UNVEILING THE UIC APPROACH: TOWARDS A NOVEL FRAMEWORK FOR RETHINKING THE DEFINITION AND IMPLICATIONS OF TERRORISM
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study explores a novel approach to defining terrorism, and evaluating its potential contributions and limitations. The objective is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the concept by analyzing its key features, motivations, and impact. The study proposes a new definition of terrorism that accounts for the complex and evolving nature of this phenomenon, building on the conceptual framework proposed by Prof. Alex Schmid and Prof. Ben Saul. By examining the key features, motivations, and effects of terrorism, the research seeks to offer a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the concept that can inform policy and practice. This innovative approach to defining terrorism will be evaluated in light of existing literature and empirical evidence, to advance the discourse on this critical issue. The findings of this research present a new definition of terrorism based on the UIC approach. The UIC approach has three basic components: (1) Understanding Terrorism, (2) Interests of Actors, and (3) Counterterrorism Policy & Implications. A comprehensive definition of terrorism will be provided using the approach introduced in the article.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Badey, T. J. 1998. “Defining international terrorism: A pragmatic approach.” Terrorism and Political Violence 10(1): 90-107.
Bryan, D., L. Kelly, and S. Templer. 2011. “The failed paradigm of terrorism”, Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression 3 (2): 80-96.
Crenshaw, M. 2001. “Counterterrorism Policy and the Political Process.” Studies in Conflict& Terrorism 24(5): 329–337.
Crenshaw, M. 2011. Explaining Terrorism: Causes, Processes, and Consequences. Routledge.
Esmaeilzadeh E. Y., and F. H. Ahmadi 2016. “The Impact of ISIS on Iran's Security with Emphasis on the Copenhagen School.” Political Strategic Studies 5(18): 123-141. doi: 10.22054/qpss.2016.6800
Esmailzadeh, Y. 2020. “Organizing the concept of legitimacy-based political violence by focusing on the views of Habermas and Weber 1.” Political Sociology of Iran, 3(1): 347-362. doi:10.30510/psi.2021.307008.2379
Esmailzadeh, Y. 2023, “Towards the emergence of the fifth wave of terrorism in the world.” The Iranian Research letter of International Politics 11(2). doi: 10.22067/irlip.2022.71990.1138
Esmaizladeh E.Y., and S. Tajari. 2017. “Ethical and Ontological Frameworks in Security Cosmopolitanism.” Iranian Research letter of International Politics 5(2): 1-19. doi:10.22067/jipr.v5i2.52952
Esmailzadeh, Y. 2023, “Potential Risks of ChatGPT: Implications for Counterterrorism and International Security”, International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 10(4),535-543, DOI: 10.18415/ijmmu.v10i4.4590
Esmailzadeh, Y. 2023, Defining Terrorism: Debates, Challenges, and Opportunities, North Carolina: Lulu Press.
Feyyaz, M. 2019. “Terrorism Can and Should be Defined. But How?.” Strategic Analysis 43(4): 310-327.
Ganor, B. 2002. “Defining terrorism: Is one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter?.” Police Practice and Research 3(4): 287-304.
Gibbs, J.P. 1989. “Conceptualization of terrorism”. American sociological review 54 (3): 329-340.
Huff, C. and J. D. Kertzer. 2017. “How the Public Defines Terrorism.” American Journal of Political Science 62(1): 55-71.
Jackson, R., and D. Pisoiu. 2018. Contemporary debates on terrorism. Abingdon: Routledge.
Jackson, R. L. Jarvis, J. Gunning, and M. Breen-Smyth. 2011. Terrorism: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke: Red Globe Press.
John H. 2005. The social and psychological characteristics of terrorism and terrorists, in Tore Bjorgo (ed.). Root causes of terrorism: myths, reality and ways Forward. Routledge: Abingdon.
Juergensmeyer, M. 2000. Terror in the mind of God: The global rise of religious violence. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Laqueur, W. 1987. The age of terrorism. Boston: Little Brown and Company.
Meisels, T. 2009. “Defining terrorism–a typology.”
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 12(3): 331-351.
Pollitt C. and G. Bouckaer. 2004. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Primoratz, I. 2004. Terrorism–the philosophical issues, London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ramsay, G. 2015. “Why terrorism can, but should not be defined”, Critical Studies on Terrorism 8 (2): 211-228.
Rapoport, D. C. 1972. “Counterterrorism and the comparative study of political violence.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 16(3): 367-387.
Rapoport, D. C. 2022. Waves of Global Terrorism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Richard E. 2016. Does terrorism work?. Oxford: Oxford University Press,.
Saul, B. 2006. Defining Terrorism in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Saul, B. 2019, Defining Terrorism: A Conceptual Minefield. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmid, A. P. 1983. “Terrorism: A conceptual and typological analysis.” Journal of Peace Research 20(2): 181-197.
Schmid, A. P. 2011. The Routledge Handbook of Terrorism Research. London and New York: Routledge.
Schmid, A. P. 2023. Defining Terrorism. The Hague: ICCT.
Schmid, A, and A. Jongman, 1988. Political terrorism: a research guide to concepts, theories, databases, and literature. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
Schmid, A. 1984. Political terrorism: a research guide to concepts, theories, databases and literature, Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
Shanahan, T. 2010, “Betraying a certain corruption of mind: how (and how not) to define terrorism.” Critical Studies on Terrorism 3(2): 173-190.
Trotsky, L. 2004. A defense of the Red Terror. London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Veronica S. and E. Niklas. 2015. “Swedish Counterterrorism Policy: An Intersection Between Prevention and Mitigation?.” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. 38(5): 359-379, DOI:10.1080/1057610X.2015.1009799
Waldron, J. 2004. “Terrorism and the uses of terror.” The Journal of ethics 8(1): 5–35.