Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Differentiate terrorism and international terrorism
Difficulty in defining terrorism
Difficulty in defining terrorism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Differentiate terrorism and international terrorism
Defining international terrorism continues to be a problem fraught with difficulties. Though, several attempts have been made and continue to be made by various scholars, governments and international organizations such as the United Nations, a universally accepted definition is still a long way off, if ever it can be achieved.
Such an impasse is due to various reasons. First, vested interests exist of nations using international terrorism as an extension of state policy but covertly. Second, terrorism is the best alternative to an openly declared war as it costs less both in terms of money and lives. Third, the distinction between a freedom struggle and terrorism is hard to make. Fourth, terrorist organizations and their well knitted network spread over the world, often act as a counter to the will of national governments and may even influence government policies in many countries. Last but not least, the changing trends of international terrorism – from being a part of superpower rivalry during the Cold War to the religious terrorism of the present day. The whole world faces the menace of international terrorism today. No single country can boast of being immune from international terrorism. Even a country like Japan, where the crime rate is very low cannot claim itself free from the threat of terrorism. With the advancement of the technology and science, life has become very easy, comfortable and luxurious. It has been so also for terrorists who have more sophisticated technology at their hands to spread destruction and fear. Yet their basic method remains much the same. By killing innocents, and striking at public places – soft targets – terrorists try to convey their message whether ideological or not.
As we have seen ...
... middle of paper ...
... Japan has certain compulsions to follow and endorses the US action in many matters it has always been careful to keep its own interests at the front.
By responding to the international crisis caused by terrorist attacks of September 11, Japan made its intentions conspicuous that it could resort to its traditional check book diplomacy, and follow America in what is often termed Karaoke diplomacy, but also respond in a more active manner if need be. The whole background for Japan to go on military lines once again is ready. If, at any point of time in the future it wishes to shed the restraints imposed by its pacific constitution, the Japanese response to the events of September 11, 2001 have provided a useful precedent. Already in possession of one of the most sophisticated defense forces, Japan can emerge as one of the greatest military powers in the world.
In the first chapter of his book “Triangular Relations and the Pacific War” Hasegawa details American, Japanese, and Russian Relations prior to the Second World War up until shortly after the Yalta Conference. He summarizes Russo-Japanese relations from the founding of Vladivostok to the Russian loss in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, presenting the ominous background in diplomatic relations before the founding of the Soviet Union. Hasegawa then details the aggressive actions taken by Japan in China and the Pacific during the 1930s, along with the hardline stance taken by the United States against such actions in comparison with the Soviet strategy of appeasement. The promise by the Soviet Union to join the Pacific War as well as the Manhattan project and Japanese peace activists are discussed as Hasegawa details wartime relations.
After a quick examination of the recurring theme of Japanese military arrogance, I will argue that the three most compelling strategies that the Japanese could have pursued in the spring of 1942 were, one – to consolidate the most important resource gains that were already made; two – commence immediate planning for a strong anti-submarine warfare campaign; and three – coordinate significant operations with Japan’s Axis partners, particularly in the Indian Ocean and Southwest Asia theaters of conflict.
The Japanese government believed that the only way to solve its economic and demographic problems was to expand into its neighbor’s territory and take over its import market, mostly pointed at China. To put an end on that the United States put economic sanctions and trade embargoes. We believed that if we cut off their resources and their source of federal income than they would have no choice but to pull back and surrender. But the
Japan led a ruthless assault in the Pacific for fifteen years. This small island was able to spread imperialism and terror to neighboring countries through means of force and brutality. Japan even attempted to combat and overcome European and Western countries such as Russia and the United States. Even with an extreme militaristic government, Japan was unable to achieve the glory it was promised and hoped for. The Pacific War analyzes Japan’s part in the war and what the country could have done to prevent such a tragedy.
One reason Japan assaulted U.S.A. Navy was because the "New World Order.” “The ideals of Japan... are represented by the principle that the benevolent rule of the Emperor may be extended so as to embrace the whole world."(Doc. A) The beliefs Japanese grew up with were that the Emperor was sublime and his empire should be followed everywhere nerveless by everyone. They were trained to be dedicated; willing to do anything to please their superior. “An old order... (European and American)... is now crumbling.”(Doc. A) Great Britain,
Starting in the early 1930’s, the Japanese began to display their great imperialistic dreams with ambition and aggression. Their goal was to create a "Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere" where they controlled a vast empire in the western Pacific.1 In September of 1939, Japan signed the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis Treaty, allying themselves with Germany and Italy in an effort to safeguard their interests in China from the Soviet Union. Japan’s only major obstacle left lay in the significant size of the United States Pacific Fleet. To rid themselves of this, Japan attacked the United States Pacific Fleet in hopes of crippling it enough to prevent any further hindrance from the US. Although Japan began the War in the Pacific on the offensive, winning many battles and gaining significant territories, the tide quickly turned in favor of the US because of the their dominating industrial capacity. Thus, the Japanese began to resort to ghastly measures to prevent a humiliating defeat.
The bombings of 1945 by the United States of America on Japan were very controversial events. Many historians believe these acts were aggressive and unnecessary. In addition, analysts argue that the U.S. should have used alternative methods instead of the bomb, but most do not realize the repercussions of these different tactics. On the contrary, the bomb was needed to ease tension quickly and effectively. Ultimately, the bomb proved more effective than any other method, and also proved to be a technique that is sufficient for America’s needs. The effort made by the U.S. to bomb Japan after their disapproval of the Potsdam Declaration was needed to end conflicts in the Pacific because of Japanese resistance, to save American lives, and to portray the U.S. as a nation of power and dominance.
Categorical terrorism, according to Jeff Goodwin, is defined as “the strategic use of violence and threats of violence, usually intended to influence several audiences, by oppositional political groups against civilian or noncombatants who belong to a specific entity, religious or national group, social class or some other collectivity, without regard to their individual identities or roles.” More so, in terms of definition, according to a study done by Jeffrey Record in 2003, there was a count of over 109 definitions of terrorism, covering 22 different categorical elements. During the 70s and 80s, the United Nations struggled to define the term, finally coming up with the following definition: “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”
In the early 1940s, an event that was so premeditated and yet so very atrocious hit our nation’s pacific ocean. The state of Hawaii and its famous harbor was left victimized and bleeding as the skies rained down with munitions and kamikaze fighter planes. Many of the members of the armed services found themselves asking one question. What was to come next? As the United States of America and the empire of Japan at the time demonstrated that both sides had its differences no one could have ever expect anything of this magnitude to take place.
...feat of Japan in World War 2). With the changes of the nature of power, Japan by balancing out aggressive economic policies and a quiet military buildup, was able to build herself up to become a prominent player in the international sphere today. In closing, while Japan’s policies today in general have been skewered towards the arguments of the ‘Gentleman’, increasingly Japan has considered more realist concerns of security in the escalation of tensions of the East Asian geopolitical sphere. Chomin’s Discourse has nonetheless served as a prophetic blueprint for more than a century of Japan policy-making.
perspective of Japan’s power was both inaccurate and underestimated. Japan and China were in a war, and rather than in Japan, the U.S. had interests in China. On top of that, it supplied no respect to the Japanese in China either. By submitting to the economic reprisals on trade administered by the U.S., “not only would Japan's prestige be entirely destroyed and the solution of the China Affair rendered impossible, but Japan's existence itself would be endangered” (Kiong 2). Japan needed a way to sustain itself, and having two of the most powerful nations against it did not support its case. In order to save its nation, Japan started spreading propaganda about the U.S. Even though Japan asked to restart the shipments, the U.S. refused to have any affiliations with it. Hence, their brash attitude and underestimation of Japan elicited the foreign nation’s inclination for revenge. However, this was not the only indication that Japan was going to retaliate (Wukovits
There a small but clear differences between domestic terrorism and international terrorism, that difference is where the terrorist act is planned, supported, and carried out. In the case of domestic terrorism, the act must be planned, supported, and carried out all within the boundaries of the United States. The domestic terrorists must also be domicile to the United States and not be current foreign nationals at the time of the act. If the terrorist act is committed with help from a foreign group, planned or supported in a foreign country or committed by foreign nationals inside the boundaries of the U.S., then the attack may be international terrorism. The 9/11 attack was a clear act of international terrorism as it was planned, supported,
Japan had always been an ally of the United States. Japan tried to collect their share of treasure from Versailles. Japan ran into some troubles, Woodrow Wilson. Wilson rejected Japan’s claim to German concessions in Shantung. Duan Qirui, a Chinese warlord and politician had borrowed money from Japan to make China’s army stronger. Japan used that loan and wanted it to be repaid by getting the concessions in Shantung. In 1921, at the Naval Conference the US pressured the Britain’s to end their 20 year alliance with the Japanese. Japan was now isolated, Stalin’s unhappy empire to the north, t...
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
Vogel, E. F. (1979). Japan as number one :Lessons for america. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.