# data[].attributes.body
I. Organization's Name & Significance
Counter-Terrorism Action Group (CTAG)

CTAGs name says that they take action when terrorism will/or has happened
II. Who Works for this Organization

ii) The G8 formed the Counter-Terrorism Action Group (CTAG) in July 2003 under the French Presidency of the G8 as part of the G8 Action Plan: Building International Political Will and Capacity to Combat Terrorism adopted by Leaders at the Evian Summit. The group consists of other organizations such as the G8, the European Commission, and a representative from the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee. Representatives from Australia, Switzerland, and Spain have attended past sessions, as have officials from international, regional and functional organizations such as the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, the Asian Development Bank, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the International Civil Aviation Organization, the International Maritime Organization and the World Bank.
III. What is their Objective/Mission

iii) Their main objective is to help the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC), by coordinating donations to counter-terrorism capacity building assistance, and performing outreach to other states to encourage them to adhere to UN Security Council Resolution 1373 and the 13 UN international instruments on terrorism.
IV. What Strategies are they using to meet this Objective? Why are they Effective

iv) Their strategies are counter-terrorism capacity building assistance which provides training, funding, expertise, equipment, technical and legal assistance to other countries, so that they can prevent and respond to terrorist activity within international norms and standards. Areas of assistance include: fraudulent document detection; anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing; law enforcement training; training transportation, customs, immigration and border security officials; baggage screening at airports; chemical/biological/ radiological and nuclear (CBRN) prevention and response; examining marine vessels and containers; and assistance drafting counter-terrorism policies and legislation. These strategies will help stop terrorists from getting in multiple ways such as airplanes, boats, on foot, and driving. People also steal identities to get past the border, but these defence programs help stop these attacks against your personal security.
V. What Strategies are we Using to Meet our Objective? Why are they Effective

v) They are government and tax funded. As well as receive money from the World Bank. This guarantees that they will get payed for their programs.
VI. How is the Organization Funded

vi) You can help by giving money to CTAG members that are in need of more help for their programs. You can also apply to work/volunteer for one of their programs.
VII. How can People get Involved

vii) They also offer assistance to travelers to other countries and returning home. They also provide passport services.

VIII. Contact Info

viii) Global Affairs Canada

Authentication Services Section

125 Sussex Drive

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

K1A 0G2

http://www.international.gc.ca/crime/ctag-gact.aspx?lang=eng

# data[].attributes.headline
The Causes of Terrorism, By Amy Zalamn, Ph.D.

# data[].attributes.subject
The Causes of Terrorism, By Amy Zalamn, Ph.D.

# data[].attributes.body
This article states the two main motivations for all terrorist attacks, and then it says we'll probably never know the answer to what causes terrorism. It then proceeds to talk about what conditions are favorable for terrorism to brew.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ThoughtCo.com is the World's Largest Education Resource

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From chemistry to computer programming, arts to World War II, ThoughtCo.com provides guides, tips, and resources to help you understand more about the world around us.

# data[].attributes.headline
Evolution of Islamic Terrorism, By John Moore

# data[].attributes.subject
Evolution of Islamic Terrorism, By John Moore

# data[].attributes.body
This article just talks about the Evolution of Islamic Terrorism over the years. It goes through which are the main terror groups in different periods of time, and talks about the globalization of terrorism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The author is a former political-military analyst with the U.S. Department of Defense and terrorism analyst with the State Department. He is currently a security consultant, focusing on the mitigation of post-Cold War patterns of terrorism and political violence.

Key Characteristics

Definition of Terrorism

"the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
-- U.S. Department of Defense publication

In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the U.S., the threat of militant Islamic terrorism -- rooted in the Middle East and South Asia -- has taken center stage. While these extremely violent religious extremists represent a minority view, their threat is real. As pointed out by RAND's Bruce Hoffman, in 1980 two out of 64 groups were categorized as largely religious in motivation; in 1995 almost half of the identified groups, 26 out of 56, were classified as religiously motivated; the majority of these espoused Islam as their guiding force.

To better understand the roots and threat of militant Islam, here's a closer look at how modern terrorism has evolved in the Middle East and South Asia.

The colonial era, failed post-colonial attempts at state formation, and the creation of Israel engendered a series of Marxist and anti-Western transformations and movements throughout the Arab and Islamic world. The growth of these nationalist and revolutionary movements, along with their view that terrorism could be effective in reaching political goals, generated the first phase of modern international terrorism.

In the late 1960s Palestinian secular movements such as Al Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) began to target civilians outside the immediate arena of conflict. Following Israel's 1967 defeat of Arab forces, Palestinian leaders realized that the Arab world was unable to militarily confront Israel. At the same time, lessons drawn from revolutionary movements in Latin America, North Africa, Southeast Asia as well as during the Jewish struggle against Britain in Palestine, saw the Palestinians move away from classic guerrilla, typically rural-based, warfare toward urban terrorism. Radical Palestinians took advantage of modern communication and transportation systems to internationalize their struggle. They launched a series of hijackings, kidnappings, bombings, and shootings, culminating in the kidnapping and subsequent deaths of Israeli athletes during the 1972 Munich Olympic games.

These Palestinian groups became a model for numerous secular militants, and offered lessons for subsequent ethnic and religious movements. Palestinians created an extensive transnational extremist network -- tied into which were various state sponsors such as the Soviet Union, certain Arab states, as well as traditional criminal organizations. By the end of the 1970s, the Palestinian secular network was a major channel for the spread of terrorist techniques worldwide.

(descriptions taken directly from the U.S. State Department publication " Key Radical Palestinian Groups

Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2000")

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP): The PFLP, one of the original members of the PLO,[1] is a Marxist-Leninist group founded in 1967 by George Habash. The group was against the 1993 Declaration of Principles; participation in the PLO was also suspended. Participated in meetings with Arafat's Fatah party and PLO representatives in 1999 to discuss national unity but continues to oppose negotiations with Israel. Committed numerous international terrorist attacks during the 1970s, has allegedly been involved in attacks against Israel since the beginning of the second intifadah in September 2000. Syria has been a key source of safe haven and limited logistical support.

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC): This group, led by Ahmed Jibril, split from the PFLP in 1968, wanting to focus more on terrorist than political action; violently opposed to the PLO and is closely tied to Syria and Iran. The PFLP-GC conducted multiple attacks in Europe and the Middle East during the 1970s and 1980s. Unique in that it conducted cross-border operations against Israel using unusual means, including hot-air balloons and motorized hang gliders. Currently focused on small-scale attacks in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip.

Abu Nidal Organization (ANO): Anti-Western and anti-Israelinternational terrorist organization led by Sabri al-Banna; left the PLO in 1974. Organizational structure composed of various functional committees, including political, military, and financial. The ANO has carried out terrorist attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring almost 900 persons. Targets have included the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, moderate Palestinians, the PLO, and various Arab countries. Major attacks included the Rome and Vienna airports in December 1985, the Neve Shalom synagogue in Istanbul and the Pan Am flight 73 hijacking in Karachi in September 1986, and the City of Poros day-excursion ship attack in Greece in July 1988. Suspected of assassinating PLO deputy chief Abu Iyad and PLO security chief Abu Hul in Tunis in January 1991. ANO assassinated a Jordanian diplomat in Lebanon in January 1994. Has not attacked Western targets since the late 1980s. Al-Banna relocated to Iraq in December 1998, where the group maintains a presence. Financial problems and internal disorganization have reduced the group's capabilities; activities shut down in Libya and Egypt in 1999.

While these secular Palestinians dominated the scene during the 1970s, religious movements also grew. The failure of Arab nationalism in the 1967 war resulted in the strengthening of both progressive and extremist Islamic movements. In the Middle East, Islamic movements increasingly came into opposition with secular nationalism, providing an alternative source of social welfare and education in the vacuum left by the lack of government-led development -- a key example is The Muslim Brotherhood. Islamic groups were supported by anti-nationalist conservative regimes, such as Saudi Arabia, to counter the expansion of nationalist ideology. Yet political Islam, [2] more open to progressive change, was seen as a threat to conservative Arab regimes and thus support for more fundamentalist -- and extremist -- groups occurred to combat both nationalist and political Islamist movements.

Meanwhile, in Iran, a turn to revolutionary Shia Islam under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini further eroded the power and legitimacy of the U.S.-backed authoritarian Pahlevi regime, setting the stage for the Shah's downfall.

The year 1979 was a turning point in international terrorism. Throughout the Arab world and the West, the Iranian Islamic revolution sparked fears of a wave of revolutionary Shia Islam. Meanwhile, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the subsequent anti-Soviet mujahedeen war, lasting from 1979 to 1989, stimulated the rise and expansion of terrorist groups. Indeed, the growth of a post-jihad pool of well-trained, battle-hardened militants is a key trend in contemporary international terrorism and insurgency-related violence. Volunteers from various parts of the Islamic world fought in Afghanistan, supported by conservative countries such as Saudi Arabia. In Yemen, for instance, the Riyadh-backed Islamic Front was established to provide financial, logistical, and training support for Yemeni volunteers. So called "Arab-Afghans" have -- and are -- using their experience to support local insurgencies in North Africa, Kashmir, Chechnya, China, Bosnia, and the Philippines.

In the West, attention was focused on state sponsorship, specifically the Iranian-backed and Syrian-supported Hezbollah; state sponsors' use of secular Palestinian groups was also of concern. [3] Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers in the Middle East, and was linked to the 1983 bombing and subsequent deaths of 241 U.S. marines in Beirut, Lebanon, as well as multiple kidnappings of U.S. and Western civilians and government officials. Hezbollah remains a key trainer of secular, Shia, and Sunni movements. As revealed during the investigation into the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, Libyan intelligence officers were allegedly involved with the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine -- General Command (PFLP-GC). Iraq and Syria were heavily involved in supporting various terrorist groups, with Baghdad using the Abu Nidal Organization on several occasions. State sponsors used terrorist groups to attack Israeli as well as Western interests, in addition to domestic and regional opponents. It should be noted that the American policy of listing state sponsors was heavily politicized, and did not include several countries -- both allies and opponents of Washington -- that, under U.S. government definitions, were guilty of supporting or using terrorism.

Key Radical Religious Groups

(descriptions taken directly from the U.S. State Department publication "Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2000")

Hezbollah: Radical Shia group formed in 1982 in Lebanon. Strongly anti-Western and anti-Israeli. Closely allied with, and often directed by, Iran but may have conducted operations that were not approved by Tehran. Known or suspected to have been involved in numerous anti-U.S. terrorist attacks, including thesuicide truck bombing of the U.S. Embassy and U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in October 1983 and the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut in September 1984. Elements of the group were responsible for thekidnapping and detention of U.S. and other Western hostages in Lebanon. The group also attacked the Israeli Embassy in Argentina in 1992 and is a suspect in the 1994 bombing of the Israeli cultural center in Buenos Aires. Operates in the Bekaa Valley, the southern suburbs of Beirut, and southern Lebanon. Has established cells in Europe, Africa, South America, North America, and Asia. Receives substantial amounts of financial, training, weapons, explosives, political, diplomatic, and organizational aid from Iran and Syria.

Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ - Al-Jihad, Jihad Group, Islamic Jihad): Egyptian group active since the late 1970s. The EIJ is apparently split into two factions: one led by Ayman al-Zawahiri - who currently is in Afghanistan and is a key leader in the Usama bin Laden (UBL) network - and the Vanguards of Conquest (Talaa' al-Fateh) led by Ahmad Husayn Agiza. Abbud al-Zumar, leader of the original Jihad, is imprisoned in Egypt and recently joined the group's jailed spiritual leader, Shaykh Umar Abd al-Rahman, in a call for a "peaceful front." The group's traditional goal is the overthrow of the Egyptian Government and creation of an Islamic state. Given its involvement with UBL, EIJ is likely increasingly willing to target U.S. interests. The group has threatened to strike the U.S. for its jailing of Shaykh al-Rahman and the arrests of EIJ cadres in Albania, Azerbaijan, and the United Kingdom..

Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ): The PIJ, emerging from radical Gazan Palestinians in the 1970s, is apparently a series of loosely affiliated factions rather than a cohesive group. The PIJ focus is the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Palestinian Islamic state. Due to Washington's support of Israel, the PIJ has threatened to strike American targets; the PIJ has not "specifically" conducted attacks against U.S. interests; Arab regimes deemed as un-Islamic are also threatened. The group has stated its willingness to hit American targets in Jordan. PIJ cadres reportedly receive funding from Tehran and logistical support from Syria.

Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS): Emerging from the Muslim Brotherhood during the first Palestinian intifadah (1987), HAMAS has become the primary anti-Israeli religious opposition in the occupied territories. The group is mainly known for its use of suicide bombers and is loosely organized, with centers of strength in Gaza and certain areas in the West Bank. HAMAS, while condemning American policies favoring Israel, has not targeted the U.S. directly.

Al-Gamaat Al-Islamiyya (IG - the Islamic Group, al-Gama'at, Islamic Gama'at, Egyptian al-Gama'at al-Islamiyya, GI): The IG, begun in the 1970s, is the largest of the Egyptian militant groups. Its core goal is the overthrow of the Cairo regime and creation of an Islamic state. The IG appears to be a more loosely organized entity than the EIJ, and maintains a globally present external wing. IG leadership signed Usama Bin Ladin's February 1998 anti-U.S. fatwa but has denied supporting UBL. Shaykh Umar Abd al-Rahman is al-Gama'at's spiritual leader, and thus the U.S. has been threatened with attack. From 1993 until the cease-fire, al-Gama'a launched attacks on tourists in Egypt, most notably the attack in November 1997 at Luxor that killed 58 foreign tourists. Also claimed responsibility for the attempt in June 1995 to assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Has a worldwide presence, including Sudan, the United Kingdom, Afghanistan, Austria, and Yemen. The Egyptian Government believes that Iran, Bin Ladin, and Afghan militant groups support the organization.

The disintegration of post-Cold War states, and the Cold War legacy of a world awash in advanced conventional weapons and know-how, has assisted the proliferation of terrorism worldwide. Vacuums of stability created by conflict and absence of governance in areas such as the Balkans, Afghanistan, Colombia, and certain African countries offer ready made areas for terrorist training and recruitment activity, while smuggling and drug trafficking routes are often exploited by terrorists to support operations worldwide. With the increasing ease of transnational transportation and communication, the continued willingness of states such as Iran and Iraq to provide support, and dehumanizing ideologies that enable mass casualty attacks, the lethal potential of terrorist violence has reached new heights.

The region of Afghanistan -- it is not a country in the conventional sense -- has, particularly since the 1989 Soviet withdrawal, emerged as a terrorist training ground. Pakistan, struggling to balance its needs for political-economic reform with a domestic religious agenda, provides assistance to terrorist groups both in Afghanistan and Kashmir while acting as a further transit area between the Middle East and South Asia.

Since their emergence in 1994, the Pakistani-supported Taliban militia in Afghanistan has assumed several characteristics traditionally associated with state-sponsors of terrorism, providing logistical support, travel documentation, and training facilities. Although radical groups such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda, and Kashmiri militants were in Afghanistan prior to the Taliban, the spread of Taliban control has seen Afghan-based terrorism evolve into a relatively coordinated, widespread activity focused on sustaining and developing terrorist capabilities. Since the mid-1990s, Pakistani-backed terrorist groups fighting in Kashmir have increasingly used training camps inside Taliban-controlled areas. At the same time, members of these groups, as well as thousands of youths from Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP), have fought with the Taliban against opposition forces. This activity has seen the rise of extremism in parts of Pakistan neighboring Afghanistan, further complicating the ability of Islamabad to exert control over militants. Moreover, the intermixing of Pakistani movements with the Taliban and their Arab-Afghan allies has seen ties between these groups strengthen.

Since 1989 the increasing willingness of religious extremists to strike targets outside immediate country or regional areas underscores the global nature of contemporary terrorism. The 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, are representative of this trend.

Key Groups in the New Phase of Militant Islamic Terrorism

(descriptions taken directly from the U.S. State Department publication "Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2000")

Al-Qaeda (The Base): Established by Usama Bin Ladin (UBL) circa 1990, Al Qaeda aims to coordinate a transnational mujahideen network; stated goal is to "reestablish the Muslim State" throughout the world via the overthrow of corrupt regimes in the Islamic world and the removal of foreign presence - primarily American and Israeli - from the Middle East. UBL has issued three anti-U.S. fatwas encouraging Muslims to take up arms against Washington's "imperialism." Al Qaeda provides financial, manpower, transportation, and training support to extremists worldwide. In February 1998 bin Ladin issued a statement under the banner of "The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against The Jews and Crusaders," saying it was the duty of all Muslims to kill U.S. citizens, civilian or military, and their allies. Allegedly orchestrated the bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, on August 7, 1998. Claims to have been involved in the 1993 killing of U.S. servicemen in Somalia and the December 1992 bombings against U.S. troops in Aden, Yemen. Al Qaeda serves as the core of a loose umbrella organization that includes members of many Sunni Islamic extremist groups, including factions of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), the Gama'at al-Islamiyya (IG), and the Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM). The group is a prime suspect in the Sept. 11 attacks as well as theU.S.S Cole bombing.

Armed Islamic Group (GIA): Having initiated terrorist activities in 1992 following Algiers refusal to accept a democratically elected Islamist government, the GIA has conducted multiple mass killings of civilians and assassinations of Algerian leaders. While present in areas such as Yemen, the GIA reportedly does not target the U.S. directly. However, it is possible that GIA splinter movements or personnel may become involved in anti-U.S. action.

Aden-Abyan Islamic Army (AAIA): The Aden-Abyan Islamic Army is allegedly affiliated to the Yemeni Islamic Jihad and has been implicated in acts of violence with the stated goal to "hoist the banner of al-Jihad, and fight secularism in Yemen and the Arab countries." Aden-Abyan Islamic Army leader Zein al-Abideen al-Mehdar was executed for participating in the December 1998 kidnapping of 16 Western tourists. Four of the hostages were killed and another 13 hostages were freed when Yemeni security forces attacked the place where the hostages were being held. In March 1999 the group warned the U.S. and British ambassadors in Yemen to leave immediately.

Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM): Formerly part of the Harakat al-Ansar (HUA), the Pakistani-based HUM operates primarily in Kashmir. Long-time leader of the group, Fazlur Rehman Khalil, in mid-February stepped down; the popular Kashmiri commander and second-in-command, Farooq Kashmiri, assumed the reigns. Khalil, who has been linked to Bin Ladin and signed his fatwa in February 1998 calling for attacks on U.S. and Western interests, assumed the position of HUM Secretary General. The HUM is linked to the militant group al-Faran that kidnapped five Western tourists in Kashmir in July 1995; one was killed in August 1995 and the other four reportedly were killed in December of the same year. Supporters are mostly Pakistanis and Kashmiris and also include Afghans and Arab veterans of the Afghan war. The HUM trains its militants in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Jaish-e-Mohammed (Army of Mohammed): The Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) has greatly expanded since Maulana Masood Azhar, a former ultra-fundamentalist Harakat ul-Ansar (HUA) leader, formed the group in February 2000. The group's aim is to unite Kashmir with Pakistan. It is politically aligned with the radical, pro-Taliban, political party, Jamiat-i Ulema-i Islam (JUI-F). The JEM maintains training camps in Afghanistan. Most of the JEM's cadre and material resources have been drawn from the militant groups Harakat ul-Jihad al-Islami (HUJI) and the Harakat ul-Mujahedin (HUM). The JEM has close ties to Afghan Arabs and the Taliban. Usama Bin Ladin is suspected of giving funding to the JEM. Group by this name claimed responsibility for theUSS Cole attack.

Lashkar-i-Taiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous): The LT is the armed wing of the Pakistan-based religious organization, Markaz-ud-Dawa-wal-Irshad (MDI)--a Sunni anti-U.S. missionary organization formed in 1989. One of the three largest and best-trained groups fighting in Kashmir against India, it is not connected to a political party. The LT leader is MDI chief, Professor Hafiz Mohammed Saeed. Almost all LT cadres are foreigners--mostly Pakistanis from seminaries across the country and Afghan veterans of the Afghan wars. The LT trains its militants in mobile training camps across Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Afghanistan.

[1] Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Al Fatah
The PLO was founded in 1964 as a Palestinian nationalist umbrella organization committed to the creation of an independent Palestinian state. After the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, militia groups composing the PLO vied for control, with Al Fatah -- led by Yasser Arafat -- becoming dominant. Al Fatah joined the PLO in 1968 and won the leadership role in 1969. In 1969 Arafat assumed the position of PLO Executive Committee chairman, a position he still holds. Al Fatah essentially became the PLO, with other groups' influence on PLO actions increasingly marginalized. Al Fatah and other PLO components were pushed out of Jordan following clashes with Jordanian forces in 1970-71. The Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 led to the group's dispersal to several Middle Eastern countries, including Tunisia, Yemen, Algeria, Iraq, and others. The PLO maintains several military and intelligence wings that have carried out terrorist attacks, including Force 17 and the Western Sector. Two of its leaders, Abu Jihad and Abu Iyad, were assassinated in recent years. In the 1960s and the 1970s, Al Fatah offered training to a wide range of European, Middle Eastern, Asian, and African terrorist and insurgent groups and carried out numerous acts of international terrorism in Western Europe and the Middle East in the early-to-middle 1970s. Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles (DOP) with Israel in 1993 -- the Oslo Accords -- and renounced terrorism and violence. The organization fragmented in the early 1980s, but remained the leading Palestinian political organization. Following the 1993 Oslo Accords, the PLO -- read Al Fatah -- leadership assumed control of the nascent Palestinian National Authority (PNA).

[2] Political versus Fundamentalist Islam
Political Islam, as opposed to fundamentalist or neo-fundamentalist Islam, posits a worldview that can deal with and selectively integrate modernity. In contrast, fundamentalist Islam calls for a return to an ontological form of Islam that rejects modernity; groups such as Al Qaeda and the Egyptian Islamic Jihad are representative of fundamentalist Islam.

[3] A Note on State Sponsors of Religious Terror Groups
Unlike the "secular" national, radical, anarchist terrorism sponsored by states such as Libya, Syria, Iraq, Cuba, North Korea, and behind the scenes by the former Soviet camp, most of the Islamic terrorist groups have never been sponsored by states. Many Egyptian organizations emerged from the Egyptian domestic landscape. Algerian groups likewise were not sponsored by foreign states. Hezbollah certainly can be viewed as an Iranian surrogate, but other movements, while open to state assistance, remain operationally and ideologically independent.

photo copyright © reuters newmedia inc./corbis home + introduction + interviews + timeline + islamic terrorism
lessons from the 1980s + links & readings + video + discussion + tapes & transcripts
press + credits
frontline privacy policy + FRONTLINE + pbs online + wgbh

web site copyright 1995-2014 WGBH educational foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Evolution Of Islamic Terrorism - An Overview | Target America | FRONTLINE | PBS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The author is a former political-military analyst with the U.S. Department of Defense and terrorism analyst with the State Department. He is currently a security consultant, focusing on the mitigation of post-Cold War patterns of terrorism and political violence.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Geography of Terrorism, by Kathy Gilsinan

# data[].attributes.subject
The Geography of Terrorism, by Kathy Gilsinan

# data[].attributes.body
This article just explains how 80% of terrorist attacks happen in 5 countries, and that they went up by 61% from 2012 to 2013. It also explains how most terror groups are ended

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Deaths From Terrorism, 2000-2013

Global Terrorism Database/Institute for Economics and Peace

Percentage of Global Terrorism-Related Deaths, 2013

Global Terrorism Database/Institute for Economics and Peace

Biggest Increases in Terrorism-Related Deaths, 2012-2013

Global Terrorism Database/Institute for Economics and Peace

While last year's terrorism fatalities may have been concentrated in a small number of countries, the authors do note that overall, "Since 2000 there has been over a five-fold increase in the number of deaths from terrorism, rising from 3,361 in 2000 to 17,958 in 2013."

Much of that period corresponded with massive international military efforts to root out terrorism. And as the U.S. winds up its war in Afghanistan-a country that saw a 13-percent increase in terrorism-related fatalities last year-and considers the extent to which it wants to intervene militarily to halt the spread of ISIS, it's worth asking: How does terrorism actually end? The question is one that the Rand Corporation addressed in a 2008 study that the Global Terrorism Index authors cite. That report examined 268 terrorist groups that halted their attacks between 1968 and 2006. In only 7 percent of those cases, the report found, military intervention brought about the end of a terrorist group.

RAND/Institute for Economics and Peace

That finding suggests the debate over whether to put boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria-and whose boots, and how many, and whether they should be combat boots or just training-and-advisory boots-misses a larger point about the conditions that are most associated with terrorism. The report's authors devote the final section of the study to examining the factors that correlated with higher levels of terrorism in 2012-2013; among the most significant they found were ethnic and religious tensions, as well as levels of state repression including, for example, human-rights abuses and extrajudicial killings. "This can be viewed in two ways," the authors write. "Either increased terrorism leads governments to implement stricter, authoritarian and illegal acts toward its citizens through torture or state violence, or the repression results in terrorist acts as retaliation. This can create a vicious cycle of violence making it difficult to clearly identify causality."

These correlations also speak to the relationship between terrorism and conflict more broadly. "The most common context for the onset of terrorist violence is within an ongoing conflict," the authors write. About 70 percent of the fatal terrorist attacks recorded in the Global Terrorism Database between 1970 and 2013 took place in countries with serious ongoing conflicts.

This point-that war breeds violence-is not particularly novel or satisfying. But the fact that Afghanistan and Iraq continue to top the list of countries most affected by terrorism does highlight the limitations of foreign military intervention in ending terrorist violence. And warnings about threats to the homeland notwithstanding, it's not primarily Americans who suffer for it.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Kathy Gilsinan is a staff writer at The Atlantic, covering national security and global affairs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deaths From Terrorism, 2000-2013 Percentage of Global Terrorism-Related Deaths, 2013 Biggest Increases in Terrorism-Related Deaths, 2012-2013 While last year's terrorism fatalities may have been concentrated in a small number of countries, the authors do note that overall, "Since 2000 there has been over a five-fold increase in the number of deaths from terrorism, rising from 3,361 in 2000 to 17,958 in 2013."

# data[].attributes.body
This article describes how terrorism effects people around the world

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Which is why one of the signature features of the "war on terror"-the invasion of Iraq-ended up unleashing more terrorism. "When a stable government is destabilized and collapses, that's very bad from a counterterrorism point of view," said Byman. This is true with or without massive U.S. involvement, as Syria's civil war demonstrates.

Both civil wars offer muddled lessons for how a future President Trump or Clinton should design U.S. counterterrorism policy, according to Byman. He suggested an approach not unlike that which Barack Obama has pursued: "I end up with: Bad things are going to happen, and what we need is some degree of offensive [military] capability to keep the bad guys off balance, we need aggressive global cooperation to go after the global web [of terrorists], we need some homeland defenses, and we need ... domestic resilience because some attacks will happen. I look at [the attack in] San Bernardino in particular and say, 'I don't know what really could have been done [to prevent] that one, with all the benefit of hindsight.'"

Still, Byman noted, Americans may perceive terrorism as an acute threat because the 9/11 attacks primed them to view most security issues through the lens of terrorism, whether or not it makes sense to do so. He pointed out that during the Vietnam War, the Viet Cong's terrorist tactics were generally interpreted as elements of revolutionary or guerrilla warfare, not terrorism. And Europe and the United States experienced far more terrorist attacks in the 1970s and 80s than they do now, though most of these were less deadly than today's suicide bombings.

"Once you discover something that seems new, all of a sudden it's everywhere," Byman said. On September 12, 2001, Americans looked at the world anew.

And yet focusing on terrorism blurs other parts of the picture. Yes, ISIS practices terrorism, but it also governs territory, devoting much of its budget and personnel to maintaining an army and police force, minting money, establishing law and order, offering some semblance of social services, and so on. Saying ISIS is a terrorist organization is "like saying the Department of Defense is a health-care organization," Byman told me. "It is. It's the largest health-care bureaucracy in the U.S. government. But oh, by the way, they do something else."

The recent car bombing in Baghdad, for example, represented something in between terrorist tactics used in conventional war (ISIS sending suicide bombers to kill enemy forces) and clear-cut terrorism executed outside a war zone (the Paris attacks). The bombing was "clearly directed against civilians, it's clearly terrorism, but part of the purpose is to advance the Islamic State in a war, to demoralize the Iraqi military and police," Byman said.

In several countries in the Middle East, he said, people have good reason to feel gravely threatened by terrorism. But elsewhere in the world, it's more that people are paying greater attention to the terrorist threat than they used to. "We're labeling things 'terrorism,' where before it would have been seen in the context of civil wars," Byman argued. "It screws up our basic understanding of the most important question, which is: Are things getting worse?"

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Uri Friedman is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers global affairs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Which is why one of the signature features of the "war on terror"-the invasion of Iraq-ended up unleashing more terrorism. "When a stable government is destabilized and collapses, that's very bad from a counterterrorism point of view," said Byman. This is true with or without massive U.S. involvement, as Syria's civil war demonstrates.

# data[].attributes.body
I. Organization's Name & Significance
The name is very straight-forward, it states who is in this organization (whoever wants to volunteer), and what our goal is (fight terrorism).
II. Who Founded the Organization
Daniel Beaudette and Joseph Unrau founded the organization, and anyone who feels like contributing to our cause can volunteer.
III. Why is this Topic Important
This topic is important to us because terrorist attacks affect many people every year, and we think that is horrible. We would like to prevent it in any way possible.
IV. What is the Objective/Mission
Our organization's objective is to help terror victim or terror victim families rebuild their lives financially and emotionally after a terrorist attack.
V. What Strategies are we Using to Meet our Objective? Why are they Effective
Our organization has an outreach program, we compile a list of affected people from the terror attack, and we offer to connect them with a counselor, or if a victim died we would offer to the family to help with the financial aspect of losing this person to the attack. This is effective because sometimes people are left psychologically damaged and require counselling, also when someone dies, their families can be left with large debts for funerals, or debts left unpaid by the deceased.
VI. How is the Organization Funded
Our organization is funded by donations mainly. Typically after a terror attack, people feel obligated to help in some way or another, and many of them wouldn't volunteer, so they just help out financially. So as long as we have our name out there on the first page of Google when people search for organizations to donate to with their credit cards out, we're good.
VII. How can People get Involved
A way you can help the people that have been affected by these terrorism is by help them rebuild their homes, or a public areas like a airport,school,and museums
Contact Information
1-800-434-8728
hitusup@TPAT.org

# data[].attributes.headline
Distinguishing Between the Resistance and Terrorism, By Dal LaMagna

# data[].attributes.subject
Distinguishing Between the Resistance and Terrorism, By Dal LaMagna

# data[].attributes.body
This article describes how the US military is taking care of terrorism in there country

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Yesterday, I wrote about meeting with Sheik Hareth al-Dhari and began explaining how Iraqis see a distinct difference between the Resistance and terrorists. Today's blog looks at that difference in more detail.
Military Allies Itself with Insurgents
The American military is beginning to understand -- and capitalize on -- the distinction between members of the Resistance and terrorists.

The Washington Post reported on June 8, that some units of American military are now working with Iraqi militiamen, also considered to be insurgents. Author Joshua Partlow wrote:

"The American soldiers in Amiriyah have allied themselves with dozens of Sunni militiamen who call themselves the Baghdad Patriots -- a group that American soldiers believe includes insurgents who have attacked them in the past -- in an attempt to drive out al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Americans have granted these gunmen the power of arrest, allowed the Iraqi army to supply them with ammunition, and fought alongside them in chaotic street battles."

Good for the American soldiers! When faced with desperate times and battle plans that seem to fail consistently, they began to understand that many insurgent groups were not terrorists, but simply resistors revolting against occupiers of their country in the same way some French citizens actively resisted the Nazi occupation of their country during WW II.
The Resistance
We often celebrate the French Resistance, praising those who had the courage to stand up against those who occupied them, even when that resistance resulted in the death of German soldiers.

It is no different for Iraqi resistors. They are against the occupation of their country by outsiders and want to reclaim the country as their own.
Sheik Jawad Al-Khalisi
I spoke about this distinction between the resistance and the insurgency with Sheik Jawad Al-Khalisi, an Iraqi whose family are overseers of the Great Khadimain Golden Mosque in Baghdad. Al-Khalisi is also secretary general of the Iraqi National Foundation Congress, a national project aimed at uniting all the forces opposed to the occupation.

Al-Khalisi said:

"What takes place against the occupation is a creation of the resistance. But what takes place against the Iraqi people is not caused by the resistance."

Jawad's point, which I have heard echoed innumerable times during this and earlier trips to the region, is that many Iraqi citizens, proud of their country and their nationality, are opposed to having their country run by non-Iraqis. They are opposed to being governed by an army of occupiers. They are not opposed to Iraqis and do not aim to harm their countrymen.
Differing Goals
But Jawad notes that with resistance may come additional elements that may not have the same goals as the resistors. He said to me:

"When there is resistance, it is very possible that other elements come in for other ends and not the end for freeing the country."

He was referring, of course, to the groups that instill terror, the groups that blow up Iraqis in a marketplace, the same groups that Americans and others fear will someday come to their homelands.

Those groups are terrorists. They are not resistors.
Resistance vs. Terrorism
Brian Michael Jenkins, a decorated Vietnam vet and author of "International Terrorism: A New Mode of Conflict," explains that terrorism is a particular sort of violence. In an article for the Christian Science Monitor, Jenkins, wrote:

"What sets terrorism apart from other violence is this: terrorism consists of acts carried out in a dramatic way to attract publicity and create an atmosphere of alarm that goes far beyond the actual victims. Indeed, the identity of the victims is often secondary or irrelevant to the terrorists who aim their violence at the people watching. This distinction between actual victims and a target audience is the hallmark of terrorism and separates it from other modes of armed conflict. Terrorism is theater." [emphasis added]

Resistance is not theater. It may perpetrate violence in the same way that our own military does, or by whatever irregular/asymmetric/guerilla means are available to it. It fights for what it believes is the good of its country.

An almost two-year-old Newsweek article further distinguishes this point - and reiterates that understanding the difference is crucial. In July 2005, Joe Cochran wrote:

"The vast majority of attacks against U.S. and Iraqi security forces are perpetrated by former members of Saddam Hussein's regime and Sunnis fearful of being politically marginalized by the Kurds and majority Shiites. Then there are the foreign Muslims coming into Iraq to wage jihad against the United States and its allies, primarily through suicide bombings."

Cochrane sees the former group as insurgents, as resistors to the occupation. The latter, he sees as terrorists.

He is also quite clear that the military did distinguish between the two groups during military press briefings inside Baghdad at that time.

One then wonders why the public often does not make the distinction. Is it because we are so focused on our own, that we only hear "terrorist"? Is it because the media seems to use all three terms interchangeably prevents us from understanding the difference among the terms?
What the Iraqis Say They Want Asma al-Haidari
Asma al-Haidari is an Iraqi woman who now lives in Jordan. She also acts as my interpreter when I am here.

She said: "We use the word "resistance" for all resistance that is against the American Occupation. It is different than an insurgency, which is the rising of a group of people against a legal government.

She explained further that since the Iraqi people do not look at the Iraq government as a legal one since "it was brought in by the occupation and appointed by the occupation," that the resistance against the government and the occupiers cannot be called an insurgency.

She sees a vast difference between the Resistance and terrorism, saying:

"The violence that is being committed by Al Qaeda is terrorism; the violence that is being committed by all the militia is terrorism; the violence being committed by the mafias and the criminal gangs is both criminal and terrorism. All this violence is being committed against innocent civilians."
Essential Reconciliation
She is not alone in her sentiments.

As a citizen diplomat seeking to learn how America can withdraw with honor, I have listened to many Iraqi suggestions. Each of them wants to regain rule of their own country. Invariably, they say they have lived for centuries, intermingling, intermarrying, living side by side, Kurd, Sunni, Shia.

They would like to continue doing so.

But, if the borders remain open, if foreign elements who want to create jihad against the United States consistently stream in, the terrorist attacks against Iraqi civilians will continue - as will our fear that these groups will eventually knock on our own doorsteps.

The Iraqi Resistance is working to get rid of the terrorists, just as it is working to regain control of its own country.

Having listened to many Iraqis about this point it seems that as Munther Haddadin (the former Minister of Water for Jordan who has hosted two meetings between members of the U.S. Congress and members of Iraq's Parliament) said, "The best ally for the U.S. for a face-saving measure is the Iraqi current resistance."

The reduction in the overall violence in Iraq against the American forces and the Iraqi people would be dramatic if we could broker an agreement between the U.S forces and the Resistance where both would target al-Qaeda and not each other.

Were the American Administration to take the simple but dramatic step of announcing there will be a scheduled withdrawal of U.S. troops -- from what I hear continuously -- such an alignment could take place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Distinguishing Between the Resistance and Terrorism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yesterday, I wrote about meeting with Sheik Hareth al-Dhari and began explaining how Iraqis see a distinct difference between the Resistance and terrorists. Today's blog looks at that difference in more detail. Military Allies Itself with Insurgents The American military is beginning to understand -- and capitalize on -- the distinction between members of the Resistance and terrorists.

# data[].attributes.body
This video describes how some of the victims of 9/11 survived.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rare full episode of the 9/11 'I Survived' series.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.c-catcanada.org/
I. Organization's Name & Significance
The name is very straight forward, it states the goal (gang up against terrorist organizations) and who is a part of this organization (Canadians).
II. Who Works for this Organization
It is comprised of Canadian terror victims, counter-terrorism professionals, lawyers, and other individuals dedicated to battling against terrorism and helping terror victims rebuild their lives.
III. What is their Objective/Mission
Their objective is to find legal and public policy strategies to fight terrorism throughout the world.
IV. What Strategies are they using to meet this Objective? Why are they Effective
They are working with MP's and government officials to put a bill in place that allows terror victims launch civil lawsuits against foreign entities and local Canadian organizations that have supported the Terrorist entities responsible.
They are also working to get 9/11 marked as a national day of service and remembrance; as well as trying to get the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps marked as a terrorist entity.
V. How is the Organization Funded
I believe that this organization is mainly funded by donations. You can see that their funding is effective because they are able to help terror victims rebuild their lives, and they have enough influence to get the government to pass bills.
VI. How can you get Involved
I don’t see a way to get involved in C-CAT on their website, other than just donating some money to them.

VII. Contact Information
The only way to contact them on their website is to submit your information and write a comment and they will get back to you.