In such cases the opponents of the state term it as terror. Manmohan Singh has said that “terrorism which India faces, is sometimes supported by forces outside the country, terrorism can become an internal intruding problem if not handled adequately in time. This is one area which requires very sensitive handling and credible effective strategies to deal with this very sensitive issue”. He further said that “if it is driven by outside forces to our country, it is in some way easy to handle it. But if the terror modules found in our country are from inside and some misguided elements of our society take to that path, I think we have to tackle this problem with all the sensitivity that it requires[i],” (Singh) “Noam Chomsky has said “People with power understand exactly one thing- power. Terrorism can become an internal intruding problem also” (Chomsky, 2002)

“Terrorism is the use of violence against random civilian targets in order to intimidate or to create general pervasive fear for the purpose of achieving political goals”. (Yonah, 1997).

1793: The Origins of Modern Terrorism

The history of terrorism is as old as humans' willingness to use violence to affect politics. The Sicarri were a first century Jewish group who murdered enemies and collaborators in their campaign to oust their Roman rulers from Judea. The Hash hashin, whose name gave us the English word "assassins," were a secretive Islamic sect active in Iran and Syria from the 11th to the 13th century. They dramatically executed assassinations of Abbasid and Seljuk. The word terrorism comes from the Reign of Terror instigated by MAXMILIEN Robespierre in 1793, following the French revolution. Robespierre, was one of twelve heads of the new state. He had enemies of the revolution killed, and installed a dictatorship to stabilize the country. He justified his cruel methods necessary in the transition and transformation of the monarchy to a liberal democracy. Robespierre's sentiment laid the foundations for modern terrorists, who believed that violence will usher in a better system. Consequently, characterization of terrorism as a state action gradually faded, and in its place emerged the idea of terrorism as an attack against an existing political establishment gained prominence in due course of time.

1950s: The Rise of Non-State Terrorism

Ethnic nationalism such has Irish, Zionist emerged which had anti-colonial sentiments. Consequently new terrorist groups were formed in various parts of the world. Irish Republican Army was formed with the objective of forming an independent republic of Irish Catholics, rather than being a part of Great Britain. They had a nationalist agenda. They used guerrilla tactics to achieve their objectives. Likewise in Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq, a distinct ethnic and linguistic group called as Kurds sought national autonomy since the beginning of the 20th Century. The Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), was formed in the 1970s, which used terrorist tactics to announce its goal of a Kurdish state. Likewise, The Sri Lankan Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) whose members are of the ethnic Tamil minority used suicide bombing and other lethal tactics to wage a battle for independence against the Sinhalese majority government.

1970s: Terrorism Becomes International

In the late 1960s, international terrorism emerged and became a prominent issue. It was used as a tool by organized groups with specific political grievances. High jacking and other theatrical and symbolic acts of violence by organized groups became a favored tactic. In 1968, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine hijacked El Al Flight and shocked the world. The bloody events at the 1972 Munich Olympics were politically motivated. Palestinian group, called as Black September kidnapped and killed Israeli athletes preparing to compete in the Olympics. The idea behind this action was a subtle political goal to draw international attention towards their national cause and negotiate the release of Palestinian prisoners. They used spectacular tactics to achieve their goals.

1990s: The Twenty First Century: Religious Terrorism and Beyond

Religiously motivated terrorism is considered the most alarming terrorist threat today. Groups that justify their violence on Islamic grounds—Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah etc. Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and other religions have given rise to their own forms of militant extremism.

India, having one of the fastest growing economies in the world, and being the most populous democratic country, has great potential to become a future superpower. Pointing out that the tribal areas of central India were in the grip of Naxalite menace, Dr. Singh said if it was not controlled, the country would have to bid goodbye to its ambitions of sustaining a growth rate of 10-11 per cent per annum. He emphasized that a healthy and steady growth rate was needed to get rid of chronic poverty, ignorance and disease that still afflict millions and millions of our citizens.² (Manmohan Singh). Terrorism is best thought of as a modern phenomenon. Its characteristics flow from the international system of nation-states, and its success depends on the existence of a mass media to create an aura of terror among many people.

Crenshaw has defined terrorism “as the systematic use of unorthodox political violence by small conspiratorial groups, with the purpose of manipulating political attitudes rather than physically defeating an enemy”. (Martha, 1998) Terrorism comes from the French word “terrorisme” which is originally referred to state terrorism as practiced by the French government during the reign of terror. The French word “terrorisme” in turn derives from Latin verb “terre” meaning “I frighten”. ‘Although the term terrorism originally referred to acts committed by government, currently it refers to killing of innocent people by a non government group in such a way as to create media spectacle”. (Mohan, 2013). This meaning can be traced back to Sergey Nechayev, who described himself as a terrorist. He founded the Russian terrorist group “People’s Retribution “in 1869. (Mohan, 2013). Terrorists often are “participants on the political process who strive for political results by arousing acute anxieties”. (Lasswell, 1978). The causes of terrorism have been widely researched (Bjorgo, 2005) the underlying and proximate causes (Richardson, 2006) and preconditions and facilitators (Bjorgo: 2005). Chomsky’ observation on terrorism “draining the swamp will end terrorism rather than eliminating individual mosquitoes (terrorists)” is an eye opener for everyone. He stresses the need for studying the conditions giving birth to terrorism in order to enable their removal. (Chomsky, 2002).

Types of Terrorism

Many scholars have attempted to distinguish terrorists from other types of criminals and terrorism from other forms of crime (Hoffman, Walter Laquer). For them, terrorism is

· Ineluctably political in aims and motives;

· Violent or threats of violence;

· Designed to have far reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victim ;

· Conducted by an organization with identifiable chain of command or conspirational cell structure and

· Perpetrated by subnational group or non-state entity.

Terrorist acts frequently have a political purpose. It is an act used by activists for bringing out desired change with a belief that no other means can be effective. It can be viewed as a “response to economic, social and political deprivation as well as to bad Government who harbour a sense of grievance, will turn to violence to dramatize their misery or to change their conditions”. (Kant, 2011) In it, a political struggle is integrated into the framework of a religious struggle over a control of ancestral homeland or holy tools for sending message out to an audience and instilling fear in the community. Terrorism is one of “the violent coercion, a bargaining process based on power to hurt and intimidate as a substitute for the use of overt military force” (Scehelling,1966)

Different types of terrorism have been defined by lawmakers, security professionals and scholars. Types differ according to what kind of attack agents an attacker uses (biological, for example) or by what they are trying to defend (as in eco-terrorism). The list is very comprehensive. It is not feasible to deliberate on the entire list. However an effort has been made to discuss and deliberate on selected types of terrorism. In United States, different types of terrorism were first distinguished in the 1970s. Following the decade domestic and international groups gradually flourished. By then, modern groups had began to use techniques such as hijacking, bombing, diplomatic kidnapping and assassination to assert their demands and, for the first time, they appeared as real threats to democracies worldwide They began to distinguish different types of terrorism as part of the larger effort to understand how to counter and deter it.

Bio-terrorism

Bioterrorism as the name refers to is the intentional release of toxic biological agents to harm and terrorize civilians, in the name of a political or other cause. In it, viruses, bacteria and other harmful toxins are used in an attack which has the potential to damage the very fabric of the society.

Cyber terrorism

Cyber terrorism refers to the use of information technology such as computers or telecommunications to orchestrate attack on a nation. The important websites of a country are hacked by the terrorists and are used by them to disrupt networked services and create panic in the society.

Eco Terrorism

Eco-terrorism is a more recent term coined for describing violence in the interests of environmentalism. The environmental terrorists sabotage property to inflict economic damage on industries and environment. They also harm animals and the natural environment. It is described as "the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature.³"

In 1975, a National Advisory Committee on Criminal Justice, Standards and Goals was formed in United States by the Law Enforcement Assistant Administration which classified terrorism into six categories. These are stated below:

1. Political Terrorism: This type of terrorism denotes violent criminal behavior to instill and generate fear in the community for political purposes.

2. Non Political Terrorism: The purpose of this type of terrorism is to gain individual or collectively. It is without a political objective. This type of terrorism exhibits conscious design to create and maintain a high degree of fear for coercive purposes.

3. Limited political terrorism: In this terrorism genuine political terrorism is characterized by a revolutionary approach; it also refers to acts of terrorism which are committed for ideological or political motives which are not part of a concerted campaign to capture control of state

4. Civil disorder: Civil disorder is a type of collective violence which interferes with the peace, security and normal functioning of the community.

5. Quasi-terrorism: This type of terrorism incorporates violence that is similar in form and method to genuine terrorism but lack essential ingredients of terrorism. Quasi terrorists use the modalities and techniques of the genuine terrorists and produces similar consequences and reaction

6. Official or state terrorism: This refers to such nations and countries whose rule is based upon fear and oppression that reach similar to terrorism. It is also called Structural Terrorism as terrorist acts carried out by governments in pursuit of political objectives often as part of their foreign policy. “State terrorism” is as controversial a concept as that of terrorism itself.

Terrorism is often, though not always, defined in terms of four characteristics:

(1) The threat or use of violence;

(2) A political objective; the desire to change the status quo;

(3) The intention to spread fear by committing spectacular public acts;

(4) The intentional targeting of civilians. It is this last element --targeting innocent civilians-- that stand out in efforts to distinguish state terrorism from other forms of state violence. Declaring war and sending the military to fight other militaries is not terrorism, nor is the use of violence to punish criminals who have been convicted of violent crimes.

In the twentieth century, authoritarian states systematically committed to using violence and extreme versions of threat against their own civilians exemplify the premise of state terrorism. Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union under Stalin's rule are frequently cited as historical cases of state terrorism. But it can also be argued that states can, and have, been terrorists. States can use force or the threat of force, without declaring war, to terrorize citizens and achieve a political goal. Germany under Nazi rule has been described in this way.

Future trends of terrorism

Terrorism continues to adapt to meet the challenges of emerging forms of conflict, and exploit developments in technology and society. As a conflict method it has survived and evolved through several millennia to flourish in the modern information age. It has demonstrated the increasing abilities to adapt to counter-terrorism measures and political failure which can be gauged by the developing new capabilities of attack and improving the efficiency of existing methods. In the present scenario, “they become more integrated with other sub-state entities, such as criminal organizations and legitimately chartered corporations, and assume a measure of control and identity with national governments.”⁴

Terrorists have shown the ability to adapt to the techniques and methods of counter-terror agencies and intelligence organizations over the long term. “Terrorism is the strategic use of violence and threats of oppositional or non- state political group against civilians or non combatants and is usually intended to influence several audiences” (Goodwin, 2006) The decentralization of the network form of organization is an example of this. A network organization complicates the tasks of security forces, and reduces predictability of operations. Terrorists are quick to use new technologies, and adapt existing ones to their uses. Terrorists have started exploiting the use of disposable cellular phones, long-distance calling cards, Internet cafes, and other means of anonymous communications to exchange information. This ridicules the task of the security forces in nabbing them. Embedding information in digital pictures and graphics is another innovation employed to enable the clandestine global communication that modern terrorists require. Terrorists have also demonstrated significant resilience after disruption by counter-terrorist action. Terrorists are improving their sophistication and abilities in virtually all aspects of their operations and support. The aggressive use of modern technology for information management, communication and intelligence has increased the efficiency of these activities. Weapons technology has become more increasingly available, and the purchasing power of terrorist organizations has risen. The ready availability of both technology and trained personnel to operate it for any client with sufficient cash allows the well-funded terrorist to equal or exceed the sophistication of governmental counter-measures. Likewise, “due to the increase in information outlets, and competition with increasing numbers of other messages terrorism now requires a greatly increased amount of violence or novelty to attract the attention it requires. The tendency of major media to compete for ratings and the subsequent revenue realized from increases in their audience size and share produces pressures on terrorists to increase the impact and violence of their actions to take advantage of this sensationalism. ⁵ Wilkinson has distinguished the main types of terrorism in the contemporary international system. He opines that “the major trends of International and domestic terrorism are changing their modus operandi and believes that though the democracies are inherently vulnerable to terrorist activity, their popular legitimacy gives them an inner resilience to prevent them from their strategic goals”.⁶ Terrorists are adapting constantly to optimize their knowledge, training, logistical support, and readiness to conduct terror He calls for “an enhanced law enforcement and criminal justice measures to combat organized crime, enhanced counter terrorist intelligence and international sharing of intelligence co-operation, enhanced measures to combat terrorist fund raising.”⁷

Raphael Perl delineates nine aspects that frame the assessment of terrorism trends. These trends are: “intensified ideological extremism, enhanced operational capabilities, flexible organizational networks, expended transnational associations, emergent independent actors, increased weapon system lethality, intended mass casualties and mayhem, targeted economic disruption, and exploited mass media marketing.” (Perl, 2003). Presenting the report of the Future of Terrorism Task Force stated that “ future threats to the United States will increase in the next five years; There is every indication that the number and magnitude of attacks on the United

States, its interest and its allies will likely increase. The most significant terrorist threat today stems from a global movement, underpinned by a jihadist/Salafist ideology.”⁸ The report further said “Terrorism threats range al-Qaida affiliated cells with regional, international, or transnational reach to individual self-radicalized and unaffiliated terrorists with single issue agendas and finite capabilities. These types of terrorist threat exist as foreign and domestic threats of the United States in the U.S. Homeland and in United States presence throughout the world.”⁹

CONCLUDING REMARKS:

The paper traces the divergent perspectives on terrorism. Different individuals, institutions conceive the definition of terrorism which suits them closely. But one thing is sure that the dimensions of terrorism is undergoing tremendous changes in the era of globalization. On one hand the world advances in technological realms facilitate the mobility of people due to increased opportunities through Internet and social media on the other hand terrorism is becoming more dangerous and a psychologically effective weapon to unleash terror. “The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear…,” terrorism is rising from a tactical novelty to become, in many instances, a significant operational and strategic tool. Terrorism is becoming a more network based that encourages a loosely organized, self-financed organizational structure. It is not the problem of its victim societies alone. Its impact reverberates across the globe. The motivation of some terrorist groups appears to be based increasingly on theological extremes and ideological absolutes. The international or transnational cooperation among terrorist groups provides an improved ability to recruit members, develop fiscal support and resources, gain skills training, transfer of technology, and when desired, political advice. The global community must now come together to arm and defend itself against the random and indiscriminate violence of the rising tide of terror. But this, alone, will not suffice. Arms and force are necessary, if we are not to succumb. But the eventual victory against terrorism will be secured in the minds of men.

A victory for terrorism anywhere in the world is a victory for terrorism everywhere. This evil must be fought collectively, by all nations, all cultures and all civilisations. We can think of the rejection of an extraordinarily inhuman and barbaric method of warfare as an instrument of resolution only then we can defeat terrorism

REFERENCES:

Bjorgo, T. (2005). Introduction. In T. (. Bjorgo, Root Causes of Terrorism: Myths, Realities and Ways Forward (pp. 1-15). London: Oxon; Routledge.

Chomsky, N. (2002). Drain the swamp and there will be no mosquitoes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/sep/09/foreignpolicy.iraq.

Goodwin, J. (2006). A Theory of Cetegorical Terrorism. Social Forces, pp 2028.

Hardman, J. (2006). Terrorism in Seligman's Encyclopaedia of the Social Science. New Delhi: Cosmo Publishers.

K.N.Chowdhary, G. (2011). Editorial Remarks. Indian Police Journal, 2-3.

Lasswell, H. (1978). Terrorism and Political Process,l. Terrorism, An International Journal, 225.

Martha, C. (1998). Terrorism, Legitimacy and Power. Taiwan: Conn.Weseleyan University Press.

Perl, R. (2003). Terrorism and National Security, Issues and Trends. Washingtom DC: Congressional Research Service, Issue Briefs for Congress.

Richardson, L. (2006). The Roots of Terrorism: An Overview. In T. Bjorgo, Root Causes of Terrorism:Myths Realities and Ways Forward (pp. 1-16). Oxon, Routledge.

Scehelling Thomas, P, (1966). Arms and Influence, Yale University Press, New Heaven, pp 1-34

Singh, M. (n.d.). Lectures.

Weber, M. (1946). Politics as a Vocation. In H. &. Gerth, Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp. 77-128). New York: Oxford University Press.

Yonah, A. (1997). International Terrorism: National, Regional and Global Perspective. New York: Praeger Publications.

1. http://www.hindu.com/2010/12/26/stories/2010122657960200.htm

2. http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02

3. http://www.terrorism-research.com/future

4. http://www.cfr.org/issue/135

5. Wilkinson Paul, 2008, Strategic Review of Southern Africa.

6. Ibid

7. Report of the Future of Terrorism Task Force, Department of Homeland Security, 2007 pp 2-4 Washington DC

8. ibid