How are we to combat terrosrism? Is terrorism ever morally justified? When is it rational to become a terrorist? What is so terrorizing about terrorism? The answers to these important questions depend on the most fundamental one: what is terrorism? In this thesis I utilize a practice analysis to discover how we in the West think about war. From that analysis, a definition of terrorism, captured in military categories, is offered. This definition is then used to discover what makes terrorism so terrifying for us. Finally, the definition of terrorism argued for in this thesis is tested for its applicability to further analysis by using the definition to analyze the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Pentagon and World Trade Center attacks on events of September 11th, and nuclear deterrence. / vi, 86 leaves ; 29 cm.

Bibliography / Thesis (MA (Political Science. International Studies))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This research paper offers an analysis of new terrorism as a concept for analysis in Political Risk. In order to assess the novelty and value of new terrorism it is juxtaposed with old terrorism. This analysis uses a historical comparative method in which three terrorist groups, within two distinct historical periods, are discussed and compared. The first historical period is 1945-2000 and assesses old terrorism through a descriptive assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hezbollah. The second historical period, 2001-2009, provides a descriptive assessment of al-Qaeda. The primary variables for analysis with regards to the terrorist groups selected herein are goals, targets and tactics. Also discussed is the secondary variable structure. A number of key findings indicate that there are more similarities than there are differences between old and new terrorism. The novelty and value of new terrorism is thus limited as a concept for analysis within Political Risk Analysis. The conclusion of this research paper establishes that for a normative conceptualisation of terrorism to exist, and have value, it must consider both old and new terrorism. This normative understanding of terrorism better serves the purpose of mitigation within the sphere of Political Risk Analysis. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie studie bied .n ontleding van nuwe terrorisme as .n begrip vir ontleding in Politieke Risiko. Ten einde die nuutheid en waarde van nuwe terrorisme te evalueer, word dit naas ou terrorisme gestel. Hierdie ontleding gebruik .n histories-vergelykende metode waarin drie terroristegroepe, in twee afsonderlike historiese tydperke, bespreek en vergelyk word. Die eerste historiese tydperk strek van 1945.2000 en evalueer ou terrorisme met behulp van .n beskrywende evaluering van die Moslem Broederskap en Hezbollah. Die tweede historiese tydperk, 2001.2009, bied .n beskrywende evaluering van al-Qaeda. Die primere veranderlikes vir ontleding met betrekking tot die terroristegroepe wat hierin aangewys is, is doelstellings, teikens en taktiek. Verder word die sekondere veranderlike struktuur bespreek. .n Aantal belangrike bevindinge dui daarop dat daar meer ooreenkomste as verskille tussen ou en nuwe terrorisme bestaan. Die nuutheid en waarde van nuwe terrorisme het dus beperkinge vir ontleding as .n begrip in Politieke Risiko-ontleding. Die gevolgtrekking van hierdie studie dui dus daarop dat, vir .n normatiewe konseptualisering van terrorisme om te bestaan, en ook waarde te he, dit beide ou en nuwe terrorisme in berekening moet bring. Hierdie normatiewe begrip van terrorisme dien die doel van tempering binne die sfeer van Politieke Risiko-ontleding beter.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the United States has transferred close to a hundred individuals suspected of terrorism to foreign jurisdictions through a process known as extraordinary rendition. This is an infamous program that allows for the transfer of individuals to a foreign jurisdiction for interrogation, detention, or trial. While the use of extraordinary rendition attracts widespread controversy regarding its use and legality, it remains a vital tool for combating international terrorism. Evidence in this thesis lends support to extraordinary rendition program, but recognizes that while the program strengthens the country’s ability to gather vital intelligence to combat terrorism, there are methods to improve the program. The extraordinary rendition program requires an assessment of the totality of circumstances before a extraordinary rendition is permitted; reliance on diplomatic assurances from countries that hold a good human rights record; and subsequent monitoring of individuals rendered to foreign states to ensure that transfers comply with U.S. and international law. Evidence suggests that extraordinary rendition aids in the ability to gather sensitive intelligence and serves as a gathering tool used by American presidents to preserve freedom and peace; however, in the eyes of critics, this program represents a perversely autonomous and un-American legal maneuver that avoids due process. This thesis seeks to discuss common misconceptions associated with the extraordinary rendition program and identify the major points of controversy. The first part explores the history of the extraordinary rendition program and provides an understanding of its roots and procedures. The second part, discusses the executive branch’s attempts to conduct extraordinary renditions morally and responsibly, and examines the legal oversight and accountability gaps surrounding the program. Part three identifies the line of authority empowering the President to conduct extraordinary renditions. It also outlines the struggle of the legislative, judicial and executive branches to strengthen the extraordinary rendition program’s compliance with the rule of law by increasing oversight and accountability. Finally, Part four discusses the future of the extraordinary rendition program. The discussion presents possible solutions to correct oversight and accountability problems and suggests a multi-faceted approach that raises the bar for extraordinary renditions, thereby closing the oversight and accountability gaps.