Terrorism Arguments

The context in which terrorist tactics are used is often a large-scale, unresolved political conflict. The type of conflict varies widely: historical examples include:
a) secession of a territory to form a new sovereign state (IRA, PIRA and SLA)
b) dominance of territory or resources by various ethnic groups (Hammer skins(White Supremarsists))
c) imposition of a particular form of government, such as democracy, theocracy or anarchy (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia(FARC))


Terrorism is a form of asymmetric warfare, and is more common when direct conventional warfare either cannot be (due to differentials in available forces) or is not being use to resolve the underlying conflict.

In some cases, the rationale for a terrorist attack may be uncertain (as in many attacks for which no group or individual claims responsibility) or unrelated to any large-scale social conflict (such as the Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway by Aum Shinrikyo).

A global research report An Inclusive World prepared by an international team of researchers from all countries has analysed causes of present day terrorism. It has reached the conclusions that terrorism all over the world functions like an economic market. There is demand for terrorist placed by greed or grievances. Supply is driven by relative deprivation resulting in triple deficits – developmental deficit, democratic deficit and dignity deficit. Acts of terror take place at the point of intersection between supply and demand. Those placing the demand use religion and other denominators as vehicles to establish links with those on the supply side. This pattern cab be observed in all situations ranging from Colombia to Colombo and the Philippines to the Palestine.