Can terrorism be defeated Discuss in terms of both the military and Essay

Can terrorism be defeated Discuss in terms of both the military and non-military responses to the threat - Essay Example These conflicting opinions are now in the process of ripening and it is hoped that it will not be long before they find their application in practical terms. Discussion Older theorists have proposed that terrorism can be defeated if certain principles are followed. Terrorists often win because we respond to terrorism the way terrorists want us to respond. If our response is not in accordance with the terrorist's will, they fail to achieve their objective. So, it should be realized that the choice is ours. If we can learn to refuse to act upon the will of terrorists, we can hope to defeat terrorism, although we cannot always prevent it (Fromkin, 1975). Such ideas have dominated the minds of intellectuals of the past, but keeping in mind the present scenario of the world, we can infer that such ideas are far from reality. The previous two decades have seen a rise in the tendency to control terrorism using the military approach. The idea of intervening within states for the resolution o f military conflicts appeared prominently in the international scenario in the early 1990s, when in the Gulf war and later in Cambodia the international community played its role (Snyder, 2008). Subsequent years have seen a surge in such military measures and a collective effort on part of many countries to contain terrorism and limit it to its origins. They have, however, resulted in a growth of terrorist activities across the world, let alone stopping its spread. Our recent experiences of waging war against terrorism have only made us realize some bitter realities of the life. Most modern discoveries in neuroscience, anthropology, human evolution and paleoethnology have favored the idea that Homo sapiens are not inclined towards killing others of their own species. The similarity between a 'killer in uniform' and a 'killer without uniform' is striking. Both have to be fed with 'hatred' in the process of de-humanizing them, during which they are trained to overcome their natural te ndency to allow others to 'live' (Ram & Summy, 2008). Such discoveries have led us to believe that the military approach is, in fact, not the solution to the problem of terrorism. Theorists of insurgency have focused on the element of preserving public sympathy during military actions to gain benefit after takeover of states. Similarly, an indirect approach to contain insurgency, which is termed the 'hearts and minds' approach, emphasizes the need to gain public support by political means (Snyder, 2008). Such observations have favoured the non-military approach for the solution of terrorism. Democracy is considered by some to be the solution for terrorism. This may be true in some cases, but again it has its own limitations. In many European states where democracy is the rule, a number of terrorist groups have emerged, which not only fail to comply with the norms of democracy for their own expression but also use democracy as a tool to augment their deleterious activities (Snyder, 2 008). Such observations have led us to believe that perhaps, the non-military approach is too 'soft' for terrorism oriented mentality. So, the lesson learnt during war on terrorism is that terrorism cannot be defeated; instead, it can only be attenuated, reduced and controlled to some degree. Unrealistic hopes of completely sweeping