:: wikimiki.org ::

Red Army Faction

Red Army Faction

]] The Red Army Faction (in German: Rote Armee Fraktion; RAF), also known as the Baader-Meinhof Group, or the Baader-Meinhof Gang, which was one of the core groups within the RAF, was postwar Western Germany's most active left-wing terrorist organization. The RAF referred to its members as "urban guerrillas". It operated from the 1970s to 1998, causing great unrest (especially in the autumn of 1977, which led to a national crisis) and killing dozens of high-profile Germans in its more than 20 years of existence.

Prelude

The origins of the group can be traced back to the student protests of the late 1960s. In Germany, the protests turned into riots when on June 2 1967, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, visited the western part of Berlin, at the time a divided city. After a day of violent protests by exiled Iranians, supported by German students, the Shah visited the Deutsche Oper. In the course of events after the show, the German student Benno Ohnesorg—who was attending his first protest—was shot in the head and killed by West German police. This, together with perceptions of state brutality during other protests (West German police tactics of the period are viewed in contemporary times as generally overly aggressive) and the widespread opposition to the Vietnam War, brought Thorwald Proll, Horst Söhnlein, Gudrun Ensslin, and Andreas Baader together, after which they decided to set fire to several German department stores. They were arrested in Frankfurt on April 2, 1968; while they were on trial, the journalist Ulrike Meinhof published several sympathetic articles in the political magazine konkret. Meanwhile, on April 11, 1968, Rudi Dutschke, the intellectual leader of the student protests, was shot in the head (though badly injured, he was able to return to political activism until his death in 1979, a late consequence of his injuries). The attacker was Josef Bachmann, a conservative, German unskilled laborer. The students considered the tabloid newspaper Bild-Zeitung, which had headlines like "Stop Dutschke now!", the chief culprit and thus the conservative press and especially the Axel Springer corporation, the publisher of the Bild-Zeitung, became the new target of the leftist protesters. Meinhof commented, "If one sets a car on fire, that is a criminal offence. If one sets hundreds of cars on fire, that is political action."

Formation of the RAF

The RAF (Red Army Faction) was formed when two people didnt like the situation in Germany and wanted to violently change it.

Custody and the Stammheim trial

The RAF members were jailed individually in solitary confinement, with no contact among themselves and allowed visits from their relatives only every two weeks. Still, Ensslin devised an "info system" with aliases for each member, and by circulating letters with the help of their defence counsels, they were able to communicate. To protest against their conditions, they went on several coordinated hunger strikes; eventually, they were force-fed. Meins died, however, on November 9, 1974. After public protests, their conditions were somewhat improved by the authorities. The so-called second generation of the RAF emerged at the time, consisting of sympathizers independent of the inmates. This became clear when, on February 27, 1975, Peter Lorenz, the CDU candidate for mayor of Berlin, was kidnapped to force the release of several other detainees. Since none were on trial for murder, the state agreed, and those inmates (and therefore later Lorenz) were released. On April 25, 1975, the German embassy in Stockholm was occupied by another German group; two of the hostages were murdered as the German government under Chancellor Helmut Schmidt refused to give in to their demands. More people died when the explosives deployed by them were triggered later that night. On May 21, 1975, the Stammheim trial of Baader, Ensslin, Meinhof, and Raspe began, named after a city district of Stuttgart where it took place. Possibly the most tense and controversial German criminal trial ever, the Bundestag had earlier changed the Code of Criminal Procedure so that several of the attorneys who were accused of serving as links between the inmates and the RAF's second generation could be excluded. On May 9, 1976, Ulrike Meinhof was found dead in her cell, hanging from a rope made from jail towels. An investigation concluded that she had hanged herself, a result hotly contested at the time, spurring a plethora of conspiracy theories. Other theories suggest that she took her life because of being ostracized by the rest of the group. During the trial, more attacks took place; among them, on April 7, 1977, Federal Prosecutor Siegfried Buback and his driver were shot and killed by two RAF members while waiting at a red traffic light. Eventually, on April 28, 1977, the trial's 192nd day, the three remaining defendants were convicted of several murders, more attempted murders, and of forming a terrorist organization; they were sentenced to life imprisonment.

Autumn 1977 (German Autumn)

On July 30, 1977, Jürgen Ponto, then head of Dresdner Bank, was shot and killed in front of his house in Oberursel in a kidnapping that went wrong. Those involved were Brigitte Mohnhaupt, Christian Klar, and Susanne Albrecht, the last being Ponto's goddaughter. Following the convictions, Hanns-Martin Schleyer, a former Nazi and officer of the SS who was then President of the German Employers' Association (and thus one of the most powerful industrialists in West Germany) was abducted in a violent kidnapping. On September 5, 1977, his driver was forced to brake when a baby carriage suddenly appeared in the street in front of them. The police escort vehicle behind them was unable to stop in time, and crashed into Schleyer's car. Five masked assailants immediately killed the three policemen and the driver and took Schleyer hostage. A letter then arrived at the Federal Government, demanding the release of eleven detainees, including those from Stammheim. A crisis squad was formed in Bonn under the lead of Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, which, instead of acceding, resolved to employ delaying tactics to give the police time to figure out Schleyer's location. At the same time, a total communication ban was imposed on the prison inmates, who were only allowed visits from government officials and the prison chaplain. The state crisis dragged on for more than a month, while the Bundeskriminalamt carried out its biggest manhunt to date. Matters escalated when, on October 13, 1977, Lufthansa flight LH 181 from Palma de Mallorca to Frankfurt was hijacked (Landshut Hijacking). A group of four Arabs took control of the plane (named Landshut). The leader introduced himself to the passengers as "Captain Mahmud" who would be later identified as Zohair Youssef Akache. When the plane landed in Rome for refuelling, he issued the same demands as the Schleyer kidnappers, plus the release of two Palestinians held in Turkey and payment of USD $15 million. The Bonn crisis squad again decided not to give in. The plane flew on via Larnaca to Dubai, and then to Oman, where flight captain Jürgen Schumann, whom the hijackers deemed not fully cooperative, was brought before an improvised "revolutionary tribunal" and murdered on October 16. The aircraft again took off, flown by the remaining co-pilot Jürgen Vietor, this time headed for Mogadishu, Somalia. A high-risk rescue operation was led by Schmidt's former minister and now special officer Hans-Jürgen Wischnewski, who had secretly been flown in from Bonn. At five past midnight (CET) on October 18, the plane was stormed in a seven-minute assault by the GSG-9, an elite unit of the German federal police. All four hijackers were shot; three of them died on the spot. Not one passenger was seriously hurt and Wischnewski was able to phone Schmidt and tell the Bonn crisis squad that the operation had been a success. Half an hour later, German radio broadcast the news of the rescue, to which the Stammheim inmates listened on their hidden radio. In the course of the night, Baader was found dead with a gunshot wound in his head and Ensslin hanged in her cell; Raspe died in hospital the next day. Irmgard Möller, who was wounded, survived and was released from prison in 1994. The official inquiry concluded that this was a collective suicide, but again conspiracy theories abounded. It is not clear, for example, how Baader managed to obtain a gun in the high-security prison wing specially constructed for the first generation RAF members. Also, it would have been difficult if not impossible for Möller to have herself inflicted the four stab wounds found near her heart. However, independent investigations have shown that the inmates' lawyers were able to smuggle in weapons and equipment in spite of the high security. The next day, on October 19, 1977, Schleyer's kidnappers announced that he had been "executed". The events in the autumn of 1977, possibly the biggest criminal and political showdown that Germany has experienced since the end of World War II, are frequently referred to as Der Deutsche Herbst ("German Autumn"). A two-part 1997 television mini-series by Heinrich Breloer called Todesspiel ("Death Game") gives a good account of the events, as far as they can be reconstructed today.

The RAF in the 1980s and 1990s

In the early 1980s, new members of the RAF, sometimes referred to as the "third generation", established an alliance with the French group Action Directe. The collapse of Communism and the Soviet Union was a serious blow to left-wing groups, and by 1990 only the RAF remained. Well into the 1990s attacks were still being committed under the name "RAF". Among these were the killing of industrialist Ernst Zimmermann; another bombing at the US Air Force's Ramstein Air Base (near Kaiserslautern), which killed three; the death in a car-bombing of Siemens executive Karl-Heinz Beckurts; and the shooting of Gerold von Braunmühl, a leading official at Germany's foreign ministry. There were several other attacks which the government blamed on the RAF; despite these accusations, its responsibility for those attacks has never been proven. On November 30, 1989, Deutsche Bank chief Alfred Herrhausen was killed with a highly complex bomb when his car triggered a photo sensor, in Bad Homburg. On April 1, 1991, Detlev Karsten Rohwedder, leader of the government Treuhand organization responsible for the privatization of the East German state economy, was shot dead. After German reunification in 1990, it was discovered that the RAF had received financial and logistic support from the Stasi, the security and intelligence organization of East Germany, which had given several members shelter and new identities. The last big action against the RAF took place on June 27, 1993. A Verfassungsschutz (internal secret service) agent named Klaus Steinmetz had infiltrated the RAF. As a result Birgit Hogefeld and Wolfgang Grams were to be arrested in Bad Kleinen. Grams and Policeman Rüdiger Newrzella died during the mission. The official investigation concluded that Grams committed suicide, others claim his death was in revenge for Newrzella's. In 1992 the German government assessed that the RAF's main field of engagement now were extrication missions of former RAF-members. To weaken the organization further the government declared that some RAF-inmates would be released if the RAF refrained from violent attacks in the future. Hereafter the RAF announced their intentions to "take back the escalation" and stop their attacks on people. The last action took place in 1993 with a bombing of a newly built prison in Weiterstadt by subdueing the officers on duty and planting explosives afterwards. Although no one was seriously injured this action caused property damage comprising 123 million Deutsche Marks (over 50 million euro). On April 20, 1998 an eight-page typewritten letter in German was faxed to the Reuters news agency, signed "RAF" with the machine-gun red star, declaring the group dissolved:

"Vor fast 28 Jahren, am 14. Mai 1970, entstand in einer Befreiungsaktion die RAF. Heute beenden wir dieses Projekt. Die Stadtguerilla in Form der RAF ist nun Geschichte."
("Almost 28 years ago, on May 14, 1970, the RAF arose in a campaign of liberation. Today we end this project. The urban guerrilla in the shape of the RAF is now history.")

Origins of the name

The name was inspired by that of the Japanese Red Army, a Japanese leftist paramilitary group. The usual translation into English is the Red Army Faction although the original is actually a fraction, an old word for a unit under Communist party discipline. The word is rarely used in English today except in mathematics, whereas the word Fraktion is still used in German, to mean any parliamentary subgroup - dictionaries normally translate this meaning as faction. Fraktion was thrown in to illustrate the connection leftist organisations felt with a large, international Marxist struggle.

Events timeline

May 24, 1967 - Members of Kommune I, a Berlin-based radical commune, pass out leaflets at Berlin's Free University which jokingly imply that one way to bring a Marxist Revolution to fruition in West Germany is by deliberately burning down department stores and other business buildings in West Germany. June 2, 1967- During a visit to West Germany by the Shah of Iran, students gather to protest the brutal nature of the Shah's regime. This is only one of a continually growing number of protests in Berlin. Students have protested everything from the war in Vietnam to university policy each week and there is no sign that the marches will stop. Ulrike Meinhof, a noted journalist and editor of the leftist magazine Konkret, is a regular attendee of the protests but is unable to attend the June 2 protest, she is busy shopping for furniture for her new Hamburg home. Andreas Baader, at this time nothing more then a small-time troublemaker, is also unable to attend the protest. He is spending time in a Traunstein jail for stealing a motorcycle. During the course of the protest police attack the protesting crowd and pandemonium ensues. During the chaos young Benno Ohnesorg is grabbed by police and a gun is pointed at his head. The gun goes off, perhaps accidentally. Ohnesorg, who was attending his first protest, is killed. He would later become a martyr for the leftist movement in West Germany.

List of assaults attributed to the RAF

External links

- [http://www.rafinfo.de Rafinfo.de] (German)
- [http://www.baader-meinhof.com Baader-Meinhof.com] (English)
- [http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/terrorists/meinhof/1.html?sect=22 The Baader Meinhof Gang] (English)
- [http://3ammagazine.com/politica/2002_dec/interview_richard_huffman.html Interview with creator of Baader-Meinhof.com]
- [http://www.theraspberryreich.com/ The Raspberry Reich] - website of an entertaining and relevant film by director Bruce LaBruce (English) Category:Left-wing militant groups Category:Terrorist incidents in the 1970s Category:Terrorist incidents in the 1980s Category:Terrorist incidents in the 1990s ja:ドイツ赤軍 nb:Rote Armee Fraktion

Left wing

:Left wing is also a term used in several sports; see winger (sport). In politics, left-wing, the political left or simply The Left are terms that refer to the segment of the political spectrum typically associated with any of several strains of socialism or social democracy/Social liberalism. In addition it is considered the opposite of right-wing politics. Communism, as well as the Marxist philosophy that many base it on, and most currents of traditional anarchism are often considered to be radical forms of left-wing politics. Many left-wingers, however, reject any association with communism or anarchism. The term comes originally from the legislative seating arrangement during the French Revolution, when republicans who opposed the Ancien Régime were commonly referred to as leftists because they sat on the left side of successive legislative assemblies. As this original reference became obsolete, the meaning of the term has changed as appropriate to the spectrum of ideas and stances being compared, and the point of view of the speaker. In recent times, the term almost always includes some forms of socialism, social democracy, or, in the sense in which the term is understood in the United States, liberalism. The left is often seen to include secularism, especially in the United States, India, the Middle East, and in many Catholic countries, although religion and left-wing politics have at times been allied historically, such as in the U.S. civil rights movement, or in the cases of liberation theology and Christian socialism. Peter Singer (Princeton University, Professor of Philosophy) defines "the left" as being those who place minimizing suffering above other moral imperatives, such as tradition or rights. This definition handles the formation of leftist politics and modern bioethics issues well, but is intentionally over simplified and favorable, and does not handle some historical issues, like state communism correctly. See political spectrum and left-right politics for further discussion of this kind of classification.

History of the term

:See the Left-Right politics article for more detailed discussion of the history and development of the term Although it may seem ironic in terms of present-day usage, those originally on 'The Left' during the French Revolution were the largely bourgeois supporters of laissez-faire capitalism and free markets. As the electorate expanded beyond property-holders, these relatively wealthy elites found themselves clearly victorious over the old aristocracy and the remnants of feudalism, but newly opposed by the growing and increasingly organized and politicized workers and wage-earners. The "left" of 1789 would, in some ways be part of the present-day "right", liberal with regard to the rights of property and intellect, but not embracing notions of distributive justice, rights for organized labour, etc. In some countries, such as the Netherlands, the left had for a long time the meaning of the non-religious side of politics. This gradually changed into the more general European meaning of the word. The European left has traditionally shown a smooth continuum between non-communist and communist parties (including such hybrids as eurocommunism), which have sometimes allied with more moderate leftists to present a united front. In the United States, however, no avowedly socialist or communist party ever became a major player in national politics, although the Social Democratic Party of Eugene V. Debs and its successor Socialist Party of America (in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century) and the Communist Party of the United States of America (in the 1930s) made some inroads. While many American "liberals" might be "social democrats" in European terms, very few of them openly embrace the term "left"; in the United States, the term is mainly embraced by New Left activists, certain portions of the labor movement, and people who see their intellectual or political heritage as descending from 19th-century socialist movements. The New Left refers to radical left-wing movements from the 1960s onwards who claimed to be breaking with some institutions and traditions of the left. Where earlier left-wing movements were generally rooted in labour activism, the New Left generally adopted a broader definition of political activism, commonly called social activism. The New Left has had varying degrees of unity since its rise in the 1960s, losing some of its initial radicalism and mainly existing as loose coalitions of numerous distinct movements, including (but not limited to) feminists, greens, some labour unions, some atheists, some gay rights activists, and some minority ethnic and racially oriented civil rights groups. Many Greens deny that green politics is "on the left"; nonetheless, their economic policies can generally be considered left-wing, and when they have formed political coalitions (most notably in Germany, but also in local governments elsewhere), it has almost always been with groups that would generally be classified as being on the left.

Left-wing issues

The left has historically opposed the preservation of wealth and power, especially in an institutionalized form, in the hands of those who have traditionally had them. Outside the United States, which lacked an historical ruling class or nobility, this often included at the most basic level demands for democratisation of the political system and land reform in agricultural areas. With the spread of the industrial revolution, left-wing politics became concerned with the conditions and rights of large numbers of workers in factories and of lower classes in general. Partial or full socialism, the welfare state, or trade unionism have been specific ways in which some leftists have tried to advance the interests of the poor. In modern times the left also criticized what it perceives as the exploitative nature of globalization through the rise of sweatshops and the race to the bottom, and has sought to promote fair trade. As civil and human rights gained more attention during the 20th century, the left allied itself with advocates of racial and gender equality, and cultural tolerance. It has also opposed to some forms of aggressive nationalism, such as imperialism and offensive war, which has been seen as a vehicle to advance the interests of capitalism. Although specific means of achieving these ends are not agreed upon by different left-wing groups, almost all those on the left agree that some form of government or social intervention in economics is necessary to advance the interests of the poor and middle class. Advocacy of government or social intervention in the market puts those on the left at odds with advocates of the free market as well as corporations (who oppose democratic control of the markets but not necessarily all control) if they see their interests threatened. Many on the Left describe themselves as "progressive", a term that arose from their self-identification as the side of social progress. Left-wing positions on social issues, such as opposition to social hierarchy and authority over moral behaviour, strict adherence to tradition, and monoculturalism, may make them allies with advocates of right wing advocates of "individual freedom", though their solutions are very different. The above strands of left wing thought come in many forms, and individuals who support some of the objectives of one of the above stands will not necessarily support all of the others. At the level of practical political policy, there are endless variations in the means that left wing thinkers advocate to achieve their basic aims, and they sometimes argue with each other as much as with the right.

Communism and left-wing politics

Despite the important differences from other left-wing ideologies, communism is almost universally considered to be a part of "the left." This is somewhat parallel to the customary inclusion of fascism (and, in particular, that of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy) in "the right." Nonetheless, communism differs significantly from other politics that are usually classified as left wing, and most left-wingers (even many far left groups) reject any association with it on the grounds that communism is too totalitarian to be politically humane or egalitarian. The argument that communism should be viewed independently of the conventional left-right spectrum has perhaps been made most eloquently by Karl Popper, through his development of the concept of totalitarianism. There are, however, many communists (most notably Trotskyists and council communists) who regard the totalitarianism of the former Soviet Union to be the result of Stalinism and its betrayals of genuine communist ideology. Likewise, most right-wingers (even many nationalists) reject any association with Nazism and fascism as well. Some say that leftist welfare state reforms in many non-communist countries, such as the establishment of social security and recognition of labour unions helped to stave off communism by alleviating the excesses of capitalism, hence protecting and preserving social support for capitalism.

The Soviet Union

In the days of the Soviet Union, left-wing movements worldwide had different relationships with Moscow-line communist parties, ranging from enthusiastic support to outright opposition. Lincoln Steffens, in 1919, said of having visited the Soviet Union, "I have seen the future and it works", while others, increasingly numerous over the years, loathed the perceived crimes of those regimes and denounced them at every turn. Throughout the history of the Soviet Union, the large social-democratic parties of Western Europe were largely opposed to what they saw as its totalitarianism. A large majority of members of the British Labour Party, the West German SPD, and the French Socialists were never supportive of the Soviet regime, and nor were their respective leaderships. The American Democratic party took a strong anti-Soviet stand, especially at the height of the Cold War. One example of an internal dispute within communism is that most Trotskyists adhere to some variant of Leon Trotsky's view of the post-Lenin Soviet Union as a "degenerated workers' state" and denounce Stalin as a traitor, some even claiming that the Soviet Union was actually a kind of 'monopoly capitalist' state. Others, such as the American activist Hal Draper, argued that the USSR was neither capitalist nor socialist but Bureaucratic collectivist. Large segments of the left never took inspiration from the Soviet model and actually rejoiced to see the USSR's system collapse—as Michael Albert of Z Magazine put it, "one down, one to go" (referring to Stalinism and capitalism).

China

China has undergone a transition from a "Communist" state to in many ways a right-wing authoritarian regime in recent decades. Chinese neo-left-wing politics, embracing postmodernism and Chinese nationalism, and opposed both to democracy and to what they see as a return of China to the capitalist world, arose as a political idea during the mid-1990s.Neo-left-wing politics is seen as being more appealing to students in mainland China today than liberalism, as problems faced in mainland China during its modernisation such as inequality and the widening gap between the rich and the poor are becoming more serious.

The Left and postmodernism

As Barbara Epstein notes, "Many people, inside and outside the world of postmodernism (and for that matter inside and outside the left), have come to equate postmodernism with the left" . While some postmodernists, such as Francis Fukuyama, are widely identified with the right, most postmodernists would describe themselves as on the left. Postmodernism is far from being widely accepted within left-wing political movements; it has been most widely accepted amongst left-wing academics. Left-wing Postmodernism claims to reject attempts at universal explanatory theories such as Marxism, deriding them as grand narratives. It tends to embrace culture and ideology as the battle grounds for change rejecting traditional ways of organising such as political parties and trade unions, instead it focuses on critiquing or deconstructing existing society.

Critiques from within the left

Left-wing critics of postmodernism generally see it as a reaction of the failure of socialist movements of the 1960s (both in Europe and Latin America and the USA) and the disillusionment with the old Communist Parties. They claim that disconnected from any mass movements, and pessimistic about the possibility for any mass activism these academics justified their retreat into cultural studies courses by inflating the importance of culture through denying the existence of an independent reality.

The Sokal Affair

Probably the most famous critique of postmodernism from within the left came in the form of a 1996 prank by physicist and self-described leftist Alan Sokal. Concerned about what he saw as the increasing prevalence on the Left of "a particular kind of nonsense and sloppy thinking… that denies the existence of objective realities, or…downplays their practical relevance…" , Sokal composed a nonsensical article entitled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity", in which a mix of mis-stated and mis-used terms from physics, postmodernism, literary analysis, and political theory are used to claim that physical reality, and especially gravitation, do not objectively exist, but are psychologically and politically contructed. The journal Social Text published the paper in its Spring/Summer 1996 issue, whereupon Sokal publically revealed his hoax. While some saw Sokal as attacking leftism in general, he was very clear that this was intended as a critique from within:

Politically, I'm angered because most (though not all) of this silliness is emanating from the self-proclaimed Left. We're witnessing here a profound historical volte-face. For most of the past two centuries, the Left has been identified with science and against obscurantism… epistemic relativism betrays this worthy heritage and undermines the already fragile prospects for progressive social critique. Theorizing about “the social construction of reality” won't help us find an effective treatment for AIDS or devise strategies for preventing global warming. Nor can we combat false ideas in history, sociology, economics and politics if we reject the notions of truth and falsity.… The results of my little experiment demonstrate, at the very least, that some fashionable sectors of the American academic Left have been getting intellectually lazy.

Critiques from the right

Right-wing critics have generally seen acceptance of post-modernism as an indication of the poorly thought-out, fashionable nature of the academic left. Some right-wing critics mirror the idea that left-wing postmodernism is a product of the 'failure' of Marxism to bring liberation. For example Gary Jason claims that "The failure of socialism, both empirically and theoretically, ... brought about a crisis of faith among socialists, and postmodernism is their response."

The Left and Darwinism

The left's relationship with Darwinism has historically been congenial on the scientific front, with the exception of Stalin's support of Trofim Lysenko's Lamarckian views. It has been hostile on the philosophical front because the left was resisting various non-scientific right-wing political theories using evolutionary language, such as Social Darwinism. Today, evolutionary biology is increasingly seen either as supporting left-wing views directly, especially concerning sexual liberalism, homosexuality, and animal rights, or else as providing a much-needed corrective to Marxism. In particular, a number of scientifically literate leftists, such as Richard Dawkins and Peter Singer, view the iterated prisoner's dilemma as a key in understanding exploitation of the masses by the powerful.

The Left and war

Historically, various groups on the Left have been either enthusiastic supporters or high-profile opponents of various wars. While anti-war movements have never been exclusively left-wing, they have generally been led, inspired, organised by those on the left. While some on the left are inspired by pacifism, most left-wing opposition to war arises from anti-imperialism which leads them to reject specific wars because they see them as being in capitalist interests rather then being morally against all violence. Left-wing opposition to war is also often characterised by the internationalist belief that the world's workers share common interests with one another, rather than with the powers governing their respective countries.

First and Second World Wars

Until the First World War, there was broad agreement among those on the left on opposition to imperialist wars. Few left-wingers supported their nation in conflicts such as the Boer War. The First World War triggered fierce debate among socialist groups as to the right response to take. The Second world war was generally seen as an anti-fascist war and thus supported however some groups saw it as in the interests of capitalism and thus opposed it. These debates about positions on war co-incided with debates about wider political strategy, crudely the debate between revolutionary socialism and social democracy. Part of the driving force of the Russian Revolution was revolt by soldiers against the First World War, epitomised in the slogan taken up by the Bolsheviks "bread, land, and peace".

Spanish Civil War

The Spanish Civil War was seen by many on the left as an important fight between facism and democracy. In response to the outbreak of war, many people joined the International Brigades or other left-wing militias organized by trade unions or political parties. Others campaigned for the democratic countries to impose arms embargoes and to work through the League of Nations to stop the war.

Vietnam and the Post-September 11 anti-war movements

The next large anti-war movement that involved the western left was the Vietnam War, it triggered much opposition beyond the ranks of the left and is generally thought of as part of a growing counter-culture movement that took up many different left-wing issues. The American-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which came in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks led to new anti-war movements forming. Though various social democratic political parties (such as Tony Blair's Labour Party) supported and sent their countries' troops to participate in these wars, seeing them as appropriate responses to the terrorist threat, much of the organised left, particularly the socialist left, opposed these wars. This opposition was generally based to a large extent on their perception of the wars as imperialist, commonly claiming that oil and control of the Middle East were their goals rather than liberation. Some criticism has been levelled at various left-wing groups for forming anti-war coalitions with organisations that are presented as being conservative or fundamentalist Islamists. The general response has been to claim that such characterisations of all Muslim groups as extremists are racist, and that broad united fronts are positive. There has also been some controversy over the Left's use of the Palestine issue in an anti-war context. The anti-war movement was generally seen as re-invigorating left-wing movements, though there was a large current on the French Left (especially within ATTAC) that saw them as detracting from the economic issues of the anti-globalisation movement. In the U.S. much of the left-wing radicalisation was channelled into Anybody but Bush campaigns, which effectively meant supported the pro-war centrist Democratic Party. In the U.K, anti-war feeling lead to a drop in support for the pro-war Labour Party and gains for the Liberal Democrats. Some of the left-wing groups that had been involved in the anti-war movement sought to harness the increase in popular radicalism through the setting up of a new political party called Respect.

The Left and Anti-Globalisation

The anti-globalisation movement, also known as the Global Justice Movement or alter-globalization movement, is a collection of social movements which are prominent in protests against global trade agreements and the negative consequences they perceive them to have for the poor, for the environment and for peace. It is generally characterised as left-wing, though some activists within it reject association with the traditional left. Certainly it is concerned with what are generally thought of as left-wing issues. From the right, the anti-globalisation movement is often caricatured as an attempt by far-left groups to repackage themselves and it might also be regarded as existing within a broader set of anti-capitalist movements and philosophies.

Political parties on the Left

Depending on the political viewpoint of the categoriser, different groups might be categorized as on the left. One might generally characterize parties as on the political left in their respective countries, though even then they might have relatively little in common with other left-wing groups beyond their opposition to the right. However even this can cause issues. For example, the Democratic Leadership Council, an organization of centrists affiliated with the Democratic Party in which former President Bill Clinton was active, is generally considered to be the right wing of the U.S. Democratic Party. Outside of the U.S., the Democratic Party is considered by many to be right-of-centre.

Notes

#[http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/albertold13.htm Revolutions In The East], Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel, Z magazine, Date=? #[http://www.wpunj.edu/~newpol/issue22/epstei22.htm Postmodernism and the Left], Barbara Epstein, New Politics, vol. 6, no. 2 (new series), whole no. 22, Winter 1997 #[http://www.wpunj.edu/~newpol/issue22/epstei22.htm Postmodernism and the Left], Barbara Epstein, New Politics, vol. 6, no. 2 (new series), whole no. 22, Winter 1997 #[http://www.isj.org.uk/index.php4?id=59issue=105 Postmodernism, commodity fetishism and hegemony], Néstor Kohan, International Socialism, Issue 105, #[http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/chomsky-on-postmodernism.html Chomsky on Postmodernism], Noam Chomsky, Z-Magazine's Left On-Line Bulletin Board #[http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/lingua_franca_v4/lingua_franca_v4.html A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies], Alan Sokal #[http://www.physics.nyu.edu/~as2/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_singlefile.html Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity], Alan Sokal, first published in; Social Text, issule 46/47, 1996 #[http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/lingua_franca_v4/lingua_franca_v4.html A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies], Alan Sokal #[http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2005_06/jason-pomo.html Socialism's Last Bastion], Gary Jason, Liberty

Terrorism

Terrorism is the unconventional use of violence for political gain. It is a strategy of using coordinated attacks that fall outside the laws of war commonly understood to represent the bounds of conventional warfare (see also unconventional warfare). "Terrorist attacks" are usually characterized as "indiscriminate," "targeting of civilians," or executed "with disregard" for human life. The term "terrorism" is often used to assert that the political violence of an enemy is immoral, wanton, and unjustified. According to definition of terrorism typically used by states, academics, counter-terrorism experts, and non-governmental organizations, "terrorists" are actors who don't belong to any recognized armed forces, or who don't adhere to their rules, and who are therefore regarded as "rogue actors". Because of the above pejorative connotations, those accused of being "terrorists" rarely identify themselves as such, and instead typically use terms that reference their ideological or ethnic struggle, such as: separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, militant, paramilitary, guerrilla (from guerra Spanish for "war" meaning "small war"), rebel, jihadi and mujaheddin (both meaning "struggler"), or fedayeen ("prepared for martyrdom").

Etymology

Main article: Definition of terrorism Although the term is often used imprecisely, there have been many attempts by various law enforcement agencies and public organizations to develop more precise working definitions of terrorism. The United Nations Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention has proposed a short legal definition —that "[an act of terrorism is] the peacetime equivalent of a war crime." A US court found that "the malice associated with terrorist attacks transcends even that of premeditated murder." [http://www.ict.org.il/counter_ter/law/lawdet.cfm?lawid=16 Flatow v. Iran: Order. CA No. 97-396 (RCL)] More precise definitions of terrorism tend to be relativist, because views toward particular acts of political violence are often only subjective, and rarely show complete objectivity. For example, according to the United States Department of Defense, terrorism is: :"the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological." This definition is vague because it relies on unclear terms which are left to interpretation —terms such as "unlawful violence," "intended to coerce or intimidate," "the pursuit of goals..." all can easily be applied to violent actions by state actors, though the above definition suggests such can be "lawful." Like all political ideas, the meaning of the term "terrorism" has evolved in response to circumstances. The words "terrorism" and "terror" originally referred to methods employed by regimes to control their own populations through fear, a tactic seen in totalitarian regimes such as Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. The term "terrorism" comes from the French word terrorisme, which is based on the Latin language verbs terrere (to frighten) and deterrere (to frighten from). It dates to 1795 when it was used to describe the actions of the Jacobin Club in their rule of post-Revolutionary France, the so-called "Reign of Terror". Jacobins are rumored to have coined the term "terrorists" to refer to themselves. Acts described as Jacobin Club "terrorism" were mostly cases of arrest or execution of opponents as a means of coercing compliance in the general public. Up until comparatively recently, people who would now be known as "terrorists" were called "incendiaries" (due to the fact that they started fires and set off incendiary devices). One such example is the seventeenth-century Scottish nationalist John the Painter, who has been described as the first modern terrorist. However, in accounts of the time, he is labelled as an "incendiary". [http://heritage.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1267&id=196862005] The current use of the term is broader and relies more on the example of the 19th-century revolutionaries who used the technique of assassination, particularly the anarchists and Narodniks (populists) in Tsarist Russia, whose most notable action was the assassination of Alexander II. In response to the September 11, 2001 attacks, political leaders from Europe, North America, Asia, and the Middle East have placed the phenomenon of terrorism within the context of a global struggle against systems of government perceived by those accused of using terrorist tactics as harmful to their interests. The European Union includes in its 2004 definition of "terrorism" the aim of "destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country."

Key criteria

Official definitions determine counter-terrorism policy and are often developed to serve it. Most official definitions outline the following key criteria: target, objective, motive, perpetrator, and legitimacy or legality of the act.
- Violence — According to Walter Laqueur of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, "the only general characteristic [of terrorism] generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence". However, the criterion of violence alone does not produce a useful definition, as it includes many acts not usually considered terrorism: war, riot, organized crime, or even a simple assault. Whether property destruction is considered violent is also a common debate, especially with regard to the actions of the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front.
- Target – It is commonly held that the distinctive nature of terrorism lies in its deliberate and specific selection of civilians as direct targets. :This definition would exclude acts of war and attacks on military targets. It would pertain regardless of whether the attackers made an attempt to reduce civilian casualties. For example, the Zionist organization Irgun preceded many of its attacks (notably the 1946 King David Hotel bombing) with warnings to the press, the target, or the authorities of the British Mandate of Palestine. They were nevertheless considered terrorists by the British. ETA and the Provisional IRA are also known for issuing warnings. In contrast, groups such as Hamas, al-Qaeda, and the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades who use attacks against civilian targets seek to maximize casualties, and therefore never issue warnings.
- Objective – As the name implies, terrorism is understood as an attempt to provoke fear and intimidation in the main target audience , which may be a government, a whole society, or a group within a society. Terrorist acts are therefore designed and may be deliberately timed to attract wide publicity and cause public shock, outrage, and fear. The intention may be to provoke disproportionate reactions from governments.
- Motive – Terrorists acts may be intended to achieve political or religious goals, which include the spread of fear and mayhem. The terrorist who acts as a mercenary, or gun-for-hire, may also be acting for personal gain: for example, see Abu Nidal. A gang of bank robbers who kill a bank manager, blow up his vault, and escape with the contents would not be classed as terrorists, but if they were to execute the same assault with the intention of causing a crisis in public confidence in the banking system, followed by a run on the banks, and a subsequent destabilization of the economy, then the gang would be classed as terrorists. This definition excludes organized crime.
- Perpetrator – Most definitions of terrorism do not include legitimate governments as terrorist actors, unless acting clandestinely and in the absence of a state of war. Acts of war, including war crimes and crimes against humanity are regarded as distinct from terrorism, as are overt government repression of its own civilians, the Holocaust, and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, it does not rule out "state-sponsored terrorism", in which a government supports terrorist activity in another state, though this might instead be regarded as low-intensity warfare between sovereign states. Those who disagree with these definitions may use the term "state terror" to describe the actions of official groups such as the Gestapo, the KGB and the Stasi of East Germany against dissidents or ethnic minorities among their own citizens.
- Legitimacy – Many official state definitions include that the act must be unlawful.

Causes

Theories on the causes of terrorism include:
- sociological explanations, which focus on the position of the perpetrators in society
- conflict theory which examines their relationship to those in power
- ideological explanations, which focus on the differences in ideology, and the different goals of the ideologies
- media theory explanations, which treat terrorist acts as a form of communication. The existing social order within countries, and the global order of states, include structural compromises and agreements between various groups and interests. Often they arose in resolution of past conflicts. Over time, these arrangements may become less relevant to the current situation. New groups and interests may not be foreseen. Liberal democracy itself is intended to prevent small groups redesigning society according to their norms - but then they have to live in a society which they often reject. Some theories assume that groups resort to terrorism when other avenues for change, including economic campaigns, protest, public appeal, and standard warfare, hold no hope of success. This is related to the criterion of ultima ratio (last resort), in just war theory. In this perspective, terrorist acts are calculated to disrupt the existing order and provoke conflicts, in the expectation that the outcome will be a new order, more favourable to their interests. This is, crudely, the seat-at-the-table theory of terrorism. Applied to anti-terrorism policy, this approach implies policies to create and sustain an alternative, peaceful, avenue of problem resolution, particularly in the case of marginalized and oppressed populations. Ideological theories, on the other hand, often imply that nothing can be 'resolved', because the conflicting ideologies are logically incompatible.

Separatism

During much of the 20th century, the term terrorism was primarily applied to nationalist movements of various types. Most of them were separatist movements, seeking to create a new independent nation-state on the territory of a larger, existing state. There were also some cases of non-state irredentist violence, seeking to annex territory. Classic counter-terrorist operations were a feature of the decolonization in Africa and the Middle East. Some of these campaigns, such as the Mau Mau and the FLOSY, were well known in the Western media, but unlike Al-Qaeda, their violence was remote and confined to the disputed colony. However, Irish republican groups did consistently target England, and the Basque ETA often targeted Madrid and other non-Basque parts of Spain. The motives of these groups derive from their nationalist ideology, and an underlying territorial conflict about which state should control what. In this respect, no separate theory of the causes is required, since violence is the standard instrument of geopolitical change. For example, given the competing claims on the former British mandate of Palestine, the chance that the Zionist movement could ever have reached agreement on the peaceful transfer of millions of Jews to the region seems non-existent. Thus, the violence resulting from territorial conflicts is frequently considered inevitable.

Claims of responsibility

Actions defined as terrorism are sometimes followed by statements from the perpetrators. They often issue additional information, and may have representative offices in countries which sympathize with their aims. Several themes recur and can be considered categories:
- Reference to the ideals of the group, implying that the ideals justify the actions; separatist groups, for instance, often emphasize the name and flag of their future independent state.
- Reference to historical grievances, usually the oppression of an ethnic or religious group.
- Retaliation for specific acts, including military campaigns. Islamist groups, for instance repeatedly refer to the occupation of Iraq.
- There may also be a specific demand related to the above factors; for instance the demand that troops be withdrawn from Iraq. Frequently, a number of unassociated groups may claim responsibility for the action; this may be considered "free publicity" for the organization's aims. Because of its anonymous nature, it is not uncommon for the reasons for a terrorist action to remain unknown for a considerable period.

Perpetrators

Acts of terrorism can be carried out by individuals or groups. According to some definitions, clandestine or semi-clandestine state actors may also carry out terrorist acts outside the framework of a state of war. The most common image of terrorism is that it is carried out by small and secretive cells, highly motivated to serve a particular cause. However, some acts have been committed by individuals acting alone, while others are alleged to have had the backing of established states. Over the years, many people have attempted to come up with a terrorist profile to attempt to explain these individuals' actions through their psychology and social circumstances.

Terrorist groups

:Main article: Terrorist groups

Lone wolves

:Main article: Lone-wolf terrorism Law enforcement agencies such as the FBI have identified a pattern of lone-wolf terrorist acts carried out by individuals who appear not to be acting as part of a conventional group, although they may function with the tacit approval of a group, and protect it by operating alone. Terrorists cited as lone wolves include the Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski (1978-1995), Austrian letter-bomber Franz Fuchs (1993-1997), Cave of the Patriarchs gunman Baruch Goldstein (1994), Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh (1995), Centennial Olympic park bomber Eric Robert Rudolph (1996), "London Nailbomber" David Copeland (1999), and gunman Buford O. Furrow, Jr. (1999).

State sponsors

:Main article: State terrorism. See also False flag operation. Some states have been accused of sponsoring terrorist actions in foreign countries, as an alternative to carrying them out directly and risking an open declaration of war. State-sponsored terrorism is widely denounced by the international community. When states do provide funding for groups considered by some to be terrorist, they rarely acknowledge them as such. For example, Iran has been linked to a number of organizations, including Hezbollah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command, but maintains that where funds have been transferred, these have been legitimate. Iran itself has accused the British military, stationed in southern Iraq, of involvement in bombings in Iran; such claims have been denied by the British government. When proof of state sponsorship of a terrorist act is obtained, the response may include economic sanctions. Sometimes state sponsors are forced to back down by offering incentives. An example is that of Pakistan, which supported the Taliban until it was forced to sever its links after pressure from the U.S. However, India accuses Pakistan of continuing to incite, train, and support terrorist organizations that target India. Institute for Policy Studies scholar Noam Chomsky has described the U.S as "a leading terrorist state." After President Bush declared a "War on Terrorism," Chomsky stated:
The U.S. is officially committed to what is called “low–intensity warfare.” [...] If you read the definition of low–intensity conflict in army manuals and compare it with official definitions of “terrorism” in army manuals, or the U.S. Code, you find they’re almost the same. [http://www.monthlyreview.org/1101chomsky.htm]

Tactics
Terrorists often seek to demoralize and paralyze their enemy with fear, using their acts as a form of blackmail to apply pressure on governments to achieve goals the terrorists could not achieve by other means. Where terrorism occurs in the context of open warfare or insurgency, its perpetrators may shelter behind a section of the local population. Examples include the Intifada on Israeli-occupied territory, and the occupation of Iraq. This population, which is usually ethnically distinct from the counter-terrorist forces, is either sympathetic to their cause, indifferent, or acts under duress. Terrorist groups may arrange for secondary devices to detonate at a slightly later time in order to kill emergency-response personnel attempting to attend to the dead and wounded. Repeated or suspected use of secondary devices can also delay emergency response out of concern that such devices may exist. Examples include a (failed) cyanide-gas device that was meant to explode shortly after the February 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and a second car bomb that detonated 20 minutes after the December 1, 2001 Ben Yehuda bombing by Hamas in Jerusalem. In the absence of state funding, terrorists may rely on organized crime to fund their activities. This can include kidnapping, drug trafficking, or robbery. But terrorists have also found many more sources of revenue. Osama bin Laden, for example, invested millions in terrorism that his family made in the construction industry building luxury mansions for Saudi Arabia's oil-millionaires. The diamond industry emerged early in the twenty-first century as an important new source of funding for terrorism, and Islamist terrorist groups in particular have been very effective at procuring funding through a system of charitable contributions. Guerrilla warfare is sometimes confused with terrorism, in that a relatively small force attempts to achieve large goals by using organized acts of directed violence against a larger force. But in contrast to terrorism, these acts are almost always against military targets, and civilian targets are minimized in an attempt to increase public support. For this reason, guerrilla tactics are generally considered military strategy rather than terrorism, although both terrorism and guerrilla warfare could be considered forms of asymmetric warfare.
Responses to terrorism
Responses to terrorism are broad in scope. They can include re-alignments of the political spectrum and reassessments of fundamental values. The term counter-terrorism has a narrower connotation, implying that it is directed at terrorist actors.
Terrorism and immigration in Europe
Recent developments have seen a divergence in social and political responses to terrorism between the United States and western Europe. The September 11, 2001 attacks were carried out by foreigners who entered the country for that purpose, on behalf of a foreign organization, operating from bases in a remote country. Western European countries, on the other hand, are now confronted with a domestic terrorism based within a domestic religious minority, some recent immigrants, but many native-born citizens. Much of Europe has not experienced a domestic religious threat since the Wars of Religion. As a result, in Europe, the issues of Islam, immigration, and terrorism have become linked. The Dutch populist Pim Fortuyn was the first to show that the electorate may see Muslim immigrants as a fifth column at war with the country in which they live. Terrorism, according to this view, is a failure of multiculturalism and not simply a security issue. Although Muslims are a relatively small minority in the U.S., in some European cities they are approaching a majority. Aggression against sections of the population regarded as associated with the perpetrators is an increasingly important issue in these communities. Defusing potential backlash is now a standard item of European counter-terrorism policy. The direction of European responses to terrorism is indicated by new policies, proposed by Tony Blair in August 2005:
- deportation and exclusion on grounds of fostering hatred, advocating violence to further a person's beliefs or justifying or validating such violence;
- a criminal offence of condoning or glorifying terrorism;
- refusal of asylum to anyone with a connection to terrorism;
- new pre-trial procedures and extending detention pre-charge of terrorist suspects;
- extended use of control orders for those who are British nationals and who cannot be deported, with imprisonment for any breach of the order;
- new power to order closure of a place of worship which is used as a "centre for fomenting extremism". [http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page8041.asp]
Target-hardening
Common targets of terrorists are areas of high population concentration, such as mass transit vehicles (metro, bus, and trains), aircraft, office buildings, and crowded restaurants. Whatever the target of terrorists, there are multiple ways of hardening the targets so as to prevent the terrorists from hitting their mark. Perhaps the single most effective of these is bag-searching for explosives, which is only effective if it is conducted before the search subjects enter an area of high population concentration. Another method is to place concrete barriers a sufficient distance outside buildings to prevent truck bombing. Aircraft cockpits are kept locked during flights, and have reinforced doors, which only the pilots in the cabin are capable of opening.
Preemptive neutralization
Some countries see pre-emptive attacks as a legitimate strategy. This includes capturing, killing, or disabling suspected terrorists before they can mount an attack. Israel, the United States, and Russia have taken this approach, while western European states are generally more cautious. In July 2005, Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead by police at Stockwell underground station in London, because he was misidentified as a suspected suicide bomber, and police feared he had a bomb ready for detonation. The shooting led to public concern and diplomatic protest. Another major method of pre-emptive neutralization is interrogation of known or suspected terrorists to obtain information about specific plots, targets, the identity of other terrorists, and whether the interrogation subject himself is guilty of terrorist involvement. Sometimes methods are used to increase suggestibility, such as sleep deprivation or drugs. Human rights objections apart, such methods may lead captives to offer false information in an attempt to stop the treatment, or because of confusion brought on by it.
Domestic intelligence and surveillance
Most counter-terrorism strategies involve an increase in standard police and domestic intelligence. The central activities are traditional: interception of communications, and the tracing of persons. New technology has, however, expanded the range of such operations. Domestic intelligence is often directed at specific groups, defined on the basis of origin or religion, which is a source of political controversy. Mass surveillance of an entire population raises objections on civil liberties grounds.
Military intervention
Terrorism has often been used to justify military intervention in countries where terrorists are said to be based. That was the main stated justification for the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and one reason for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It was also a stated justification for the second Russian invasion of Chechnya.
History
In the 1st century, Zealots conducted a fierce and unrelenting terror campaign against the Roman occupiers of the eastern Mediterranean. The Zealots enlisted sicarii to strike down rich Jewish collaborators and others who were friendly to the Romans. In the 11th century, the radical Islamic sect known as the Hash-Ishiim (This word, derived from the word "Hashish," which the Hash-Ishiim reputedly used to drug their victims, translates directly to the word "assassin" in the English language) employed systematic murder for a cause they believed to be righteous. For two centuries, they resisted efforts to suppress their religious beliefs and developed ritualized murder into a fine art taught through generations. Political aims were achieved through the power of intimidation. Similarly, the Christian warriors of the Crusades pursued political aims by means of assaults on Muslim civilian populations. During the French Revolution (1789 - 1799), the most severe period of the rule of the Committee of Public Safety (1793 - 1795) was labelled "The Reign of Terror" (1793 - 1794) to describe rule through a systematic use of terror exemplified especially by extensive use of the guillotine. Historic references to the term "terrorism" first appeared during the Reign of Terror. In 1867 the Irish Republican Brotherhood, a revolutionary nationalist group with support from Irish-Americans, carried out attacks in England. These were the first acts of "republican terrorism", which became a recurrent feature of British history, and these Fenians were the precursor of the Irish Republican Army. The ideology of the group was Irish nationalism. In Russia, by the mid-19th century, the intelligentsia grew impatient with the slow pace of Tsarist reforms, and sought instead to transform peasant discontent into open revolution. Anarchists like Mikhail Bakunin maintained that progress was impossible without destruction. Their objective was nothing less than complete destruction of the state. Anything that contributed to this goal was regarded as moral. With the development of sufficiently powerful, stable, and affordable explosives, the gap closed between the firepower of the state and the means available to dissidents. Organized into secret societies like the People's Will, Russian terrorists launched a campaign of terror against the state that climaxed in 1881 when Tsar Alexander II of Russia was assassinated. In 1893 the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization was founded in Thessaloniki, now in Greece but then part of the Ottoman Empire. The organisation was driven by Slavic nationalism, and later acquired a reputation for ferocious attacks, including the 1934 assassination of Alexander I of Yugoslavia during a state visit to France. The Fenians/IRA and the IMRO may be considered the prototype of all 'nationalist terrorism', and equally illustrate the (itself controversial) expression that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Both groups achieved their goal, an independent Ireland and an independent Macedonia. Today, modern weapons technology has made it possible for a "super-empowered angry man" (Thomas Friedman) to cause a large amount of destruction by himself or with only a few conspirators. It can be, and has been, conducted by small as well as large organizations. Some people considered at some point in their lives to be terrorists, or supporters of terrorism, have gone on to become dedicated peace activists (Uri Avnery), respected statesmen (Yitzhak Shamir) or even Nobel Peace Prize laureates (Nelson Mandela, Yasser Arafat).
Global trends
Since 1968, the U.S. State Department has tallied deaths due to terrorism. In 1985, it counted 816 deaths, the highest annual toll until then. The deaths decreased since the late 1980s, then rose to 3,295 in 2001, mainly as a result of the September 11, 2001 attacks. In 2003, more than 1,000 people died as a result of terrorist acts. Many of these deaths resulted from suicide bombings in Chechnya, Iraq, India and Israel. It does not tally victims of state terrorism. Data from the Terrorism Knowledge Base showed a similar decline since the 1980s, especially in Western Europe. On the other hand, Asia experienced an increase in international terrorist attacks. Other regions experienced less consistent patterns over time. From 1991 to 2003, there was a consistent increase in the number of casualties from international terrorist attacks in Asia, but few other consistent trends in casualties from international terrorist attacks. Three different regions had, in three different years, a few attacks with a large number of casualties. Statistically, the distribution of the severity of terrorist attacks follows a power law, much like that for wars and also natural disasters like earthquakes, floods and forest fires.
Examples of major incidents
forest fire The U.S. State Department describes the following incidents as domestic and international terrorism: the June 1985 double-bombing of Air India jets originating from Canada, the 1993 Mumbai bombings, the Oklahoma City bombing in the USA (April 19, 1995); the Omagh bombing in Northern Ireland (August 15, 1998); the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York, and Washington DC, USA; the Munich Massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes in 1972; the Bali bombing in October 2002, the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988, attack on Indian Parliament (December 13, 2001), the Centennial Olympic Park bombing in 1996, the March 11 2004 attacks in Madrid, July 7 2005 bombings in London and the second Bali bombing in October 2005. The deadliest events described as terrorism and not known to have been sponsored by a state were the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon, in Arlington County, Virginia. So far as is known, the deadliest attack planned but not executed was Operation Bojinka, which aimed to murder Pope John Paul II and blow up 11 airliners. The plot was aborted after an apartment fire in Manila, Philippines on January 5 1995 exposed the operation to police. The militants who were planning it were just over two weeks away from implementing their plot. Other plots, such as the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, were designed to kill thousands but failed to do so.
External links

- [http://www.lawandterrorism.com Law, Terrorism and Homeland Security]. A collection of articles.
- [http://www.cgs.uiuc.edu/resources/webvideo/racvideo.html Richard Clarke speech Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror]
- [http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/10/news/belgium.php The New York Times: Terrorists in Europe find a base in Belgium ] (discussed at MajorityRights [http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1592/])
- [http://www.tkb.org/ MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base]
- [http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0502014/ Scale invariance in global terrorism]
- [http://www.nationalterroralert.com/ National Terror Alert Resource Center]
- [http://www.debriefed.org/indexen.html Security NewsLine: Global Terrorism and Counterterrorism www.debriefed.org]
- [http://www.swemorph.com/pdf/inmm-r2.pdf Nuclear Facilities and Sabotage: Using Morphological Analysis as a Scenario and Strategy Development Laboratory] (PDF)
- [http://www.swemorph.com/pdf/dbt1.pdf Protection against Sabotage of Nuclear Facilities: Using Morphological Analysis in Revising the Design Basis Threat] (PDF)
- [http://www.codeplan.org/ENindex.html C.O.D.E. : Center for the Observation and Deterrence of Extremism]
- [http://www.paradisepoisoned.com Paradise Poisoned: Learning About Conflict, Development and Terrorism from Sri Lanka's Civil Wars] by John Richardson ko:테러리즘 ja:テロリズム th:การก่อการร้าย zh-min-nan:Khióng-pò·-chú-gī

Urban guerrilla

Urban guerrilla refers to someone who fights a government or dictatorship using unconventional warfare in an urban environment (see: guerrilla tactics). Many have been on the left-wing of the political spectrum (especially in Latin America), claiming to fight for the "liberation of their people"; more recently, urban guerilla warfare has become common in the Middle East, often waged by Islamist or nationalist forces that would be considered on the right-wing of the political spectrum. The urban guerrilla phenomenon is essentially one of modernity and industrialised society. Unlike rural guerillas, urban guerrillas have not often been successful at overthrowing a government and talking power. During the 1960s, urban guerrillas such as the Montoneros in Latin America intended to destabilize civilian governments and put into power an oppressive military government which they believed would cause the middle classes to rise up in popular revolt. In many cases they did succeed on overthrowing the civilian government prompting a military government to take control and brutally wipe out the guerillas with general disregard for human rights. Historical examples include the Weathermen and the Symbionese Liberation Army in the United States, the Red Army Faction in Germany and the Red Brigades in Italy. The PLO and Hezbollah in Lebanon, groups such as Hamas in the Palestinian territories, and the insurgent forces in Iraq are other examples. However, not all urban political violence can be labeled as urban guerrilla. The Black Panther Party does not qualify, due to its public nature and pursuit of a policy of self-defence. Similarly the Italian Autonomia movement, and the German Autonomen engaged in urban political violence, but not as urban guerrillas due to their policies of public, mass and non-deadly violence. The line between an urban guerrilla or freedom fighter and terrorist is often considered to be a blurred one. The term urban guerrilla is also used to refer to westerners who support subversive politics and take part in different forms of protest like culture jamming. Urban guerrilla oftens forces a regular army to enter a city and engage in urban warfare against the guerrillas, often resulting in heavy casualties to all parties involved and great damage to property and civilian infrastructure. At the start of her trial in 1974, when Patty Hearst, involved with the Symbionese Liberation Army, was asked her occupation, she said she was an urban guerrilla. ---- Urban Guerrilla is also the name of a single record released in the United Kingdom by the band Hawkwind in 1974, but rapidly withdrawn following a terrorist outrage.

External links

- http://www.baader-meinhof.com/students/resources/print/minimanual/manualtext.html
- http://www.guerrillanews.com/ Category:Guerrilla wars

German student movement

The German student movement was a protest movement that took place during the late 1960s in Germany. It was largely a reaction against the perceived authoritarianism and hypocrisy of the German government and other Western governments, and the poor living conditions of students. A wave of protests - some violent - swept Germany, fueled by over-reaction by the police and encouraged by contemporary protest movements across the world. Following more than a century of conservatism among German students, the German student movement also marked a significant major shift to the left and radicalisation of student politics.

Historical background

Following the failure in the mid 19th century of the civil revolution in Germany (1848/49), German students largely abandoned radical politics and heavy political involvements. Having failed to turn Germany into a republic in a rebellion involving much of the working class, German students reversed course and began to follow instead the Prussian ideal of a "good citizen". During this period, the students effectively ceased all political activity against existing political institutions and began to become more conservative. By the time that the First World War broke out in 1914, students were so steadfastly conservative and nationalistic that many of them went to war voluntarily. When the war ended in humiliation for Germany in 1919, students, like many in Germany, placed the blame for Germany's defeat and subsequent economic collapses on the newly-formed Weimar Republic, its founders and the Treaty of Versailles. Resulting from this, and because German students were so used to being governed by a single figurehead, it was not hard for the German Nationalist Socialist party headed by Adolf Hitler to convince most students to join its student organization (the NSDStB - German Nationalist Socialist Student Union) and to abandon democracy. When Hitler gained full control of Germany in 1933, the universities were generally pliant towards Nazi policies. This explains in large part why so many students and professors worked together with the Nazi regime. Following the end of the Second World War in 1945, students returning from the European battlefields and their professors wanted to resume normal academic activity as quickly as possible. The Allied forces agreed that everyday life should be restored quickly, and so removed only a few professors from the posts they had already held during the Nazi regime. German students were hence allowed to return to work very quickly, but the university system was not fully denazified. As a result, students kept their nationalist and conservative traditions in student fraternities while liberal student organizations like the SDS (German Socialist Student Union) remained insignificant, and this situation continued until the 1960s. Consequently, by the advent of the 1960s the university system was still deeply conservative in its political leanings, with these attitudes being reflected in the lack of a say for students in the governance of their universities. Similarly, in central government, many politicians and administrators from the Nazi era had survived, leading to a tendency towards authoritarian government and successive conservative administrations.

Early stages of the movement

The situation at the universities was also different than may be expected. The students were mostly taught scientific models of economics, politics etc. but were not taught how they worked, that they could be changed and that these models were only partly transferable to the real world. This curriculum was formed to keep the students from seeing the real connections of economy, politics and the general social situation making them as efficient as possible for their future jobs, to keep the Wirtschaftswunder of Germany up and running. When the miracle was over, however, the German economy had to be reorganized; with the forming of the national unity government in 1966 the government had all the power it needed to shape the economy the way it wanted: there was no opposition left to question their actions. By this time the students felt that the economic wealth of the nation, instead of improving the standard of living of the working class, would destroy it and lead to an ever-growing gap between the rich and the poor. This and the fact that the government was very powerful led the students to the conclusion that the German people had to become more democratic and that a new opposition had to be formed. Authority, they believed, addicted people. The media, however, perceived this new attitude as an anti-democratic movement because it was aimed against the society that they believed was democratic. Through their critical work on many different topics and the reactions of the public and the government itself, these main goals formed in the minds of the students: • Changing society for more democracy • Dealing with Germany's and their parents' Fascist past • Reforming the curriculum. • Stopping the war in Vietnam and improving the horrible conditions in the Third World. • Keeping the government-controlled mass media (especially publications from the “Axel Springer” publishing house) from controlling the masses and blocking the freedom of press. • Stopping the planned German emergency legislature from being passed. The first goal was the source of all the others and thus the most important in their minds. To summarise, the students rejected decision making-process and the existing unequal balance of wealth and social injustice. They felt the need to overcome and change these things.

The past

To the students, the German chapter of Fascism was not yet closed. Many former Nazis were still working for the government or at the universities (in fact, then-Chancellor Kurt Georg Kiesinger had formerly been a member of the NSDAP) and the newly-formed right-wing NPD (National Democratic Party of Germany) was attracting more and more voters. In addition to that the students had to deal with the fact that they were identified as Germans and blamed for the crimes committed by their parents’ generation. The students did not want to be held responsible for their parents’ deeds. But their parents acted as if it was no concern of theirs; when the students tried to show the public that the anti-fascist idea of the constitution was not yet established in German society the government and the press felt extremely offended because they had formed a democratic society and did not want it to be attacked.

Reforming the universities

To support its new economic policies the government wanted to change the universities, producing graduates faster by introducing a time limit on courses and limiting the number of students. The students, however, did not want to adjust to the needs of the economy and the government. In fact, they wanted to adjust the universities to their own needs. They wanted more rights in the running of universities, better-equipped workplaces and the expelling of the professors who had been active during the Nazi period. The university boards did not react to the students protest and introduced the time limit for studying. When this time limit was introduced at the Free University of Berlin during the summer holidays of 1966 the students were not there so were unable to protest against it; instead, the first big sit-in of the German student movement happened when they returned after the holidays, with about 4000 participants. The events at the Free University of Berlin can bee seen as representative of the events at all universities in Germany because the same events were repeated elsewhere a short time later.

The war in Vietnam and political suppression

Through their increasing interest in politics the students quickly engaged in discussions concerning the war in Vietnam. They formed the opinion that the USA had no right to fight in Vietnam, not only because of the victims but mainly because of what they saw as an imperialistic foreign policy. The government, however, had to back the USA since they were still watching over Germany after World War Two. For this reason, university boards put a ban on political activities by students (e.g. discussions) at the universities. They explained this act by saying that science should always be neutral. This was the same explanation the professors had used to justify their behaviour during the Third Reich. The students wanted to be able to act politically, not only because of the war in Vietnam, but to protest against the horrible conditions in the Third World as students and not only as individuals.

Emergency legislature

The students were strongly opposed to the idea of German emergency legislature which was due to be passed, which

Red Army Faction

Prelude

Formation of the RAF

Custody and the Stammheim trial

Autumn 1977 (German Autumn)

The RAF in the 1980s and 1990s

Origins of the name

Events timeline

List of assaults attributed to the RAF

External links

Left wing

History of the term

Left-wing issues

Communism and left-wing politics

The Soviet Union

China

The Left and postmodernism

Critiques from within the left

The Sokal Affair

Critiques from the right

The Left and Darwinism

The Left and war

First and Second World Wars

Spanish Civil War

Vietnam and the Post-September 11 anti-war movements

The Left and Anti-Globalisation

Political parties on the Left

Notes

See also

Left-wing Ideologies

Left-wing issues

Organizations

Related political topics

External links

Terrorism

Etymology

Key criteria

Causes

Separatism

Claims of responsibility

Perpetrators

Terrorist groups

Lone wolves

State sponsors

Tactics

Responses to terrorism

Terrorism and immigration in Europe

Target-hardening

Preemptive neutralization

Domestic intelligence and surveillance

Military intervention

History

Global trends

Examples of major incidents

External links

Urban guerrilla

External links

German student movement

Historical background

Early stages of the movement

The past

Reforming the universities

The war in Vietnam and political suppression

Emergency legislature