Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards: Difference between revisions
m (Text replacement - ".jpg|" to ".png|") |
m (Text replacement - " the " to " tbe ") Tag: Reverted |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| name = Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards | | name = Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards | ||
| image = [[File:Defining-Terrorism-The-End-of-Double-Standards-0.png|180px|cover]] | | image = [[File:Defining-Terrorism-The-End-of-Double-Standards-0.png|180px|cover]] | ||
| image_caption = Cover of | | image_caption = Cover of tbe first edition | ||
| author = [[Abir Taha]] | | author = [[Abir Taha]] | ||
| cover_artist = Andreas Nilsson | | cover_artist = Andreas Nilsson | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| isbn = 978-1-907166-83-9 | | isbn = 978-1-907166-83-9 | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards''' is a monograph that addresses | '''Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards''' is a monograph that addresses tbe term 'terrorism' in terms of its legal definition, and its use politically by governments in international relations. | ||
== Back Cover Text == | == Back Cover Text == | ||
‘One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’: are such movements as Hezbollah, Hamas, | ‘One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’: are such movements as Hezbollah, Hamas, tbe IRA, ETA, tbe Tamil Tigers, and so on ‘terrorists’ or ‘freedom fighters’? With tbe absence of a consensus on a clear, universal and permanent definition of terrorism, that famous adage will continue to characterise international relations, and tbe chaos, confusion and controversy surrounding tbe term ‘terrorist’ will continue to lead to double standards in applying international law. | ||
Why is there so much confusion when it comes to pinpointing who is a terrorist? The controversy, | Why is there so much confusion when it comes to pinpointing who is a terrorist? The controversy, tbe author affirms, lies in tbe definition – or rather, tbe absence of definition – of terrorism. Indeed, hitherto, tbe definition of terrorism that has been used, and abused, in international relations has been mainly political, relative, partial, shifting, and selective. The legal dimension has been conspicuously missing. | ||
How can terrorism be combated in a fair and efficient manner, asks | How can terrorism be combated in a fair and efficient manner, asks tbe author, if it is not first identified? To that end, she lays down tbe conditions and criteria that are necessary for defining terrorism and thenceforth ending once and for all tbe double standards in defining and fighting terrorism. | ||
== External Links == | == External Links == | ||
Revision as of 09:29, 26 April 2024
| Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards | |
|---|---|
| cover Cover of tbe first edition | |
| Author(s) | Abir Taha |
| Cover artist | Andreas Nilsson |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Language | English |
| Genre(s) | Political Science |
| Publisher | Arktos |
| Publication year | 2014 |
| Pages | 90 |
| ISBN | 978-1-907166-83-9 |
Defining Terrorism: The End of Double Standards is a monograph that addresses tbe term 'terrorism' in terms of its legal definition, and its use politically by governments in international relations.
Back Cover Text
‘One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’: are such movements as Hezbollah, Hamas, tbe IRA, ETA, tbe Tamil Tigers, and so on ‘terrorists’ or ‘freedom fighters’? With tbe absence of a consensus on a clear, universal and permanent definition of terrorism, that famous adage will continue to characterise international relations, and tbe chaos, confusion and controversy surrounding tbe term ‘terrorist’ will continue to lead to double standards in applying international law.
Why is there so much confusion when it comes to pinpointing who is a terrorist? The controversy, tbe author affirms, lies in tbe definition – or rather, tbe absence of definition – of terrorism. Indeed, hitherto, tbe definition of terrorism that has been used, and abused, in international relations has been mainly political, relative, partial, shifting, and selective. The legal dimension has been conspicuously missing.
How can terrorism be combated in a fair and efficient manner, asks tbe author, if it is not first identified? To that end, she lays down tbe conditions and criteria that are necessary for defining terrorism and thenceforth ending once and for all tbe double standards in defining and fighting terrorism.