Michael Walzer has forwarded an argument that defends an exemption from adherence to Jus in Bello when a state finds itself in a situation of "supreme emergency." The argument is morally problematic due to the fact that it defends the direct and intentional targeting of non-combatants, a restriction which has traditionally been considered as inviolable in the Just War tradition. This thesis seeks to demonstrate a further problem for Walzer's position, the fact that his argument is sufficiently broad that it may be co-opted by parties whom Walzer wishes to exclude, practitioners of contemporary terrorism. My method will be to demonstrate certain deficiencies in Walzer's argument, through analysis of the paradigm case he presents. I will then proceed to present two cases for the adoption of his "supreme emergency" defense by the terrorist organizations Al Qaeda and Hamas. I will show that both of these cases may ultimately fail under closer scrutiny, but will conclude that the ability for two such cases to be constructed demonstrates the ability for Walzer's defense to be adopted by an entity which does not suffer these same failings, ultimately dooming Walzer's argument.

No description available.

This study is focused on the spreading wave of militancy in the Muslim youth after 9/11 era.  The role Al Qaeda is researched in understanding this problem in the case study of Pakistan. Al Qaeda is considered as the nursery for the rising of militancy in the Muslims while Pakistan is the birthplace of Al Qaeda. The problem of militancy rose to the alarming level in Pakistan after 9/11 when the Pakistani state started to support the US in the war against terror which Al Qaeda and other Islamists consider as the war against Islam. The recruitment strategies of Al Qaeda and other Pakistani militant groups like Tihreak Taliban Pakistan (TTP or Pakistani Taliban movement) are studied through the discourse analysis. The primary data from the militant sources like the speeches, books and interviews of their leadership and ideologues, their official magazines and press releases are selected for this research. All this data is available in Urdu language which is translated to the English for this research. The theoretical framework of this research is based on the “Soft theory” of Josef Nye (2006) and the “three dimensions of Power” theory of Steven Lukes (2005). The results of this research show that the militants mostly use different types of arguments in their messages to the youth in their efforts for recruiting them to the path of militancy which include mostly the religious arguments. Along with it, they also attract youth to their path on targeting their grievances and hopes. They present to them the path of militancy as an end and the only way of revenge for their all grievances. These results also show that the militants also present militancy to the youth as the only mean for achievement of their various hopes which they believe these Muslims youth cannot get without militancy.

Thesis advisor: Ali Banuazizi / This thesis is a comparative analysis of the varying approaches by which modern Islamist militancy movements attempt to justify their respective use of violent jihad within Islamic doctrine. This ultimate focus is contextualized by a broader study of the historical role of religion in the development of modern ethical standards for warfare. Justifications for horrific bloodshed and injustice in the Just War traditions of both Christianity and Islam have manifested themselves in the actual military campaigns of the Crusades and jihad respectively. These historical and modern examples demonstrate the precarious complexity of the dual role of religion to both restrict and require warfare in the cause of justice. / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2010. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: College Honors Program. / Discipline: Islamic Civilization and Society Honors Program. / Discipline: Islamic Civilization and Society.

During the 2001 war in Afghanistan hundreds of people associated with the Taliban or al Qaeda were arrested by United States forces and transported to the Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The legal status and treatment of these detainees has been an ongoing problem over the last five years. The majority have been given no recourse to justice and allegations of inhuman treatment and torture have been frequent. The first issue raised by the incarceration of these people is whether any of them may be entitled to Prisoner of War status. The evidence shows that, in general, the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters were not lawful combatants, and hence they are not entitled to Prisoner of War status. While the rights of Prisoners of War are well documented and generally uncontested, the rights of people not entitled to Prisoner of War status are not so easily definable. Despite classification as unlawful or unprivileged combatants, the detainees are not in legal limbo - they are still entitled to the benefit of certain fundamental human rights. There are applicable protections under the Fourth Geneva Convention, Additional Protocol I, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations Convention Against Torture. The main rights upheld by these documents are the right to liberty and freedom from arbitrary detention; the right to a fair trial; and the right to life. Furthermore, there is a requirement of humane treatment and an absolute prohibition on torture. Reports from international humanitarian watchdogs such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch suggest that the United States Government is not upholding the rights held by the detainees. It is essential that the United States Government recognises the fundamental rights owed to the detainees and ensures that they receive the requisite treatment and access to justice.

A number of factors contribute to the enigmatic nature of terrorism. As popular perceptions of the act and of the actor evolve, there is a corresponding desire to change the definition. The act itself has stayed largely the same; however, developments in politics and culture have changed our perceptions of terrorism and subsequently our usage of the term. As such, it has been imprecisely applied to a diverse and perpetually changing set of actors, institutions, and actions.

This thesis explores the ideological foundations of three jihadist organizations, Hizbullah, al-Qaeda, and Islamic State (IS). All three are categorized as international terrorist organizations but their goals differ. Hizbullah seeks to alter the government within Lebanon, al-Qaeda seeks to eliminate Western influences in Muslim inhabited territories, and IS seeks to create a caliphate within a large portion of the Middle East. The similarities and differences of these three organizations will be illuminated through this examination. The primary focus of the examination focuses on their religious teachings and discourse, as this is a critical aspect of their ideologies. Through this examination, the differences in discourse coinciding with the differing goals of each organization is presented. The discourse of each organization facilitates their goals, recruitment of fighters, and explanation of their actions. Self/other identification is a commonality of all three ideologies but the identification of the other is different according to each organizations goals. This thesis will highlight this aspect and allow for further discussion of the three organizations in future research. The conclusion will allow for discussion as to who gains and maintains power and whether religion is a base or merely a tool for this power. / Master of Arts

[pt] O objetivo da dissertação é analisar o conceito de terrorismo presente em reportagens de dois dos principais jornais americanos - The New York Times e The Washington Post - no período entre os ataques de 11 de setembro de 2001 e o início da guerra ao governo Talibã, no Afeganistão. Os parâmetros da análise foram propostos a partir de dois importantes debates acadêmicos relacionados ao conceito de terrorismo. Trata-se do debate sobre a questão da legitimidade do uso da violência para fins políticos e do debate sobre a existência de um novo terrorismo no mundo contemporâneo. A proposta da dissertação foi avaliar quais respostas a alguns dos principais questionamentos dos debates acadêmicos podem ser encontradas no conteúdo dos jornais americanos, nos dias seguintes aos maiores atentados da história. / [en] This dissertation seeks to analyze the concept of terrorism that can be found in the news articles from two main American newspapers - The New York Times and The Washington Post - in the period between the attacks of september 11 and the war against the Taliban government in Afghanistan. As parameters to the analysis, we used questions raised from two main academic debates related to the concept of terrorism. That refers to the debate about legitimacy and the use of political violence and to the debate about the existence of a new terrorism in the contemporary world. Our proposal was to disclose some of the answers to this academic questions that can be found in the content of the articles, in the aftermath of the greatest terrorist attacks in history.

Objetivamos analisar a construção do conceito de inimigo representado nos discursos de Osama bin Laden, durante o período de 1996 a 2004. Estes inimigos são constituídos a partir da edificação de uma realidade que apresenta Estados Unidos, Israel e seus aliados, como opressores dos muçulmanos. A fim de melhor compreender esta construção simbólica, buscaremos estudá-la com base na dinâmica de dois eixos fundamentais para a constituição do pensamento político-religioso de bin Laden: a herança teórica do islamismo radical, conjugada com a sua percepção acerca dos principais eventos geopolíticos contemporâneos envolvendo o mundo muçulmano. Dentro desta perspectiva, empregaremos o construtivismo em sua corrente linguística dos autores Nicholas Onuf e François Debrix como arcabouço teórico. Nos guiaremos pela prerrogativa de que a compreensão do mundo e da realidade ocorre de acordo com o modo como nós nos referimos a eles a partir de nossa linguagem. Como referencial metodológico que orientará nosso exame da construção do conceito de inimigo nos discursos de bin Laden, utilizaremos as categorias de operação da ideologia propostas por John Thompson na obra “Ideologia e Cultura Moderna – Teoria Social Crítica na Era dos Meios de Comunicação”. / We aimed to analyze the construction of the concept of enemy represented in Osama bin Laden‟s speeches, during the period 1996 to 2004. These enemies are making from the building of a reality that presents U.S., Israel and its allies, as oppressors of muslims. To better understand this symbolic construction, we will seek to study it based on the dynamics of two pillars for the constitution of bin Laden's politico-religious thought: the theoretical heritage of radical islam, combined with the author's perception about the main events contemporary geopolitical involving the muslim world. From this perspective, we will employ the Linguistic Constructivism of the authors Nicholas Onuf and François Debrix, as theoretical framework. We will be guided by the prerogative of the understanding of the world and reality occurs according to the way we refer to them from our language. As a methodological framework that will guide our examination of the construction of the concept of enemy in bin Laden's speeches, we will use the categories of operation of ideology proposed by John Thompson in his work "Ideology and Modern Culture - Critical Social Theory in the Era of the Media."

Objetivamos analisar a construção do conceito de inimigo representado nos discursos de Osama bin Laden, durante o período de 1996 a 2004. Estes inimigos são constituídos a partir da edificação de uma realidade que apresenta Estados Unidos, Israel e seus aliados, como opressores dos muçulmanos. A fim de melhor compreender esta construção simbólica, buscaremos estudá-la com base na dinâmica de dois eixos fundamentais para a constituição do pensamento político-religioso de bin Laden: a herança teórica do islamismo radical, conjugada com a sua percepção acerca dos principais eventos geopolíticos contemporâneos envolvendo o mundo muçulmano. Dentro desta perspectiva, empregaremos o construtivismo em sua corrente linguística dos autores Nicholas Onuf e François Debrix como arcabouço teórico. Nos guiaremos pela prerrogativa de que a compreensão do mundo e da realidade ocorre de acordo com o modo como nós nos referimos a eles a partir de nossa linguagem. Como referencial metodológico que orientará nosso exame da construção do conceito de inimigo nos discursos de bin Laden, utilizaremos as categorias de operação da ideologia propostas por John Thompson na obra “Ideologia e Cultura Moderna – Teoria Social Crítica na Era dos Meios de Comunicação”. / We aimed to analyze the construction of the concept of enemy represented in Osama bin Laden‟s speeches, during the period 1996 to 2004. These enemies are making from the building of a reality that presents U.S., Israel and its allies, as oppressors of muslims. To better understand this symbolic construction, we will seek to study it based on the dynamics of two pillars for the constitution of bin Laden's politico-religious thought: the theoretical heritage of radical islam, combined with the author's perception about the main events contemporary geopolitical involving the muslim world. From this perspective, we will employ the Linguistic Constructivism of the authors Nicholas Onuf and François Debrix, as theoretical framework. We will be guided by the prerogative of the understanding of the world and reality occurs according to the way we refer to them from our language. As a methodological framework that will guide our examination of the construction of the concept of enemy in bin Laden's speeches, we will use the categories of operation of ideology proposed by John Thompson in his work "Ideology and Modern Culture - Critical Social Theory in the Era of the Media."