately after the collapse of the Union, in 1994-1995, and they did not stop later. The most large-scale act in recent years in the Russian Federation was the terrible seizure of Beslan in North Ossetia, when children became victims. Terrorists are people who do not have any morals, which is why they encroached on the lives of children. In the school, which was captured by criminals on September 1, 2004, there were about 1,200 people in total; 326 died in three days of terror. According to the investigation by the special services, 32 people took part in that terrible action, 31 of whom were killed in the process of liberating people. Only one of the bandits remained alive. You can also remember Nord-Ost, the capital's palace of culture, which was mined by terrorists along with 700 spectators and employees of the establishment. The terrorists held the hostages for three days, morally abusing the relatives of the poor people. The act ended with an assault, which, according to the official version, began after the bandits began shooting people. In this fight, the special forces acted professionally against the terrorists, but they had to use lethal gas. Unfortunately, many innocent people have died from its effects.
Another terrorist threat to modern Russia are Arab Wahhabis. This group carries out acts of religious terror from which Russians may suffer. Terrorists, whose photos are in the files of international and Russian services dealing with this problem, can live among us and at the same time plan their atrocities.
Methods of fighting terrorists
There is a lot that can be said about the fight against terrorism in the current situation. First of all, I would like to say about which bodies in Russia directly fight criminal groups or individual terrorists. The main fighter is the Russian Federation. In addition to this service, there are departments for combating terrorism in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, the Service foreign intelligence of the Russian Federation, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation and the Russian Defense Ministry.
Anti-terrorist units have been created in the Russian Federation, the main of which are the Alpha and Vympel groups. Also, special services that fight terrorism have been created under the army, under the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Vega group), and under the security forces.
Terror can only be avoided through joint efforts different countries who are committed to seriously solving the problem. It is necessary to develop a comprehensive approach to combating this phenomenon by not only legal and forceful influence, but also by identifying the main causes of its occurrence. The most important thing is not to look for excuses for terrorism, not to divide it into right and wrong. It is necessary to fight against any manifestation of it. At the legislative level in all countries it is necessary to strengthen criminal liability for acts of terror. The law on countering terrorism and criminal legislation must be tightened, even introducing the death penalty.
Laws that help fight terrorists
The fight against terrorism in Russia is helped by the law “On Countering Terrorism,” adopted in March 2006. The law established the basic principles of struggle, developed various ways prevention.
