The field of terrorism and counterterrorism studies has grown exponentially since the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. The terrorist attacks on that day are among the defining features of the 21st century and terrorists are still making headlines worldwide, threatening or attacking governments and ordinary citizens. In some parts of the world, terrorism has been one of the most important threats to peace, security and stability. Yet in most parts it received a lot of attention without constituting a primary threat, let alone a strategic threat. But what does this mean? What is the nature of this threat and how does it ‘work’? Who or what is threatened, how, by whom and why? And what can be done about it, or how can we at least limit the impact of terrorism and make sure that terrorists do not manage to spread fear, dread or anxiety?

These are just a handful of questions that we address in this revised textbook that accompanies the Massive Open Online Course on Coursera and FutureLearn: ‘Terrorism and Counterterrorism: Comparing Theory & Practice’. This undergraduate level course was first launched in September 2013 and has attracted over 180,000 participants from more than 80 countries. The course and this handbook have been completely revised in 2022. The revised edition discusses recent trends and developments and uses many new studies that shine a different light on certain topics. Additionally, it pays more attention to the important question what we can do to deal with the impact of terrorism on politics and society. The input from the course participants from all across the world and students at Leiden University helped us to develop our thoughts for this revised edition.

The aims of both the online course and this textbook are to learn more about:

• • The notion of terrorism as an instrument to achieve certain goals.

• • The difficulties and importance of definitions of terrorism.

• • The state of the art of terrorism studies.

• • Theoretical notions and practical examples to better understand the phenomenon of terrorism.

• • Theoretical notions and practical examples to better understand and critique approaches to counterterrorism.

• • How to deal with the impact of terrorism.

• • Possible futures of terrorism and terrorism studies.

Introduction

In the previous chapter we looked into the impact of terrorism and counterterrorism and how to limit that impact on societies and our daily lives. In this chapter we will reflect on what we know and what we do not yet know about terrorism and counterterrorism.

Let us first briefly go back to the previous parts of this book. In chapter 1 we explored the definition and essence of terrorism and looked into the question of why there is no generally accepted definition of the term and the consequences this might have. In chapter 2 we described and analysed the history of terrorism. This was followed by a chapter on the state of the art of terrorism studies in which we explained why it is so difficult to do research on terrorism and counterterrorism. In chapters 4 and 5 we explored and discussed assumptions on terrorism and counterterrorism. And, as mentioned above, in the previous chapter we looked into the impact of terrorism. In these different chapters we observed a need for further study on certain topics, a lack of consensus about certain assumptions and persisting challenges for policymakers.

In this final chapter we stress the need for research into these domains. We look into un- and underresearched topics in terrorism studies and end with a suggestion for a future research agenda. First, however, we would like to emphasise that in order to be able to look ahead, it is important to grasp fully what is going on today and to try to see trends and developments. That is why we start this chapter by focusing on the importance of monitoring developments and analysing trends in an attempt to forecast what may be coming towards us.

Importance of monitoring trends and looking ahead

Why is it important to investigate developments and trends and to look ahead? In the first chapter of this book we mentioned that terrorism is a constantly changing phenomenon. One of the goals of studying terrorism and counterterrorism is to provide answers to the questions of policy-makers and politicians and those of the general public. They want to know what is happening today and what may happen tomorrow and in the years to come. With regard to counterterrorism, we also mentioned that prevention is one of the key elements of counterterrorism policies.

Introduction

In the previous chapter we analysed five assumptions about terrorism. In this chapter we will investigate five popular assumptions about counterterrorism we consider interesting either because they are challenged or because of the opposite: they are considered true and constitute the basis for policy-making. As witnessed in the previous chapters, terrorism is a dynamic phenomenon and subject to continuous change, which means that theories and hypotheses regarding this phenomenon and the policies for dealing with it need to be regularly evaluated and possibly revised. This also holds for the following assumptions about counterterrorism which we will investigate in this chapter:

• 1. Profiling works.

• 2. Deradicalisation of terrorists is possible.

• 3. Decapitation of terrorist organisations works.

• 4. Terrorism cannot be defeated.

• 5. Terrorism can best be dealt with by way of a holistic or wide approach.

But before we move on to these assumptions, we first have to define the term ‘counterterrorism’. What exactly do we mean by this? Basically it refers to actions and policies to deal with the phenomenon of terrorism. That concept was discussed in detail in the first three chapters of this textbook. From that discussion we learned that there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism and that its meaning is to some extent a matter of personal opinion. Similarly, there are different opinions about counterterrorism. In this chapter we simply refer to ‘counterterrorism’ as a set of measures and activities that are designed to prevent terrorism or react to terrorism.

Assumption one: Pro_ling works

As discussed in chapter 3, one of the major difficulties when researching terrorism is its secretive nature. This is a challenge not only to academics, but also to policy-makers in the field of counterterrorism. Obviously, they would like to discover terrorists before they engage in terrorist activities. This is, of course, very difficult and the comparison with the proverbial finding of a needle in the haystack has often been made. Nonetheless, there have been several successful attempts to recognise a terrorist based on certain clues or signs – in most cases this related to ‘suspicious’ behaviour, which resulted in foiled terrorist plots (see box 5.01).

Introduction

In the first chapter we discussed the definition and essence of terrorism. Although there is no universally accepted definition of the phenomenon, it is generally regarded as an instrument used by certain actors to achieve political goals by spreading fear and anxiety through violent acts. These acts are part of the practice and not a goal in themselves. We quoted Brian Jenkins, who said that terrorists like to see a lot of people watching, not a lot of people dead. This means that audiences are very important and that their reactions to a terrorism-related incident are what matters. Terrorism is about impact, about how you and I react to a bomb attack, hostage taking or a shooting spree. Of course it also depends on media coverage, statements by politicians, official responses and other factors. Spreading fear is a key aspect in this mechanism of how terrorism works.

Fear of terrorism

Fear features prominently in many definitions of terrorism. But what is fear and how does it ‘work’? Scholars from many different disciplines have struggled to find answers to the fundamental questions. The difficulty lies, amongst other things, in the fact that fear pertains to a diffuse range of situations and behaviours. It ranges from an individual, psychological state of mind or a socio-cultural sentiment in society to political claims and rhetoric. In relation to the phenomenon of terrorism, Edwin Bakker and Beatrice de Graaf referred to fear as ‘a sentiment of anxiety caused by the perception or presence of danger’ (2014, p. 1). It should be stressed that fear in itself should not be considered merely as a negative reaction to threats and attacks. According to these authors, fear of danger is a very natural and useful emotion. It also functions as a survival mechanism that helps people to take the right measures and actions to protect themselves (p. 2). However, much depends on the level of or reasons for fear.

Fear is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon. One of the dimensions is time. To understand the complexity of fear of terrorism a distinction should be made between immediate fear responses to terrorism (fear after an attack) and enduring, sustainable fear of terrorism that is not ignited by a prevailing acute threat.

Introduction

Terrorism is a highly complex, highly subjective and politically sensitive topic. In this chapter we will address some of this complexity, subjectivity and sensitivity. We will show why and how terrorism is receiving much attention from both the media and governments and how it has affected societies. After discussing the geographical distribution of attacks and casualties, we will arrive at the problem of defining terrorism. We will explore the questions of what can be labelled terrorism and what not, and why it is actually important (and difficult) to define the term. Finally, we will discuss the nature of terrorism: what it is about, what it does to society, and how it works.

That terrorism indeed has an impact on society we can read in the papers and see on television and the internet. In fact, terrorism makes headlines almost every day and almost everywhere around the globe. In recent years, major attacks have taken place in many parts of the world, leaving hardly any region untouched. The most lethal and most ‘spectacular’ attacks have not only received national attention, but in many cases have made headlines across the world. For instance, the Paris attacks on 13 November 2015 not only were breaking news in France and the rest of Europe, but also resulted in headlines in newspapers as far away as Indonesia. Readers of Media Indonesia were confronted with a picture of the attack and its victims with a headline saying, ‘Europe on alert after the Paris tragedy’. Other examples are international responses to the many attacks by the terrorist organisation Boko Haram in Nigeria. Their kidnapping of young girls in April 2014 made it to the front pages of newspapers around the world. The US-based CBS News reported, ‘100 schoolgirls kidnapped in Nigeria by suspected extremists’, and the newspaper China Daily reported, ‘China condemns Nigeria kidnappings’. US First Lady Michelle Obama and Pope Francis were among the various international figures who joined the #BringBackOurGirls social media campaign. Also in 2014, the rise of Islamic State (formerly known as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - ISIL) and the atrocities committed by that organisation led to worldwide condemnation.

Introduction

In the previous chapter we looked into the field of terrorism studies and its different authors, centres, disciplines and approaches. We explored the results of the study of terrorism and counterterrorism and looked at the difficulties of doing terrorism research. In this chapter we are going to investigate some of the assumptions about terrorism that have often been put forward by scholars, practitioners, politicians or journalists. These assumptions are frequently repeated in the public debate on terrorism, or even constitute the basis of policy-making. Therefore, it is important to test these assumptions to see whether they are true, partly true or false. The five assumptions we are going to explore and analyse are the following:

• 1. Terrorism is caused by poverty.

• 2. Terrorists are crazy.

• 3. Terrorism is becoming increasingly lethal.

• 4. Terrorism is predominantly anti-western.

• 5. Terrorism is successful.

Assumption one: Terrorism is caused by poverty

One of the most frequently repeated assumptions about terrorism is that it is caused by poverty. The basic idea behind this assumption is that poverty leads to a lack of opportunities to improve the quality of someone’s life. This could result in antagonism towards people who are better off and could lead to blaming others, such as the government, for this lack of chances in life. These kinds of grievances are believed to be an important cause of terrorism. In combination with the idea that terrorists are rational actors, it is argued by some that violence might be the last resort of the downtrodden to put grievances on the political agenda. Others point to the fact that many poor countries seem to suffer from terrorism and that there are many examples of terrorists from the lower ranks of society. Then they assume that a correlation between poverty and terrorism exists. Lastly, it has to be mentioned that some terrorist organisations, specifically left-wing-oriented ones, have claimed to fight for or on behalf of the poor. Think of the earlier example given in chapter 3 of the Tupamaros who initially were mainly involved in robberies, distributing the stolen money among the poor (see box 4.01).

Introduction

Although terrorism has received more attention than ever since the attacks on the US on 11 September 2001, the phenomenon is much older. In fact, there have been several periods in which (what we now call) terrorism ranked high on political and security agendas. In other words, the phenomenon is certainly not a new one. According to Walter Laqueur (2007), ‘[t]errorism appears in the Bible’s Old Testament, and there were frequent incidents of political murder, even systematic assassination in Greek and Roman history’. What is often new is the size, shape, nature and impact of these acts, as well as how we label them. This has changed in the course of the long history of this phenomenon. The French Revolution and the ‘Reign of Terror’ in 1793-1794 are considered by many to be the starting point of modern terrorism. The Revolutionary regime used ‘terror’ to deal with its opponents. Terrorism in those days clearly referred to the actions of the state, something which would change in the centuries that followed.

Historians such as Laqueur have looked into the long development of terrorism, aiming to see patterns and trends (see box 2.01). In his book, A History of Terrorism, first published in 1977, Laqueur wanted to ‘shed some light on certain problems such as the conditions under which terrorism tended to occur and the circumstances in which it prospered or failed’ (2001, p. vii). At the same time, he warned that an analysis of the history of terrorism does not offer clear-cut lessons for today, as terrorism varies in time and no country or era could be directly equated with any other.

Introduction

In this chapter we will look into the field of terrorism studies and introduce different authors, centres, disciplines and approaches. What have academia and think tanks come up with since 9/11? We will also focus on why conducting research in the field of terrorism is so difficult. What are the particular challenges when investigating this phenomenon and the attempts to counter or to manage it? Finally, we will have a critical look at the results of research on terrorism and counterterrorism and discuss the state of the art of this multidisciplinary field of study.

The history of terrorism studies

As shown in the previous chapter, terrorism is not new, and this also holds for the study of this phenomenon. In this section we will look at research into modern-day terrorism, meaning the terrorism that emerged in the late 1950s and early 1960s.

Terrorism studies pre-9/11

In the late 1950s and the 1960s relatively few scholars looked into the political violence and so-called ‘revolutionary terrorism’ of that age. They focused on a number of the fundamental questions: Why do people fight? Why do they use violence? Why do they rebel? Scholars tried to answer these questions, amongst others, with the help of conflict theories. These theories were partly derived from the work of sociologists and political scientists who emphasised the social, political or material inequality of groups in society. Relatively many scholars were influenced by the works of Karl Marx, who is regarded as the father of the social conflict theory. They were particularly interested in the phenomenon of violence related to the decolonisation process in Africa and Asia, but also in riots and political violence in Western European and North American cities and university campuses. These types of political violence were studied under the name of either terrorism studies or political violence studies. The groups they studied included revolutionary terrorist groups and anti-colonial or anti-imperialist groups. These particular groups were active in the era of what Rapoport called the third wave of terrorism or the new left wave. In the 1970s, some of the organisations of that wave received a fair amount of scholarly attention, in particular the Red Army Faction (RAF) in Germany (see box 3.01), the Red Brigades in Italy, the Weathermen in the US and the Tupamaros in Uruguay (see box 3.02).

Abstract

Late medieval Europe saw the spread and popularization of a particular form of institutionalized socio-legal practice and logic: the law court. While generally understood in legal or institutional terms, this book presents this ‘rise of the court’ as a socio-cultural history of communicative interactions between producers and consumers of justice. In a world with many alternatives for resolving conflicts and countering perceived threats to social order, courts presented people with specific – and in hindsight highly successful – scripts to perform and define justice, entailing spaces, acts, texts, oral pronouncements and more. By comparing three different types of courts from different regions, this book traces their shared and individual development as scriptwriters of justice, impacting both their contemporaries and modern historians.

Keywords: medieval law courts, medieval legal practice, medieval court records, comparative history, legal communication, performativity

Justice can be an ambiguous concept. That much was clear to the Parisian poet François Villon (b. 1431) from his encounter with law courts. In 1462 the provost of Paris had sentenced him to death, following his involvement in a street brawl. Fighting the latter's decision in an appeal to the supreme royal court, the Parlement, Villon managed to obtain a reprieve from this harsh punishment. Yet, while granting the poet his life, the Parlement also decided to exile him from his home town, effectively sentencing him to a social death instead. In the poem ‘Ode to the Court’, Villon underscored the irony of his situation. While his poem begins as a laudatory exposition on the goodness of the Parlement, by the third stanza the underlying critique becomes discernable:

Until now, the focus of this book has been on the media – be they of a spatial, enacted, oral or textual nature – constituting the process of court communication. We have seen how law courts formed the locus of an extensive communicative activity, where diverse social issues were negotiated between its participants. The latter, while present in each of the previous chapters, have not stood at the centre of attention as such. Yet it was participants’ intentions and their subsequent activities that drove much of these processes of socio-legal communication. In recent years, the users of law courts have received greater attention from social and legal historians. Daniel Lord Smail, for one, has proposed to approach developments in legal practice from a consumerist perspective. While courts were traditionally considered the exclusive result of rulers’ attempts at acquiring socio-political monopolies of power, Smail emphasized the role of the law's consumers, that is, those pursuing their cases in court, in shaping the court-based legal system of many late medieval societies. It was at least partly because litigants actively chose to invest in a legal process that courts could become such dominant forms of legal practice. Thus, the agents of change in this period were not just authorities coercing society into using their courts, but rather the people themselves who considered it profitable to bring their disputes there, instead of looking for an alternative solution.

Oath of the advocates of the Parlement of Paris

Below follows the oath taken by the Parlement's advocates as recorded in 1340 on fols. 18v–19r of the fourth criminal register of the Parlement (AN X2A4). The oath follows a list with the names of all the advocates working in the Parlement, and is followed by a comparable name list and oath for the proctors (see Appendix 3.2).

Aduocati istius curie iurabunt articulos qui sequntur videlicet:

❖Quod diligenter et fideliter istud officium exercebunt.

❖Quod causarum iniustarum patrocinium scientur non recipient.

❖Quod et si non ab inicio ex post facto tamen viderint causam esse iniustam statim eam dimittent.

❖Quod in causis quas fovebunt si viderint tangi regem ipsi de hanc curiam avisabunt.

❖Quod causa placitata et factis negatis ipsi de recenti infra biduum uel trium facient et curie tradent articulos suos iusi ex causa de licencia curie defferent.

❖Quod impertinentes articulos scienter non facient.

❖Quod consuetudines quas veras non coediderint non proponent nec sustinebunt.

❖Quod causas quas suscipient cito expedient pro posse suo.

❖Quod in eis dilaciones et subterfugia maliciose non quarent.

❖Quod pro salario suo quantumcumque sit magna causa ultra triginta libras Turonensis non recipient nec etiam aliquod ultra in salarii maioris fraudem minus tamen recipere possunt.

❖Quod pro mediocri minus et pro minori causa multo minus recipient secundum quantitatem cause et condiciones personarum.

❖Hoc idem iuramentum prestabunt illi qui aduocatis proponentibus ut consiliarii assistent.

❖Iniungatur eis preter iuramentum.

❖Quod bene mane venient et bene mane venire faciant partes suas.

❖Quod illum cui data fuerit audientia non impediant.

❖Quod stando et retro primum scamium patrocinentur.

❖Quod primum scamium non occupant.

❖Quod licet plures sint aduocati in vna causa vnus tantummodo loquatur.

❖Quod facta impertinencia non proponant.

❖Quod ipsi de curia non recedant quamdiu magistri in camera erunt.

❖Et est sciendum quod nullus aduocatus ad patrocinandum recipietur nisi fit iuratus et in rotulo nominum aduocatorum scriptus. Et prohibet curia ne ipsi ingerant se ad patrocinandum nisi sint iurati.