May 17, 2008 |  1 comment |  Print this Article | E-Mail Your Research  

Amarjyoti  Acharya

Think Tank Analysis: Foregone Conclusions

Amarjyoti Acharya: Democratic free spaces & their subversions are the immediate concerns for internal security of states. Between states like India & the UK - what do we see apart from the obvious differences that exist between the ‘two’ democracies, in their war against terrorism?

The transnational nature of contemporary terrorism poses analytical challenges to conventional understandings of security that move around states as the subjects and the objects of analysis. The challenge presented by transnational terrorism is unique because of the relatively new globally-networked nature of it, aided by technology and the process of globalization.

Like criminal activities, its networking activities are carried out in secret and only its end-product as dramatic violence becomes public knowledge. Contemporary international terrorism has found its expression in the networking of various radical sub-units and disparate radical individuals within the milieu of religious fundamentalism. Given the religious fanaticism as an attribute of contemporary terrorism, it is difficult to separate religious nationalism from religious fundamentalism, since it is the logic of religious fundamentalism that gives rise to religious nationalism.

The overtly religious rhetoric of contemporary transnational terrorism finds easy audiences in many societies that are yet to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of development and modernization, particularly in those societies where any particular religion is the dominant ideology around which the state and society are structured. This networking of disparate elements means the emergence of an amorphous body of globally-networked actors that may equally participate in both global crime and transnational terrorism. The networking of phantom cells, unlike conventional understandings of terrorists who operate in largely A-line organizational structures, makes contemporary transnational terrorism operationally difficult to contain without wide-spread international co-operation between states.

 
  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
Tags: | problems | India | international terroism | UK |
 
Comments
ilyas m mohsin

May 18, 2008

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Religion would have faded even in LDCs etc if International law and morality had been observed by the states of the world. unfortunately saying good things can't change afcts. Mandela was a 'terrorist' despite being a Christain and had to be jailed for 27 years before he became a
' freedom-fighter'. This is true of Saron, Begin etc in the Middle east. the Afghan leadesr were like 'the founding fathers' for the US/ Reagan and what are they now. What is happening in Palestine/ kashmir so that-is-why the extremists surface, gain sympathy and 'hit-back' at 'occupation'.
 

Create Comment

Type the characters shown in the image below into the textfield.
Captcha

What are tags?