Subliminal Semantics

War is just large scale terrorism with big funding.

INTRODUCTION
The mere word Terrorism does its job magnificently by sending shivers of cold dread and well, terror down the spine.

It is easily the most in vogue negative term in any given modern liberal democracy.
But do we actually know the meaning of the word? There has always existed a problem of defining Terrorism. There are various global factors which have caused this trouble such as

1. The freedom of various states to set their own limitations with regard to the definition of Terrorism. There lacks a common international understanding of what terrorism is.
2. Terrorism is defined from the viewpoint of the victims and fails to take into consideration the Perpetrator.

3. There exists a certain ambiguity surrounding the word Terrorism in terms of the elements that should be inclusive.
4. Terrorism is of different manifestations and forms that it is difficult to bring it all under a single common definition.

DEFINITION OF THE UN
Terrorism is defined by the United Nations Security Council as those 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, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be invoked to justify them. The definition above tends to give a wider view on the meaning of terrorism. However, it still does not give a clear cut definition, In the sense, that it does not define the elements that constitute an act of terror. Any state can always interpret what they believe to be a terrorist act committed at their discretion. Whether this discretion is prejudiced or not is privy to the defining body. Internationally, this can cause problems between states if one state refuses to believe a particular act to be labeled as terrorism. It can also hinder the textual limitations that are inherent of having a crisp definition as opposed to an intuitive one.

DEFINITION OF THE United States

The United States department of defense defines terrorism as The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological. However, even a seemingly clear and concise definition as the above has its flaws: Although it takes into consideration the concerned elements of Terrorism such as 1) Violence 2) Intimidation 3) Fear, it still fails to define each of these elements separately under the definition. The fact that in the definition, violence has been specifically demarcated into unlawful violence without a clear description of what encompasses unlawful violence is problematic.

In defining such a packed term, the US government almost decidedly wavers in providing the descriptive precise elements that are required to constitute a terrorist act.

COMMON DEFINITION OF TERRORISM

It is deemed to as necessary necessary that a common definition for terrorism to be developed:

In order to develop an international strategy to combat terrorism, there is an urgent requirement to formulate a common definition for terrorism.
International mobilization against terrorism cannot be put in operation if the participants cannot agree with a definition. It will be the basis and operational tool for expanding the international communitys ability to combat terrorism. A common definition for Terrorism is important as it will enable legislation and specific punishments against those perpetrating, involved in and supporting terrorism. It well also act as a bedrock of legislation.

A definition of terrorism will thwart attempts of terrorist organizations to attain public legitimacy and erode popular sentimental support.

Problems caused by overtly general definitions

General definitions such as this, .a politically motivated tactic involving the threat or use of force or violence in which the pursuit of publicity plays an important role fall short of: Bringing out the psychological element of fear that is necessary to constitute such an act.

Stressing on the non political incitements and causes of terrorism. i.e religious, philosophical, random reasons.

For example, such a definition of terrorism will hardly be applicable for noted terrorists such as the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski; an American mathematician, social critic and anarchist who engaged in a mail bombing spree that spanned nearly 20 years, killing three people and injuring 23 others. The above definition does not explicitly mention the parties that could be deemed to be guilty of terrorist acts as even policemen, political leaders and protestors can carry out politically motivated tactics involving threat or use of force

Steps towards establishing a universally acceptable definition of terrorism

The definition must include: A comprehensive list of specific groups/parties/individuals who may be considered to be perpetrators of terrorist acts Steps to differentiate these groups from governmental bodies and affected citizens A comprehensive list of acts that can be construed to be terrorist acts along with the scale of and damage caused by such acts. A system to monitor the implementation of the conventions to combat terrorism effectively. It should take into account a concise psychosocial effect that succeeds an act of terrorism in academically accurate terms rather than loose general terms such as fear or apprehension. It should be framed in such a way that it binds governmental bodies to the textual definition without granting them the unwarranted power to interpret the term in accordance with their interests. It must clearly differentiate terrorist acts from acts of civil violence in criteria and componential terms.

Terrorism, as a term finds its position of importance in the hearts of the people rather than their law-books.

The popular yet loose definitions of Terrorism itself causes the indistinct yet potent feeling of confusion and apprehension that could be resolved by a universal definition of the term.
Yet there is no such universal definition.