The orthodox and the critical approach toward terrorism: An overview

The orthodox ond the criticql opprooch towqrd terrorism: orthodox An overview opp explonotions terrorist phen Poowin Bunyovejchewinl odopted the to , exomine differences c Abstroct The incident of 11 September 2001 hos led to numerous reseorch on terrorism, especiolly in the Vorious implir United Stotes. Nevertheless, most reseorch tends to odopt the some proctices ond conclude in the some direction. These hove been colled orthodox terrorism studies. Recently, o new opprooch to studies of terrorism hos oppeored in the form of Welsh School of Criticol Security Studies. This short orticle oims to clorify the moin differences between orthodox tefroiism studies ond criticol studies. More specificolly, we will exomine the differences in their ontology, epistemology, ond methodology. The implicotions of the distinctions will olso be discussed. 16 (} Keywords: Orthodox Terrorism Studies, Criticol Terrorism Studies, Terrorism ,g .& .Cl !t a, s Terrorism is not o new phenomenon to politicol scientists, since terrorists hove become tronsitionol octors since the lote 1960s2, but during the Cold Wor ero terrorism wos deemed more os o :P locol o a' issue ond source of conflict, since the moin issue of thot time wos the conflict between the greot powers. After the collopse of the Soviet Union, terrorism hos groduolly come more explicitly to the forefront, olthough it hod previously been neglected by both ocodemics ond proctitioners in the 1990s, which seemed to be o decode of relotive peoce ond cooperotion. Not surprlsingly, the incident of 11 September 2001 creoted o drostic shock for the greot powers; especiolly the US, Source: And which wos ottocked by non-stote octors within their country on os scole which hod never M. B. Smytl" hoppened before. This led to demonds being mode on ocodemics by the US government ond mony members of Americon society to find woys of understonding how ond why the incident hoppened, in order to provide procticol woys of comprehending such terrorist octivities so os to prevent them reoccurring. Consequently, the number of studies of terrorism hove increosed significontly. Most of these studies, however, hove tended to reoch conclusions which onswer the question of 'how' terrorism occurs, rother thon 'why'. These studies con be soid to follow 1 the I would like to thonk Dr Cornelio Beyer for introducing the criticol terrorism studies. Speciol thonks to Songdet Nillosithonukroh for his kindly qssistonce ot qn obstroct. 'Jor", Globotizotion of World Politics: An introduction pp.374-375 t D. Kiros (2008) 'Terrorism ond globolizotion', in J. Boylis, S. Smith ond P. Owens, eds., Ihe to internotionol relotions,ln edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), - Hon R. .Jockson, fut : ,.-ltledge), pp.€ 55 rrthodox opprooch' However, there is o smoiler group of ocodemics who criticize orthodox explonotions os being essentiolly inodequote for forming on understonding of the noture of the terrorist phenomenon' Their opprooch con be colled the criticol opprooch, ond in generol they hove odopted the concepts developed by the welsh school of Criticol Security Studies.s This essoy oims to exomine the moin differences between the orthodox ond the criticol opprooches. These differences con be cotegorized in three moin woys: ontorogy, epistemoroqy, ond methodorogy. Vorious implicotions ond exomples derived from these distinctions will be illustroted here. Figure 1 Books published with .terrorism, in the ti'e, 1995_2007 ttG d "& iEl zffi :l &, et {D lF a 1 I *ffi 1p9*'r*t'r*' source: Andrew silke (2009)'contemporory Wr terrorism studies: issues in reseorch,, in R. Jockson, M' B' Smyth ond J. Gunning, eds., CriticarTerrorism Studies: A new reseorch ogendo(Abingdon; Routledge), p. 35 3 Hormonie Toros ond Jeroen Gunning (2009) 'E1pl6p;pg o criticor theory opprooch to terrorism studies, in R' Jockson' M' B' Smyth ond J' Gunning, eds., Criticor Terrorism Studies: A new reseorch ogendo (Abingdon: Routledge), pp.88-89 36 Most of Figure 2 Percentoge of reseorch orticles focusing on ol-Qoedo by moinstreom s on indePendent question is not c conceptuolized time ond Ploce exist 'out there o E 6 g ontologicol Positi slD ln cont o. Rother, object t sense, their ont ond contexts. I foundotionolism ww E00s'..? PFdsd subject.6 Conse Source: Andrew Silke (2009) 'Contemporory terrorism studies: issues in reseorch', in R. Jockson, noture is not M. B. Smyth ond J. Gunning, eds., CriticolTerrorism Sfudr'es: A new reseorch ogendo (Abingdon: Intention, ond Routledge), p.42 cotegorisotion' I constructivism- Figure 5 Percentoge of reseorch orticles focusing on militont lslomist terrorist groups ideos obout ho Since how it con I moinstreom tr objective 'scie motrix; hence o ID criticol oPProo t positivist ePis l' s- sociol reolitY 3t {, o 1sffis M ffiS*? tortud vol.22, no 3 u u Source'. Andrew Silke (2009) 'Contemporory terrorism studies: issues in reseorch', in R. Jockson, Jot' t (9 To, lbi. Ri. M. B. Smyth ond J. Gunning, eds., CriticolTerrorism Studies: A new reseorch agendo (Abingdon: Annuol Confere Routledge), p.42 http://www.bis (occessed on 2 37 Most of the studies of terrorism which follow the orthodox opprooch hove been infruenced by moinstreom sociol science, which osserts thot sociol phenomeno os well os their meonings hove on independent existence' Thus, o contextuoi considerotion is not essentiol since the object in question is not reloted to socio-politicol octors ond contexts. This ontorogicor position con be conceptuolized os objectivism'' Thus, the orthodox opprooch tends to negrect the importonce of time ond ploce os well os socio-politicol contexts, since it oppeors to believe thot terrorists will exist 'out there" no motter whot the historicol context moy be. ontologicor position determines its epistemorogy os As o result, its objectivist we, os its methodorogy. ln controst' the criticol opprooch does not believe thot the object exists outonomously. Rother' object ond subject 'shope eoch other in o diorecticor, never-ceosing dynomic,.s In this sense' their ontologicol position is bosed on socio-politicor interoctionr.,gnd focuses on both octors ond contexts' According to criticol theorists on terrorism, they define their ontoloqy os o minimor foundotionolism, since the opprooch does not totolly deny the distinction between object ond subject.. Consequentry, terrorism ,fundomentory is o socior foct rother thon o brute foct; thot its noture is not inherent to the violent oct itself, but is dependent upon context, circumstonce, intention' ond cruciolly' sociol, culturol' legol, ond poriticor processes coteqorisotion' ond lobelling'.7 This ontorogicor opprooch con be of interpretotion, conceptuorized os socior constructivism' lt orgues thot o difference in woys of being reods to different woys of seeing ond ideos obout how oims will be ochieved. how Since the ontology describes whot it is out there to know, therefore, the next question is it con be known. The orthodox opprooch, os orreody mentioned obove, odopts the moinstreom trodition of sociol science, which hos mode strong efforts to moke sociol science on objective 'science'' Therefore' its woy of seeing on epistemologicol position connot differ from its motrix; hence positivism results' Thus, in order to understond the epistemorogicor position of the criticol opprooch, it is necessory to comprehend its positivist premise. As objectivism is the root of positivist epistemology' positivism stresses the existence sociol reority con be understood in of on existing object. rn other wor<js, the form of doto ond foct by using the methods of notu.or a Jonothon Grix (2002).lntroducing Students to the Generic Terminology of Sociol Reseorch, polr?ics, vol.22, no 5 (September), 177 5 Toros ond Gunning, op. cit., p.92 6 t tbid., pp.92_9s Richord Jockson 'criticol Terrorism Studies: An Expronotion, o Defence ond o woy Forword, B/s,4 Annuol Conference, 14_16 December 2009, p.4 http://www.biso.oc.uk/index.php?option=com_biso&tosk=downlood_poper&no_html=.1&ps55.6_roper_id=54 (occessed on 23 November 2O1O) 38 science, which cloim to be volue-free, such os doto collection, theoreticol deduction, ond stotisticol Resec of onolysis. Thus, the object must be observoble unless the instruments of noturol science connot be cent opplied.s From the positivist position, the orthodox opprooch tends to focus only on whot con be methods, but empiricolly verified. Physicol violence, for instonce, is deemed os moin object to be observed since in orthodox-st it occurs explicitly ond hod been poid ottention to by the government. An exomple would be the nomely the A RAND Dotobose of Worldwide Terrorism lncidents. This project, led by the RAND Corporotion, one orthodox oppt of the prominent Americon think tonks, hos collected doto reloted to terrorist incidents for over 50 opprooch con yeors, ond this doto hos been used in its reseorch.e its 'Wor on Te Nevertheless, it must be mentioned thot the positivist epistemology of the orthodox opprooch is not os neutrol os its proponents cloim it to be. lt could be described os solving theory, o term first introduced by Robert Coxto, in thot 'it tokes the o problem- reseo 1 be conducted The or it finds it, with specificity, on the prevoiling sociol ond power relotionships ond the institutions into which they ore grgonised, os This opprooch o inclined to ond monolithir presuppose thot terrorism must be conducted by non-stote octors, ond divides the world into the vorious eleme legitimote stote ond the illegitimote terrorists,l2 since it does not question the existing sociol ond post-structur< power relotions becouse of its epistemologicol presuppositions. ln this sense, the orthodox opprooch positivism. y99 given fromework for oction'.11 From this perspective, the orthodox opprooch rejects the concept of stote terrorism, since the stote hos is o monopoly on the legitimote use of The force. Wolter Loqueur, for exomple, insisted thot '[including stote terror in the study of terrorism] completely would hove mode the study of terrorism impossible, for it would hove included not only US foreign usefulness of policy, but olso Hitler ond Stolin'.13 Bruce Hoffmon defined terrorism os octs 'perpetroted by o thot the contt o consequence, it con be orgued thot the orthodox not only for : opprooch uses octor-bosed onolysis, focusing entirely on non-stote octors. However, on exception origin of ony subnotionol group or non-stote entity'.14 As tends to be mode for stote-sponsored terrorism, which is often defined os such by the mojor understond generolly powers such os the US. re t re< with its root u 2nd considered il Mot, Alu"rron ond Koj Skoldberg (2009) Reflexive Methodology: New Vistos for Aualtotive Reseorch, edn. (London: Soge), pp.16-17. e Notionol Security Reseorch Division, RAND Dotobose of Worldwide Terrorism /ncrdents. (RAND Corporotion) http://www.rond.org/nsrd/projectVterrorism-incidents/ to (occessed on 23 November 2010) Rob"rt W. Cox (1981) 'sociol Forces, Stotes ond World Orders: Beyond lnternotionol Relotions Theory' Millennium: Journol of lntemotionol Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, 128-130 t' t' orthodox ten necessory tc For exomple 'Wor on Te J"ro"n Gunning (2007) 'A Cose for Criticol Terrorism Studies?' Government and Opposition, vol. 42, Rrth Blok"l"y (2009) Stote Tenorism ond Neoliberolism: The North in the South (Abingdon: Routledge), p.26. to l rbid., p.128 no.3 (Summer),571 't those who Bru." Hoffmon (1998) /nside Terrorism (London : Victor Golloncz), p.45. tuA Terrorism Reg 'u ,, J, I 59 cent of Reseorch into terrorism hos increosed significontly since g/11. Before 2001, oround 1g per reseorch popers published in terrorism journols used the descriptive ond inferentiol methods' but this hos since been extended to 26 percent.'u Thus it con be seen thot the increose in orthodox-style reseorch into terrorism derives from o specific proce ond time os well os context; nomely the Americon experience of whot the US hos defined os on oge of terror. Thus, the orthodox opprooch con be seen to be o stote-centric explonotion. Ultimotely, the orthodox opprooch con olso be deemed to be o legitimizotion of elements of US government policy, such os its 'wor on Terror', since the epistemology of this concept determines thot the bulk of reseorch will be conducted within this government_defined fromework. The criticol opprooch, on the controry, oims specificity, ond nuonce. to toke into occount context, history, lt olso rejects notions of universolism, essentio[gp, ond exceptionolism.,6 This opprooch stems from the epistemologicol positions of those who follow it, which ore not stotic ond monolithic' The epistemology of the criticol opprooch is hord to conceptuolize, since it odopts vorious elements from different forms of epistemology, from positivism to ethnogrophy through to post-structurolism' Nevertheless, it con be conceptuolized roughly os criticol positivism ond postpositivism. The criticol opprooch does not completely reject the ideo of positivism, in thot it does not completely reject o belief in timeless low ond monolithic cotegories.lT Thus, it still preserves tlre usefulness of positivist epistemology for exomining some specific contexts. However, it stresses thot the context needs to be reviewed in order to enquire obout its meoning, since the episteme is not only for someone ond some purpose but olso must come from somewhere. ln this sense, the origin of ony use of knowledge must be scrutinized, for otherwise it would not be possible to understond the meonings thot terrorists ottoch to their octions. suicide bombing, for instonce, is generolly regorded os irrotionolity or psychologicol obnormolity occording the western epistemr:, with its roots in philosophicol notions obout the feor of poinfur deoth. However, if such octs ore considered in the context of ethnogrophic epistemology, they moy not seem so irrotionol. Also, those who follow the criticol opprooch ore well owore thot the norrotive ond knowledge .f orthodox terrorism studies seem incopoble of understonding outside discourse, ond thot it therefore necessory to reveol cleorly whot the discourse of orthodox terrorism studies octuolly consists o,. For exomple' the present discourse oround terrorism functions to legitimize US foreign policy on th: 'wor on Terror" which uses militory intervention ond regime chonqe os well os tu And'"* silke (2007) Terrorism Research: stote tu tt Jockson, op. of the 'The impoct of 9/11 on reseorch on terrorism', in M. Ronstorp, ort, qaps ond future direction(Abingdon: Routredge), p.g1 cit., p.4 Toros ond Gunning, op. cit., pp.92-95 ed., extendinr; Mapping 40 r:: s:li"ce progrommes to outhoritorion regimes.tu From this point of view, post-structurolism is ,-e of the epistemologies of the criticol Foucouldion g, opprooch. Nevertheless, those who follow the criticol understonding :pprooch do not odopt post-structurol epistemology entirely, in thot they do not deny the specific consider certc cotegory of terrorist violence os o whole.te Due to the epistemologies it uses, however, the criticol which we, os opprooch denies the orthodox presupposition thot the oct of terrorism connot be perpetroted by point of view, stotes, since it sees terrorism os politicol ond sociol construct. Consequently, the criticol opprooch is opprooch. on oction-bosed onolysis, which orgues thot o terrorist oct con be perpetroted by onyone, given reflexive meth ln the existence of o porticulor context. Lost but not the leost, due Los to its epistemologicol positions, the criticol opprooch ploces co weoknesses. importonce on the notion of emoncipotion, which is 'the reolisotion of greoter humon freedom ond ontology, epis humon potentiol ond improvements in individuol ond sociol octuolisotion on{;qll-being'.to Thrs, which opproo< the criticol opprooch opens o spoce for silent ond morginolized voices, including even those of both hove terrorists. Nevertheless, in controst to the orthodox opprooch, the epistemologies of the criticol which opproo, opprooch leod to critiques of the methodologies which derive from its episteme. understood in co The methodologies of both the orthodox ond the criticol opprooch ore bosed on their dissimilor uses of epistemology, ond thus they ore very different from eoch other. ln the orthodox opprooch, the opplicotions of scientific methods such os empiricol doto collection ond stotisticol onolysis ore employed for the purposes of reseorch. ln this sense, the root couses of terrorism con be concluded from empiricol evidence ond onolysis. As o consequence, the orthodox opprooch frequently used for policy recommendotions, since it is con provide verifioble informotion which oppeors to provide o credible input into the policy process. The results of its onolyticol processes ore deductions from its reseorch. Thus, the explonotions ond conclusions of the orthodox opprooch tend to be norrowly focused due to the methodologies it uses. ln controst to the orthodox opprooch, the criticol opprooch costs doubt on the inherent trustworthiness of o stotisticol longuoge since stotistics con eosily be monipuloted to serve o porticulor purpose. As o result of the epistemologicol positions it uses, the criticol opprooch oims to utilize its interdisciplinory methodologies to produce more conclusive explonotionr.'t For exomple, to Richord Jockson (2009) 'Knowledge, power ond politics in the study of politicol terrorism', in R. Jockson, M. B. Smyth ond.l. Gunning, eds., Criticol Terrorism Studies: A new research agenda (Abingdon: Routledge), p.79. 'n Toros ond Gunning, op. cit., p.93. 'o Richord Jockson (2007) 'symposium: The core commitments of criticol terrorism studies' Europeon Politicol Science, vol. - 21 6, no. 5 (September),249. _ Toros ond Gunning, op. cit, pp.98-99 22 Jocl " so,. 41 Foucouldion geneology hos been odopted by the criticor opproo ch," inorder to refrect understonding of terrorism' on existing since this method .onoryse(s) the conditions under which we might consider certoin utteronces or propositions to be ogreed to be true... [ond] the condition under which we' os individuols, exist ond whot couses us to exist in the woy thot we do,.25 From point of view' self-reflexivity this is o vitol methodologicol notion in the methodologies opprooch' Lost but of the criticor not leost' it is not only the orthodox opprooch thot con be revised by serf_ refrexive methodorogies' The criticol opprooch con orso benefit by corefury exomining itserf. ln conclusion, both the criticol ond orthodox opprooches uppruucnes ho, hove their own strengths weoknesses. These ond derive frnm +h^ *^,- ,;. ;:ffi ,** ;il' "..' J**;l: JJ;ffi J,,ffi ,::: .TT::y;*n )r or more oppropriote, since their foundotions both hove contributed which opprooch to understood in t'"'o of terrorism studies' 'h:, use::i':i: in reseorch, rn reseorch' the condit. 'nt -*o'ons depth. oEi O,ff"r*.,r;;;;r", Neve ond limitotions of #:ilt::J t***rr**** s t nt.t nrtFinil flrcqruyorfi o tigoro"{t nIi, nruvrlarnn6 un rlwna?,milrirurs "o . fi ri.r rffi nrt Fln c * d e'n-u rr;;;; r', o,u n firsnrrcuu f,Uu, n* uoatawei, ?uHr:dtfiunrr ru ?ogouyt?cRoJ " Jockson, op. cit., p.4. 23 Soroh Miils (2OOS) Michet Foucault (Abingdon: Routledge), p.25. ,T:l 42 Bibliogrophy Andrew Silke 'Contemporory terrorism studies: issues in reseorch', in R. Jockson, M. B. Smyth ond J. Gunning, eds. CriticatTerrorism Studies: A new research ogendo (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009), pp.34-48 Andrew Silke 'The impoct of 9/11 on reseorch on terrorism', in M. Ronstorp, ed. Mopping Terrorism Reseorch: Stote of the ort, gops ond future direction (Abingdon: Routledge, 2OO7), pp.76-95 {rumifi Bruce Hoffmon, tnside Terrorism (London : Victor Golloncz' 1998) Hormonie Toros ond Jeroen Gunning 'Exploring o criticol theory opprooch to terrorism studies', in Jockson, M. B. Smyth ond J. Gunning, eds. Criticol Terrorism Studies: A new reseorch ogendo (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009), pp'87-108 rulr:yifrrd, ilryt1fyt1ilq, Jomes D. Kiros 'Terrorism ond globolizotion', in J. Boylis, S. Smith ond P. OVfenJ, eds. Ihe Globolbotbn of Wortd Potitics: An introduction to internotional relotions,fn edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), pp.57O-585 Jeroen Gunning 'A Cose for Criticol Terrorism Studies?' Government ond Opposition, vol. 42, no. 3 (Summer 2007), 563-595. Jonothon Grix 'lntroducing Students to the Generic Terminology of Sociol Reseorch' Politics, vol.22, no. 5 (September 2OO2),175-186. Mots Alvesson ond Koj Skdldberg, Reflexive Methodology: New Vistos r *lilo R. for Qualitotive Reseorch,2nd edn. (London: Soge, 2009) Notionol Security Reseorch Division, RAND Dotobose of Worldwide Terrorism lncidents. (RAND Corporotion) <http://www.rond.org/nsrd/projects/terrorism-incidents/> (occessed on 25 November 2010) Richord Jockson 'Criticol Terrorism Studies: An Explonotion, o Defence ond o Woy Forword' B/SA d.Fl.d. ru'figrl {on.rrt n.a.g ot the Suvomr cyrfiuquTilei ori'Erri'u ?frntat * tdt rriurl:yrrrcr?uri, d'rrnzfiarn"j,ri rriurJ:yri'rrdrfir (http://www.mc, * !o! 6:lTntr?ur,{sir o Annuol Conference, 14-'l 6 December 2009, pp.l -25. ?uTonrcai.:frrg <http://www.biso.oc.uUindex.php?option=com-biso&tosk=downlood-poper&no-html=1&p d'.:nnunynr:rfi ossed-poper-id-54> (occessed on 25 November 2010) tFr6el.JFl,r,ruflig Richord Jockson 'Knowledge, power ond politics in the study of politicol terrorism', in R. Jockson, M. B. Smyth ond i. Gunning, eds. CriticolTerrorism Studies: A new research ogendo (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009), pp.66-85. Richord.Jockson 'symposium: The core commitments of criticol terrorism studies' European Politicol Science, vol. 6, no. 5 (September 2OO7),244-251. Robert W. Cox 'sociol Forces, Stotes ond World Orders: Beyond lnternotionol Relotions Theory' Millennium: Journol of lnternotionol Studies, vol. 10, no. 2 (1981)' 126-155 Ruth Blokeley, Sfofe Terrorism and Neoliberolism: The North in the South (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009) Soroh Mills, Michel Foucault (Abingdon: Routledge' 2OO3) rrirewn, {urar5 * lJ'lg, fiqr:rutJrioed ,2rJ?y!f,{n?1r{ iunouzo.:ri'lrnr ',:y.irdrfinurflr ,ir,tnre?is{ylr.:? --rdrrfirTl?ufi"r" -.;Lrneyr{rrfiur .-irrTno: ir.iritl