Colunistas do Lepadia

       Terrorism, as a political phenomenon with characteristics of a social phenomenon related to the commotion generated around fear and media coverage, produces not only direct victims (targeting) of terrorist activity, but also mainly indirect victims, which can be described as derived from the frightening generic effect caused by the recurrence and sneaky presence of the threat of terror. This research will seek to analyse the phenomena of terror and terrorism under the aegis of the International Law of Catastrophes.

      There are different faces of terrorism and multiple actors involved that are sometimes left out of the equation. The expression “terrorist” can be used both for armed groups that use terror when carrying out hostilities and for individuals who are influenced or seek to align their attitudes with those groups, considering political, religious, etc.

As for the motivation for committing terrorist acts or even for the will to form groups destined for this purpose, one can cite the rejection or non-belonging to collectively shared identities, fundamental political objections and essentially radicalized belief systems - which produce profound intolerances and are considered incompatible in coexistence with the system to which it refers. Acts of terror, therefore, are used as tools or methods of enforcement regarding certain requirements or implementations forced by the group agenda or shared belief system.

     Indeed, it can be said that terrorism, like most legal fictions that appear in the human imagination, engages in a psychological struggle with its conception of reality, risk and security; in a way, it makes the brain hostage to the most striking characteristics of terrorist acts, such as the character of being sudden, sudden, sometimes unpredictable, and also of being able to occur anywhere, against anyone, connecting directly with another of the great fears of the unconscious: losing loved ones.

        Terrorism can be understood as the socio-political system, in which acts of terror (acts of public violence) are used against the civilian population - and here the definition of civilians is established by the IV Geneva Convention of 1949, which recommends that those who do not engage in hostilities or, basically, the stereotyped image of "innocent people" – with the aim of, through the psychological, socioeconomic and political impacts generated on an even greater and more massive number of people (indirect victims), influence the International Community or state institutions in a certain direction.

Mass broadcasting in the media also increases the unconscious fear about the ubiquity of terrorism, altering the subjective ability to question real data concerning direct victims, so that across the globe, regardless of any predictability or probability, makes becomes its indirect victim. The existing instruments for the containment of terrorism and terror are not sufficient for the management of such phenomena, so that, if there are no mechanisms for this in Counterterrorism or International Humanitarian Law, then these must be created in some other area of ​​knowledge that supports them.

      In this sense, Professor Sidney Guerra, when proposing the study in the scope of International Law of Catastrophes, contemplated terror as a socio-political catastrophe. Thus, some of these necessary criteria will be analysed from the referred theoretical framework. Indeed, as discussed above, terrorism largely depends on the propagation of terror and the changes in behaviour that its existence and consideration on the part of people entails. In other words, it is possible to understand terrorism also as a social catastrophe, given its massive psychological impacts, generating anxiety, stress and fear in a large number of people (indirect victims) through media coverage.

        In this sense, terrorism presents itself as a unique catastrophe, which produces behavioural changes in the way humanity deals with risk decisions and in how people relate to important elements for the conformation of what the present generation understands by peace, national security, international security, war, etc.; as well as the agreement or disagreement of public opinion about the engagement in new armed conflicts and the support to conflicts in progress (proxy wars) – a criterion that directly influences the foreign policy decisions of nations.

        Terrorism as a socio-political institute modifies the human perception of risks related to violence and the use of force today, generating distorted perceptions on other topics of relevance to the international community, such as forced migrations, closing borders, xenophobia, armed conflicts, proxy wars and counterterrorism measures, for example.

       The existence of terrorism as a doctrine by definition can already be considered a catastrophe. That is why, despite the importance and influence of terrorism as a practice, both approaches can be distinguished. Terrorist acts constitute means or tools of political violence, while the existence of terrorism as a doctrine can be considered the socio-political catastrophe itself. A legal fiction like terrorism only exists in factual reality, causing its consequences as a catastrophe, because it lingers in the collective imagination. Therefore, it remains in each historical moment, signifying with new words full of meanings used to describe the same events.

        Another interesting point to be analysed corresponds to the meaning imported from a globalized reality of a phenomenon (catastrophe) shared by humanity within the cultural limits of each nation, territory and territoriality, that is, how each culture, each nation, assimilates the symbol of terror, processes this symbol internally and projects its decisions, understandings and political directions on the global level to the international system.

   The lack of consensus on the definition of terrorism occurs at all levels of theoretical depth, among academics, policymakers, politicians and other specialists; generating controversies regarding its interpretation and consequences concerning counterterrorism measures, linked and dependent on a contradicted definition. Considering the impact that a concept has when defining a global catastrophe, it is also important to emphasize the power belonging to those who define it and the backstage and reasons for such an interpretation to be assimilated by an entire world.

       The terrorist act is the tool used to propagate terror in order to ensure the consolidation and strengthening of terrorism as a socio-political catastrophe. The great socio-political catastrophe is, therefore, genuinely compounded by the spread of fear. This dissemination will cause the greatest social, political, economic, cultural, etc. impacts.

        In this sense, it is possible to perceive that the very definition of the "terrorism catastrophe" constitutes a visceral element of human nature, which bumps into psychological obstacles of what is inherent to an intrinsic evil, to a collective definition of monstrosity, of what is heinous and perverse. Other characteristics such as transnationality and multiculturalism add new variables to the equation, proving its status as an independent catastrophe. It is, therefore, possible to prove the presence of allegorical terror, based on rhetoric, narratives and fictions that reproduce fear.

      Finally, it is reaffirmed that the International Law of Catastrophes presents itself as a sufficient and necessary legal framework to when properly regulated, lead the international community to fill the legal gaps arising from socio-political catastrophes ignored as the terrorist phenomenon. For that, more than ever, it will be necessary for International Law to evolve toward the visualization of non-conventional paths and expanded approaches to the production of knowledge and norms.

 

_________________________________________

BANDEIRA, L. A. M. The world disorder: US Hegemony, proxy wars, terrorism and humanitarian catastrophes. Brasília: Civilização Brasileira, 2017.

CLUB DE MADRID. Addressing the Causes of Terrorism. Madrid: The Club of Madrid Series on Democracy and Terrorism, International Summit on Democracy and Security, 2005.

FERNÁNDEZ-SÁNCHEZ, P. A. International legal Dimension of Terrorism. International Humanitarian Law Series. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009.

GUERRA, S. Direito Internacional das Catástrofes. Curitiba: Instituto Memória. Centro de Estudos da Contemporaneidade, 2021.

SCHMID, A. P. Terrorism as psychological warfare. Terrorism Prevention Branch, UNODC. Vienna: Routledge, 2005.

SCHMID, A. P. The Routledge Handbook of Terrorism Research. London, New York: Routledge, 2011.