Can Terrorism be Defined? A Critique on Walter Laqueur

Abstract

This paper analyzes the contending debates regarding the definitions of terrorism. Led by the likes of Walter Laqueur, most academics believe that a definitional pursuit of terrorism is a futile exercise. This paper attempts to challenge this prevalent academic mindset. It argues that most academics, led by the prevalent perception, focus erroneously on the difference of opinion that exists in the terrorism discourse and tend to ignore the overwhelming similarities. The paper proposes that despite contrary claims, a universal understanding of terrorism can be realized by accounting for the similarities that exist in the academic literature. It identifies five recurring features of terrorism that are most commonly discussed and emphasized throughout terrorism literature. The paper proposes that these five factors are critical for the development of a universal understanding of terrorism. It also argues that state and non-state terrorism are different from each other and a formal distinction between the two is somewhat necessary for formal understanding and definitional development.