Misplaced Pages

United States and state terrorism: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:45, 11 May 2011 view sourceJrtayloriv (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers17,855 edits Philippines: Neither of these are SPS (one is clearly cited as published by Polity Press, the other is merely an online copy of a book published by Pantheon books)← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:31, 24 November 2024 view source XTheBedrockX (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users78,143 edits new key for Category:Terrorism committed by the United States: " " using HotCat 
(476 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Terrorism allegations against the U.S.}}
The ''']''' has engaged in military and covert operations that arguably amount to ''']''', depending on how state terrorism is defined. The U.S. has funded, trained, and harbored individuals or groups who have engaged actions targeting violence at civilians, which is arguably terrorism.<ref>
{{about|allegations of US state terrorism|terrorism sponsored by the United States|United States and state-sponsored terrorism}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.austlii.org/au/journals/QUTLJJ/2004/15.html|archiveurl=http://www.webcitation.org/5n4tuzDcU|archivedate=2010-01-26|title=Terroris, Human rights, Social justice, Freedom and Democracy: some considerations for the legal and justice professionals of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’|last=Ball|first=Matthew|publisher=QUT Law & Justice Journal|year=2004|accessdate=2008-02-14}}
{{pp-protected|small=yes}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.arkibongbayan.org/2006-10Oct24-iapl/iapl.htm|title=The role of lawyers in defending the democratic rights of the people|last=
]
|first=Various|publisher=International Association of People's Lawyers|date=November 7, 2006|accessdate=2008-02-14|archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080408175353/http://www.arkibongbayan.org/2006-10Oct24-iapl/iapl.htm |archivedate = 2008-04-08}}
{{terrorism}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.ahrchk.net/ahrc-in-news/mainfile.php/2007ahrcinnews/1130/|title=Filipina Militants Indict Bush-Arroyo for Crimes Against Humanity
Several scholars have accused the ] of involvement in ]. They have written about the US and other ]' use of state terrorism, particularly in relation to the ]. According to them, state terrorism is used to protect the interest of ] elites, and the U.S. organized a ] system of ], co-operating with regional elites to rule through terror.
|last=San Juan, Jr.|first=E.|publisher=Asian Human Rights Commission|date=April 28, 2007|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091605I.shtml|title=Venezuelan Leader Lashes at US in UN Speech|publisher=Agence France-Presse
|date=September 16, 2005|accessdate=2008-02-14|archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080213083411/http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091605I.shtml |archivedate = 2008-02-13}}
* {{cite news|url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1309/is_v23/ai_4656176|title=Security Council considers Nicaraguan complaint against United States, takes no action|publisher=United Nations|date=November, 1986|accessdate=2008-02-07}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/sanjuan180906.html|title=Class Struggle and Socialist Revolution in the Philippines: Understanding the Crisis of U.S. Hegemony, Arroyo State Terrorism, and Neoliberal Globalization|last=San Juan, Jr.|first=E.|publisher=Monthly Review Foundation|date=September 18, 2006|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.india-seminar.com/2002/518/518%20roland%20g.%20simbulan.htm|title=The Real Threat|last=Simbulan|first=Roland G.|publisher=Seminar
|date=May 18, 2005|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite book|last=Piszkiewicz|first=Dennis|title=Terrorism's War with America: A History|date=November 30, 2003|publisher=Praeger Publishers|pages=224|isbn=978-0275979522}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-95571886.html|title=Understanding, responding to, and preventing terrorism|last=Cohn|first=Marjorie
|date=March 22, 2002|publisher=Arab Studies Quarterly|format=Reprint|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAL20050703&articleId=627|title=The UN and its conduct during the invasion and occupation of Iraq|last=Halliday|first=Dennis|publisher=Centre for Research on Globalization|date=July 3, 2005|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite episode|title=Noam Chomsky Interview on CBC|series=Hot Type|network=]|airdate=2003-12-09}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=KNQtB_VHoYEC&pg=PA157&dq=walzer+hiroshima+terror&lr=lang_en&as_brr=3&cd=18#v=onepage&q=walzer%20hiroshima%20terror&f=false|publisher=]|page=157|author=Michael Howard, George J. Andreopoulos, Mark R. Shulman|title=The Laws of War: Constraints on Warfare in the Western World|ISBN=9780300070620|year=1997|quote=Michael Walzer has argued that Hiroshima was not a case of supreme emergency, but rather an act of political terror.}}</ref><ref name=coady1>{{Cite web|url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/just-causes-dont-excuse-indiscriminate-killing/2007/11/13/1194766672031.html|date=2007-11-14|author=]|title=A just cause doesn't excuse indiscriminate killing|publisher=]|accessdate=2010-05-12|quote=Although there were some genuine military targets in Hiroshima, the atomic bomb was not needed to destroy them. If we think of terrorism as the deliberate killing of the innocent, then the bombing was an act of terrorism far greater than any single act of terrorism perpetrated since by non-state agents.}}</ref>
Some of the states in which the U.S. has allegedly conducted or supported terror operations include the ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]/] ], ], and ].


Such works include ] and ]'s '']'' (1979), Herman's ''The Real Terror Network'' (1985), ]'s ''Western State Terrorism'' (1991), Frederick Gareau's ''State Terrorism and the United States'' (2004), and ]' ''America's Other War'' (2005). Of these, Ruth J. Blakeley considers Chomsky and Herman as being the foremost writers on the United States and state terrorism.<ref name="Blakeley"/>
==U.S. policy and the definition of terrorism==
{{See also|State terrorism|Definitions of terrorism}}


This work has proved controversial with mainstream scholars of ], who concentrate on non-state terrorism and the state terrorism of dictatorships.<ref name="Blakeley">{{cite book|last=Blakeley|first=Ruth|date=2009|title=State Terrorism and Neoliberalism: The North in the South |url=http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415462402/|publisher=]|pages=, , |isbn=978-0415686174|access-date=2015-06-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150614055306/http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415462402/|archive-date=2015-06-14|url-status=live}}</ref>
The ] definition of ] excludes acts openly done by recognized ].<ref>“Congress' definition of terrorism excludes most state sponsored violence against civilians” http://www.examiner.com/law-and-politics-in-arlington/congress-definition-of-terrorism-excludes-most-state-sponsored-violence-against-civilians</ref><ref>"the war on terrorism is necessarily sub-national in character because terrorists are by most definitions not state actors." http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/archives_roll/2003_01-03/essay_2and3/essay2_kenney.html</ref> According to U.S. law terrorism is defined as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.”<ref>http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php?option=com_rokzine&view=article&id=34 </ref><ref>http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2006/82739.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nctc.gov/site/other/definitions.html</ref><ref>http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/422/usc_sec_22_00002656---f000-.html</ref> According to professor ], "American politicians and most social scientists definitionally exclude actions and policies of the United States and its allies" as terrorism.<ref>Selden P.4 http://books.google.com/books?id=D0icvm2EQLIC&pg=PA4&dq=American+Politicians+and+most+social+scientists+definitionally+exclude+actions+and+policies+of+the+United+States+and+it’s+allies&hl=en&ei=G6RETYGMJo26sQPX7f3iCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false</ref> There is no international consensus on a legal definition of terrorism, ], and ].<ref>http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=29633 http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=31267</ref><ref>http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/01-12-2010/116016-UN_unable_to_define_terrorism-0/</ref><ref>http://www.un.org/terrorism/ruperez-article.html</ref>


==History== ==Notable works==
Beginning in the late 1970s, ] and ] wrote a series of books on the United States' involvement with ]. Their writings coincided with reports by ] and other ] of a new global "epidemic" of ] and murder. Chomsky and Herman argued that terror was concentrated in the U.S. ] in ], and documented ] carried out by U.S. ]s in ]. They argued that of ten Latin American countries that had ], all were US client states. Worldwide they claimed that 74% of regimes that used torture on an administrative basis were U.S. client states, receiving military and other support from the U.S. to retain power. They concluded that the global rise in state terror was a result of ].<ref>Sluka, p. 8</ref>
===General critiques===


Chomsky concluded that all powers backed state terrorism in client states. At the top were the U.S. and other powers, notably the United Kingdom and France, that provided financial, military, and diplomatic support to ] regimes kept in power through violence. These governments acted together with ], particularly in the arms and security industries. In addition, other developing countries outside the Western sphere of influence carried out state terror supported by rival powers.<ref name="Sluka, p. 9">Sluka, p. 9</ref>
Professor ], formerly President Reagan's ] Director wrote:


The alleged involvement of major powers in state terrorism in developing countries has led scholars to study it as a global phenomenon rather than study individual countries in isolation.<ref name="Sluka, p. 9"/>
<blockquote>"As many critics have pointed, out, terrorism is not an enemy. It is a tactic. Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today's war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world."<ref name="odom_terrorismtactic"></ref><ref></ref></blockquote>


In 1991, a book edited by ] also argued that other ] powers sponsored terror in developing countries. It concluded that the U.S. and its allies were the main supporters of ] throughout the world.<ref>Sluka, pp. 8–9</ref> Gareau states that the number of deaths caused by non-state terrorism (3,668 deaths between 1968 and 1980, as estimated by the ] (CIA)) is "dwarfed" by those resulting from state terrorism in US-backed regimes such as Guatemala (150,000 killed, 50,000 missing during the ] – 93% of whom Gareau classifies as "victims of state terrorism").<ref>
Professor ] has argued that the U.S. and other first-world states, as well as mainstream ] institutions, have obfuscated the true character and scope of terrorism, promulgating a one-sided view from the standpoint of first-world privilege. He has said that
{{cite book
:if 'terrorism' as a term of moral and legal opprobrium is to be used at all, then it should apply to violence deliberately targeting civilians, whether committed by state actors or their non-state enemies.<ref name="Falk 1988">{{Cite book|last=Falk |first=Richard |title=Revolutionaries and Functionaries: The Dual Face of Terrorism |city=New York |publisher=Dutton |year=1988}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.transnational.org/SAJT/forum/Nonviolence/2004/Falk_GandhiNonviolence.html |title=Gandhi, Nonviolence and the Struggle Against War |last=Falk |first=Richard |publisher=The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research |date=January 28, 2004 |accessdate=2007-07-10}}</ref>
|author=Gareau, Frederick Henry
|title=The United Nations and other international institutions: a critical analysis
|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield
|year=2002
|page=246
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ipWSObZsXYQC&pg=PA246
|isbn=978-0-8304-1578-6
|access-date=2016-01-05
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160506025300/https://books.google.com/books?id=ipWSObZsXYQC&pg=PA246
|archive-date=2016-05-06
|url-status=live
}}
</ref>


Among other scholars, Ruth J. Blakeley says that the United States and its allies sponsored and deployed state terrorism on an "enormous scale" during the ]. The justification given for this was to contain ], but Blakeley contends it was also a means by which to buttress the interests of U.S. business elites and to promote the expansion of ] throughout the ].<ref name="Blakeley"/> Mark Aarons posits that right-wing authoritarian regimes and dictatorships backed by Western powers committed atrocities and mass killings that rival the Communist world, citing examples such as the ], the ], the "]" in Guatemala during the civil war, and the assassinations and state terrorism associated with ] throughout South America.<ref name ="BlumenthalMcCormack">
Falk has argued that the repudiation of authentic non-state terrorism is insufficient as a strategy for mitigating it<ref name="falk">{{cite journal|title=Thinking About Terrorism|journal=]|date=1986-06-28|first=Richard|last=Falk|coauthors=|volume=242|issue=25|pages=873–892|id= |url=|format=|accessdate=2008-01-30}}</ref>
Mark Aarons (2007). "." In David A. Blumenthal and Timothy L. H. McCormack (eds). '' {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160105053952/http://www.brill.com/legacy-nuremberg-civilising-influence-or-institutionalised-vengeance |date=2016-01-05 }}'' ]. {{ISBN|9004156917}} pp. &
Falk also argued that people who committed "terrorist" acts against the United States could use the ].
</ref> In ''Worse Than War,'' ] argues that during the last two decades of the Cold War, the number of American client states practicing mass murder outnumbered those of the ].<ref>] (2009). ''Worse Than War.'' ]. {{ISBN|1586487698}} p.537
* "During the 1970s and 1980s, the number of American client states practicing mass-murderous politics exceeded those of the Soviets."</ref> According to Latin Americanist ], the number of repression victims in Latin America alone far surpassed that of the U.S.S.R. and its East European satellites between 1960 and 1990.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Coatsworth|first1=John Henry|author-link=John Henry Coatsworth |chapter= The Cold War in Central America, 1975–1991 | editor1-last=Leffler|editor1-first=Melvyn P.|editor1-link=Melvyn P. Leffler|editor2-last=Westad|editor2-first=Odd Arne|editor2-link=Odd Arne Westad|date=2012 |title=The Cambridge History of the Cold War (Volume 3)|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xjTVBAAAQBAJ&pg=PT230|publisher=]|page=230 |isbn=978-1107602311}}</ref> ] asserts that "hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans were tortured, abducted or killed by right-wing military regimes as part of the US-led anti-communist crusade."<ref>{{cite book|last1=McSherry|first1=J. Patrice|author-link1= J. Patrice McSherry|editor1=Esparza, Marcia |editor2=Henry R. Huttenbach|editor3=Daniel Feierstein|title=State Violence and Genocide in Latin America: The Cold War Years (Critical Terrorism Studies)|chapter=Chapter 5: "Industrial repression" and Operation Condor in Latin America |page=|publisher=]|year=2011|isbn=978-0415664578|chapter-url=https://www.routledge.com/State-Violence-and-Genocide-in-Latin-America-The-Cold-War-Years/Esparza-Huttenbach-Feierstein/p/book/9780415496377}}</ref>


==Definition==
], reviewing Falk's ''Revolutionaries and Functionaries'', argued that Falk's definition of terrorism hinges on some unstated definition of "permissible"; this, says Schorr, makes the judgment of what is terrorism inherently "subjective", and furthermore, he suggests, leads Falk to characterize some acts he considers impermissible as "terrorism", but others he considers permissible as merely "terroristic". <ref>, Daniel Schorr, 1 May 1988.</ref>
{{See also|State terrorism|Definitions of terrorism}}

The ] ] excludes acts done by recognized ].<ref>
=== Indonesia's anti-Communist purges (1965–66)===
{{cite book
{{Main|Indonesian killings of 1965–1966}}
|author=Gupta, Dipak K.

|title=Understanding terrorism and political violence: the life cycle of birth, growth, transformation, and demise
Professor Ruth Blakely stated that the governments of the United States and Britain were aware of the "campaign of state terror" in Indonesia, and that they supported the regime with military aid in spite of this knowledge, and "actively encouraged" the repression of the PKI and its supporters.<ref name="blakely-2009-87-88">{{cite book|author=Blakely, Ruth|title=State terrorism and neoliberalism: the North in the South|publisher=Taylor & Francis|year=2009|isbn=9780415462402|pages=87–88|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=FoxuDCMmlqoC&pg=PA87}}</ref>
|publisher=Taylor & Francis
The common estimate of the death toll of the anti-Communist purge in Indonesia which was carried out by the Indonesian Army is 500,000.<ref>Robert Cribb, ed. The Indonesian Killings of 1965-1966: Studies from Java and Bali (Clayton, Vic: Monash papers on Southeast Asia, no. 21, 1990), p.12</ref>
|year=2008

|page=8
In an article for the ], journalist Kathy Kadane wrote that senior U.S. diplomats and ] officials compiled lists of ] operatives and provided a list of approximately 5,000 names to the ] as it captured and annihilated the Indonesian communist party and its sympathizers.<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFDA1431F931A25754C0A966958260</ref> Kadane wrote that approval for the release of names put on the lists came from top U.S. embassy officials; Ambassador Marshall Green, deputy chief of mission Jack Lydman and political section chief Edward Masters.<ref>''San Francisco Examiner'', May 20, 1990; ''Washington Post'', May 21, 1990.</ref><ref name="SFOKK">{{cite news|title=Ex-agents say CIA compiled death lists for Indonesians |newspaper=] |date=1990-05-20|author= |location=San Francisco }}</ref>
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=a5S8tAyPuQwC&pg=PA8

|isbn=978-0-415-77164-1
Robert J. Martens, who from 1963 to 1966 was a political officer at the United States Embassy in Jakarta acknowledged that he had passed a lists of names to the Indonesians but contended in a letter to the editor of The Washington Post that "I and I alone decided to pass those "lists" to the non-Communist forces, I neither sought nor was given permission to do so by Ambassador Marshall Green or any other embassy official". Martens wrote: "I also categorically deny that C.I.A. or any other classified material was turned over by me. Furthermore, I categorically deny that I "headed an embassy group that spent two years compiling the lists." No one, absolutely no one, helped me compile the lists in question." He said in the letter that the lists were gathered entirely from the Indonesian Communist press and were available to everyone.
|access-date=2016-01-05

|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160502065534/https://books.google.com/books?id=a5S8tAyPuQwC&pg=PA8
Edward Masters later told Ms. Kadane that the Indonesian military was not a group of "village idiots" and that he believed they knew how to find Communist leaders without American help.<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFDA1431F931A25754C0A966958260</ref>
|archive-date=2016-05-02
Mark Mansfield, a CIA spokesman stated: "There is no substance to the allegation that the CIA was involved in the preparation and/or distribution of a list that was used to track down and kill PKI members. It is simply not true.”<ref>http://www.namebase.org/kadane.html</ref>
|url-status=live

}}
===Indonesia's occupation of East Timor (1975–1999)===
</ref><ref>
{{Main|Indonesian occupation of East Timor}}
{{cite journal

|title=How to Define Terrorism
In 1975, the ], including President Ford and ] acquiesced Indonesia's invasion and occupation of East Timor. Ford stated to Suharto that “We will not press you on the issue. “ and Kissinger advised that it was “important whatever you do succeed quickly.”<ref>http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/doc4.pdf (pg.9-10)</ref> Subsequent U.S. administrations continued support to Indonesia while its army occupied East Timor. By 1980 the occupation had left more than 100,000 dead with some estimates running as high as 230,000.<ref>http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/#18</ref><ref>http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35878.htm</ref>
|first=Joshua

|last=Sinai
Professor Ruth Blakely states that "Both the U.S. and Britain were complicit in an ongoing campaign of state terrorism by Indonesia which cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Furthermore, their economies benefited from the sale of arms which were used against East Timorese civilians."<ref name="blakely-2009-91">{{cite book|author=Blakely, Ruth|title=State terrorism and neoliberalism: the North in the South|publisher=Taylor & Francis|year=2009|isbn=9780415462402|page=91|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=FoxuDCMmlqoC&pg=PA91}}</ref>
|journal=Perspectives on Terrorism

|volume=2
===Wars in Indochina===
|issue=4
{{Main|Korean War}}
|year=2008
{{Main|Vietnam War}}
|url=http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/33/html
Professor Ruth Blakely stated the following:
|access-date=2011-07-06
{{blockquote|The methods used by the U.S. to defeat its opponents in Indochina involved the widespread use of state terrorism. The U.S. was directly responsible for state terrorism in some cases, as in the aerial bombardment of the civilian population in Korea and the establishment of counterinsurgency programs such as the Phoenix Program in Vietnam, which involved torture and assassination of civilians suspected of supporting the opposition, and was intended to deter public support for the enemy. The U.S. was complicit in state terrorism through its support for repressive regimes, either by giving the green light to acts of state terrorism or by providing military hardware to regimes engaged in campaigns of state terrorism, as was the case in Taiwan and Indonesia. The U.S. also collaborated with those regimes through the sharing of military doctrine which advocated state terrorism, as the case of the Philippines shows<ref name="blakely-2009-91" />}}
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111005054712/http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/33/html

|archive-date=2011-10-05
Professor ] considers the 1972 bombings of North Vietnam, code-named ], to be an example of a type of terrorism that he calls "terrorism by coercive diplomacy" -- i.e. terrorism whose purpose is to force an opponent to agree to your demands by making their living conditions "horrible beyond endurance".<ref>{{cite book|author=Stohl, Michael|title=The Politics of Terrorism|publisher=CRC Press|year=1988|isbn=9780824778149|page=279|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=R60c_2nCcnYC&pg=PA279}}</ref>
|url-status=live

}}
===Atomic bombings of Japan (1945)===
</ref> According to U.S. law (22 U.S.C. 2656f(d)(2))<ref>{{cite web
{{main|Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki}}
|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/422/2656f-

|title=Title 22 > Chapter 38 > § 2656f - Annual country reports on terrorism
The ] during World War II was the first and last<ref name="Frey 2004"/><ref name="Dower 1995"/> time a state has used ] against people. Because concentrated civilian populated areas were targeted, critics hold that it represents the single greatest act of ] in the 20th century. Those who defend the bombings argue that as a result its supposed shortening of the war, thereby preventing any possible need for an invasion, less lives were lost on both sides overall.<ref name="Frey 2004">{{Cite book
|date=February 1, 2010
| last = Frey
|author=U.S. Department of State
| first =Robert S.
|publisher=Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute
| title = The Genocidal Temptation: Auschwitz, Hiroshima, Rwanda and Beyond
}}</ref> terrorism is defined as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience".<ref>Gupta, p. 8</ref><ref>
| publisher =University Press of America
| year =2004
| id = ISBN 0761827439 }} Reviewed at:
{{cite journal {{cite journal
|volume = 2
| last = Rice
|issue = 4
| first =Sarah
|year = 2008
| title =The Genocidal Temptation: Auschwitz, Hiroshima, Rwanda and Beyond (Review)
|title = How to Define Terrorism
| journal =Harvard Human Rights Journal
|first = Joshua
| volume = 18
|last = Sinai
| year =2005
|journal = Perspectives on Terrorism
| url = http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss18/booknotes-Genocidal.shtml
|url = http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/33/html
| accessdate = }}</ref><ref name="Dower 1995">{{cite journal
|access-date = 2011-07-06
| last = Dower
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20111005054712/http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/33/html
| first =John
|archive-date = 2011-10-05
| title =The Bombed: Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japanese Memory
|url-status = live
| journal =Diplomatic History
}}
| volume = 19
</ref><ref>
| issue = 2
{{cite web
| year =1995
|work=National Counterterrorism Center: Annex of Statistical Information
| url =
|title=Country Reports on Terrorism - Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism
| accessdate = }}</ref>
|date=April 30, 2007
|publisher=U.S. State Department
|url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2006/82739.htm
|access-date=2017-06-25
}}
</ref> There is no international consensus on a legal or academic definition of terrorism.<ref name="Williamson-38">{{cite book
|author=Williamson, Myra
|title=Terrorism, war and international law: the legality of the use of force against Afghanistan in 2001
|publisher=Ashgate Publishing
|year=2009
|isbn=978-0-7546-7403-0
|page=38
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZuJIPP9HfRsC&pg=PA38
}}</ref> United Nations conventions have failed to reach consensus on definitions of non-state or state terrorism.<ref>{{cite web|work=U.N. Action to Counter Terrorism |title=The UN's fight against terrorism: five years after 9/11 |first=Javier |last=Rupérez |publisher=]|location=Spain|author-link=Javier Rupérez |date=6 September 2006 |url=https://www.un.org/terrorism/ruperez-article.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110411034734/http://www.un.org/terrorism/ruperez-article.html |archive-date=April 11, 2011 }}</ref>


According to professor Mark Selden, "American politicians and most social scientists definitionally exclude actions and policies of the United States and its allies" as terrorism.<ref>Selden </ref> Historian ] wrote that "Even when definitions of terrorism allow for ''state terrorism'', state actions in this area tend to be seen through the prism of war or national self-defense, not terror."<ref>{{cite book|author=Hor, Michael Yew Meng|title=Global anti-terrorism law and policy|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2005|isbn=978-0-521-10870-6|page=20|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nzQOAR5rqvcC&pg=PA20|access-date=2016-11-12|archive-date=2019-03-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190303234424/https://books.google.com/books?id=nzQOAR5rqvcC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA20|url-status=dead}}</ref> According to Dr Myra Williamson, the meaning of "terrorism" has undergone a transformation. During the reign of terror a regime or system of terrorism was used as an instrument of governance, wielded by a recently established revolutionary state against the enemies of the people. Now the term "terrorism" is commonly used to describe terrorist acts committed by ''non-state or subnational entities'' against a state.<ref>Williamson </ref>
] before and after bombing]]
For scholars and historians, the primary ]s ],<ref>See: {{cite journal|title=Recent Literature on Truman's Atomic Bomb Decision: A Search for Middle Ground|journal=Diplomatic History|year=2005|month=April|first=J. Samuel|last=Walker|coauthors=|volume=29|issue=2|pages=334|id= |url=|format=|accessdate=2008-01-30 }}</ref> relate to whether the use of the nuclear weapons were justified. Psychologist Chris Stout and former U.S. ambassador ] consider the atomic bombings to be a form of state terrorism, based on a definition of terrorism as the targeting of civilians to achieve a political goal.<ref>{{citation|title=The Psychology of Terrorism: Clinical aspects and responses Psychological dimensions to war and peace|author=Chris E. Stout|isbn=0275977714|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|year=2002|isbn=0275978664|pages=105–7|quote=Surely if targeting civilians is a defining characteristic, then the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki would qualify as state terrorism.}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=Trying to Define Terrorism|author=Robert V. Keeley|journal=]|volume=9|issue=1|publisher=]|date=December 2002|pages=33–39 |quote=Terrorism is also used in nation-state wars, for example in the wholesale and indiscriminate bombings of civilians living in cities – a tactic used by both sides in World War II – culminating in the atom bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a deliberate and successful attempt to end the war quickly by threatening the extinction of populations. How acute the problem of definitions is becomes manifest when anyone who tries to explain these atom bombings as acts of state terrorism in wartime is pilloried as anti-American if not worse.}}</ref>


In ''State terrorism and the United States'' Frederick F. Gareau writes that the intent of terrorism is to intimidate or coerce both targeted groups and larger sectors of society that share or could be led to share the values of targeted groups by causing them "intense fear, anxiety, apprehension, panic, dread and/or horror".<ref>{{cite book|last=Gareau|first=Frederick H.|title=State terrorism and the United States : from counterinsurgency to the war on terrorism|year=2004|publisher=Clarity Press|location=Atlanta|isbn=978-0-932863-39-3|page=14}}</ref> The objective of terrorism against the state is to force governments to change their policies, to overthrow governments or even to destroy the state. The objective of state terrorism is to eliminate people who are considered to be actual or potential enemies, and to discourage those actual or potential enemies who are not eliminated.<ref>Wright, p. 11</ref>
Some scholars have also argued that the bombings weakened moral taboos against attacks on civilians, and allege that this led to such attacks becoming a standard tactic in subsequent ] actions.<ref name=Selden/>


==General critiques==
====Views and opinions====
{{Overquotation|section|date=September 2017}}
According to ], the bombings were part of the overall military strategy to defeat Japan by forcing as quick an end to the war as possible while minimizing loss of life and also avoid a very costly, in terms of both Japanese and Allied casualties, invasion of the Japanese mainland.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Code-Name Downfall |last=Allen |first=Thomas |coauthors=Norman Polmar|pages=266–270 |year= 1995|publisher=Simon & Schuster |location=New York |isbn=0684804069}}</ref> However, there is considerable ] that centers on whether killing hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians with such weapons was moral or even necessary, especially the need for a second nuclear bomb to be dropped on Nagasaki.{{cite}}
Professor ], formerly the ] under President Reagan's administration, wrote:


<blockquote>As many critics have pointed out, terrorism is not an enemy. It is a tactic. Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today's war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.<ref name="odom_terrorismtactic">
;Viewed as state terrorism
{{Cite journal|author=Odom, General William|title=American Hegemony: How to Use It, How to Lose It|journal=Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society|volume=151|issue=4|date=December 2007|page=410}}. Online copy available {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110614105156/http://www.middlebury.edu/media/view/214721/original/OdomPaper.pdf |date=2011-06-14 }}
</ref></blockquote>


Professor ] holds that the US and other rich states, as well as mainstream ] institutions, have obfuscated the true character and scope of terrorism, promulgating a one-sided view from the standpoint of ] privilege. He has said that:
]


<blockquote>If 'terrorism' as a term of moral and legal opprobrium is to be used at all, then it should apply to violence deliberately targeting civilians, whether committed by state actors or their non-state enemies.<ref name="Falk 1988">{{Cite book|last=Falk |first=Richard |title=Revolutionaries and Functionaries: The Dual Face of Terrorism |url=https://archive.org/details/revolutionariesf0000falk |url-access=registration |location=New York |publisher=Dutton |year=1988|isbn=9780525246046 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web
Historian ] writes: "if ']' has a useful meaning (and I believe it does, because it marks off an act as intolerable, since it involves the indiscriminate use of violence against human beings for some political purpose), then it applies exactly to the bombings of Hiroshima and ]."<ref name="ZinnBreakingSilence">{{Cite web|url=http://polymer.bu.edu/~amaral/Personal/zinn.html |title=Hiroshima; Breaking the Silence |accessdate=2008-01-30 |first=Howard Zinn |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20071201172331/http://polymer.bu.edu/~amaral/Personal/zinn.html <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 2007-12-01}}</ref> Zinn cites the sociologist ] who states that: {{quote|The attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not 'combat' in any of the ways that word is normally used. Nor were they primarily attempts to destroy military targets, for the two cities had been chosen not despite but because they had a high density of civilian housing. Whether the intended audience was Russian or Japanese or a combination of both, then the attacks were to be a show, a display, a demonstration. The question is: What kind of mood does a fundamentally decent people have to be in, what kind of moral arrangements must it make, before it is willing to annihilate as many as a quarter of a million human beings for the sake of making a point?<ref name="ZinnBreakingSilence" />}}
|url = http://www.transnational.org/SAJT/forum/Nonviolence/2004/Falk_GandhiNonviolence.html
|title = Gandhi, Nonviolence and the Struggle Against War
|last = Falk
|first = Richard
|publisher = The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research
|date = January 28, 2004
|access-date = 2007-07-10
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070802103222/http://www.transnational.org/SAJT/forum/Nonviolence/2004/Falk_GandhiNonviolence.html
|archive-date = August 2, 2007
|url-status = dead
|df = mdy-all
}}</ref></blockquote>


Falk has argued that the repudiation of authentic non-state terrorism is insufficient as a strategy for mitigating it.<ref name="falk">{{cite journal
The ] theorist ] argues that while taking the lives of civilians can be justified under conditions of 'supreme emergency', the war situation at that time did not constitute such an emergency and was influenced by the U.S. demand for an unconditional Japanese surrender.<ref name=justice>{{Cite book|title=Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=KhuyAtfeecIC&pg=PA197&dq=walzer+hiroshima+emergency&lr=lang_en&as_brr=3&cd=5#v=onepage&q=walzer%20hiroshima%20emergency&f=false|publisher=]|page=197|year=2006|author=Simon Caney|ISBN=9780199297962}}</ref>
|title=Thinking About Terrorism

|journal=]
], ], and ] also view the targeting of civilians during the bombings as a form of terrorism.<ref name=coady1/><ref name=jamal>{{Cite book|title=Globalization and Terrorism: The Migration of Dreams and Nightmares|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=KVgUGDJGGl4C&pg=PA30&dq=hiroshima+terrorism&cd=3#v=onepage&q=hiroshima%20terrorism&f=false|author=]|year=2009|publisher=]|page=30|ISBN=9780742557888|quote=As discussed earlier, the Holocaust, followed by the Allied firebombings of Dresden and Tokyo and the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, represented some of the most severe effects of terrorism directed at civilian populations.}}</ref>
|date=June 28, 1986

|first=Richard |last=Falk
], professor Emeritus of ] and Practice at ] has written in detail about Hiroshima and Nagasaki as instances of state terrorism. He writes "The graveyards of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the number-one exhibits of state terrorism... Consider the hypocrisy of an Administration that portrays ] as barbaric while preparing to inflict terrorism on a far grander scale.... Any ] policy worth the name must include a convincing indictment of the First World variety.".<ref name="Falk 1988"/><ref>{{Cite web
|volume=242|issue=25|pages=873–892
|url=http://www.transnational.org/SAJT/forum/Nonviolence/2004/Falk_GandhiNonviolence.html
}}</ref>
|title=Gandhi, Nonviolence and the Struggle Against War
Falk also argued that people who committed "terrorist" acts against the United States could use the ].
|last=Falk
|first=Richard
|publisher=The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research
|date=28 January 2004
|accessdate=2007-07-10
}}</ref> He writes elsewhere that:<ref>Falk, Richard. "State Terror versus Humanitarian Law",in Selden,, Mark, editor (November 28, 2003). War and State Terrorism: The United States, Japan, and the Asia-Pacific in the Long Twentieth Century. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.. ISBN 978-0742523913. ,45</ref>

{{quote|Undoubtedly the most extreme and permanently traumatizing instance of state terrorism, perhaps in the history of warfare, involved the use of atomic bombs against the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in military settings in which the explicit function of the attacks was to terrorize the population through mass slaughter and to confront its leaders with the prospect of national annihilation....the public justification for the attacks given by the U.S. government then and now was mainly to save lives that might otherwise might have been lost in a military campaign to conquer and occupy the Japanese home islands which was alleged as necessary to attain the war time goal of unconditional surrender.... But even accepting the rationale for the atomic attacks at face value, which means discounting both the geopolitical motivations and the pressures to show that the immense investment of the ] had struck pay dirt, and disregarding the Japanese efforts to arrange their surrender prior to the attacks, the idea that massive death can be deliberately inflicted on a helpless civilian population as a tactic of war certainly qualifies as state terror of unprecedented magnitude, particularly as the United States stood on the edge of victory, which might well have been consummated by diplomacy. As Michael Walzer puts it, the United States owed the Japanese people 'an experiment in negotiation,' but even if such an initiative had failed there was no foundation in law or morality for atomic attacks on civilian targets.}}

], author of '']'' (2006), states in Chapter 6 (entitled 'Terror'), page 130 that:

'Remember that people killed by terrorism are not the people the perpetrators wish to persuade. They are exemplars, bargaining chips. There is a disconnect between victims and audience; the violence is a warning to people other than those targeted. (The writer Brian Jenkins has sumed up this fact in the catchphrase 'terrorism is theatre': a US Army lieutenant colonel went one better, telling a reporter in Baghdad in 2003: 'terrorism is grand theater')<ref>Danner, Mark "Delusions in Baghdad", New York Review of Books, 19 November 2003</ref> Unfortunately this, too, is true of many government actions. Consider the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945...the bombings were designed as an awful demonstration: to instill such fear in the Japanese government that they would surrender. The bomb thus spoke thus: Give up or there'll be more where this came from. It also sent a powerful message to a secondary audience: Joseph Stalin. On this measure, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are, by many orders of magnitude, the greatest acts of terrorism in history.'<ref>2006 Poole, Steven 'Unspeak', Little Brown, London. ISBN 0 316 73100 5</ref>

;Viewed as primarily wartime acts

] states in ''Terrorism and Collective Responsibility'' that "any definition which allowed the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to count as instances of terrorism would be too broad." He goes on to argue "The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while obviously intended by the American government to alter the policies of the Japanese government, seem for all the terror they involved, more an act of war than of terrorism."<ref name=Wilkins>{{Cite book
|title=Terrorism and Collective Responsibility
|publisher=Routledge
|last=Wilkins
|first=Burleigh Taylor
|isbn=041504152X
|pages=11}}</ref>


;Viewed as diplomacy or state terrorism not considered

Critical scholarship has focused on the argument that the use of atomic weapons was "primarily for diplomatic purposes rather than for military requirements ... to impress and intimidate the Soviet Union in the emerging Cold War."<ref>{{cite journal|title=Recent Literature on Truman's Atomic Bomb Decision: A Search for Middle Ground|journal=Diplomatic History|date=2005-April|first=J. Samuel|last=Walker|coauthors=|volume=29|issue=2|pages=312|id= |url=|format=|accessdate=2008-01-30 }}</ref> Certain scholars who oppose the decision to use of the atom bomb, while they state it was unnecessary and immoral, do not claim it was state terrorism per se. Walker's 2005 overview of recent historiography did not discuss the issue of state terrorism.<ref>Walker, "Recent Literature on Truman's Atomic Bomb Decision", ''passim''.</ref>

====Forward effects====
] professor ] and ] researcher ], in their book ''Terrible beyond Endurance? The Foreign Policy of State Terrorism'', discuss the argument that the institutionalized form of terrorism carried out by states have occurred as a result of changes that took place following World War II, and in particular the two bombings. In their analysis state terrorism as a form of foreign policy was shaped by the presence and use of ], and that the legitimizing of such violent behavior led to an increasingly accepted form of state behavior. They consider both Germany's bombing of London (q.v. ]) and the US atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be examples of this.

Scholars treating the subject have discussed the bombings within a wider context of the weakening of the moral taboos that were in place prior to World War II, which prohibited mass attacks against civilians during wartime. ], professor of sociology and history at ] and author of ''War and State Terrorism: The United States, Japan, and the Asia-Pacific in the Long Twentieth Century'', writes, "This deployment of air power against civilians would become the centerpiece of all subsequent U.S. wars, a practice in direct contravention of the Geneva principles, and cumulatively the single most important example of the use of terror in twentieth century warfare."<ref>{{cite news
|first=Mark
|last=Selden
|title=Terrorism Before and After 9-11
|date=2002-09-09
|publisher=]
|url =http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2310
|accessdate=2008-01-30}}</ref> Falk, Selden, and Prof. Douglas Lackey, each of whom relate the Japan bombings to what they believe was a similar pattern of state terrorism in following wars, particularly the ] and the ]. Professor Selden writes: "Over the next half century, the United States would destroy with impunity cities and rural populations throughout Asia, beginning in Japan and continuing in North Korea, Indochina, Iraq and Afghanistan, to mention only the most heavily bombed nations...if nuclear weapons defined important elements of the global ] centered on U.S.-Soviet conflict, "conventional" bomb attacks defined the trajectory of the subsequent half century of warfare."<ref name=Selden>Selden, War and State Terrorism.</ref>

===Cuba (1959–present)===
After ]'s forces defeated ]'s forces, a new government was formed in ] on January 2, 1959. The ] initiated a campaign of regime change in the early parts of 1959,<ref></ref> and by the spring of 1959 was arming ] guerrillas inside Cuba. By winter of that year US-based Cubans were being supervised by the CIA in the orchestration of bombings and incendiary raids against Cuba.<ref name=autogenerated1>Chomsky, Noam. Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance, Henry Holt and Company, 80.</ref> ], ], and ] refer to the U.S. actions against Castro during the early 1960s as terrorism.
<ref>{{Cite book|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=6_E_mW8YXQEC&pg=PA14&dq=operation+mongoose+terrorism&lr=&as_brr=3&cd=11#v=onepage&q=operation%20mongoose%20terrorism&f=false|publisher=]|title=Averting 'the final failure': John F. Kennedy and the secret Cuban Missile Crisis meetings|year=2003|author=Sheldon M. Stern|ISBN=9780804748469|page=14}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=BOzoAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA58&dq=operation+mongoose+terrorism&lr=&as_brr=3&cd=14#v=onepage&q=operation%20mongoose%20terrorism&f=false|publisher=]|year=1995|author=]|title=States of mind: dialogues with contemporary thinkers on the European mind|page=58|ISBN=9780719042621}}</ref>

] officials have accused the United States government of being an accomplice and protector of terrorism against ] on many occasions.<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.granma.cu/miami5/ingles/415.html
|title=The United States is an accomplice and protector of terrorism, states Alarcón
|last=Rodríguez
|first=Javier
|publisher=Granma
|accessdate=2007-07-10
|archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070609104439/http://www.granma.cu/miami5/ingles/415.html <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 2007-06-09}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.granma.cu/cubademanda/ingles/demanda9-i.html
|title=Terrorism organized and directed by the CIA
|publisher=Granma
|accessdate=2007-07-10
|archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070609174822/http://www.granma.cu/cubademanda/ingles/demanda9-i.html <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 2007-06-09}}</ref> According to ], President of ] "Terrorism and violence, crimes against Cuba, have been part and parcel of U.S. policy for almost half a century."<ref name="landau">{{Cite web
|url=http://www.tni.org/archives/landau/alarcon.htm
|title=Interview with Ricardo Alarcón
|last=Landau
|first=Saul
|publisher=Transnational Institute
|date=February 13, 2003
|accessdate=2007-07-10
}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> Testifying before the United States Senate in 1978, ], former CIA Director, stated; "We had task forces that were striking at Cuba constantly. We were attempting to blow up power plants. We were attempting to ruin sugar mills. We were attempting to do all kinds of things in this period. This was a matter of American government policy."<ref>House Select Committee on Assassinations Report, Volume IV, page 125. September 22, 1978</ref>

The claims formed part of Cuba's $181.1 billion lawsuit in 1999 in Havana's Popular Provincial Tribunal against the United States on behalf of the Cuban people which alleged that for over 40 years, "terrorism has been permanently used by the U.S. as an instrument of its foreign policy against Cuba", and it "became more systematic as a result of the covert action program."<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.workers.org/ww/1999/cuba0916.php
|title=Cuba's case against Washington
|last=Wood
|first=Nick
|publisher=Workers World
|date=September 16, 1999
|accessdate=2007-07-10
}}</ref> The lawsuit detailed a history of terrorism allegedly supported by the United States. The United States has long denied any involvement in the acts named in the lawsuit.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9906/02/cuba.billions/
|title=Cuba sues U.S. for billions, alleging 'war' damages
|publisher=]
|date=June 2, 1999
|accessdate=2007-07-10
|archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070310002911/http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/americas/9906/02/cuba.billions/ <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 2007-03-10}}</ref>
] operatives including Guillermo Novo Sampol, (left; fourth from camera) wanted in ] for extradition in connection with terrorist acts,<ref name="sanchez">{{cite news
|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57838-2004Sep2.html
|title=Moral Misstep
|last=Sanchez
|first=Marcela
|publisher=]
|date=September 3, 2004
}}</ref> Mexico City 22 January 1963.]]

Cuba also claims U.S. involvement in the paramilitary group ], the CIA undercover operation known as ], and the umbrella group the ]. Cuban ] investigator ] testified in a ] court that the bomb attacks were "part of a campaign of terror designed to scare civilians and foreign tourists, harming Cuba's single largest industry."<ref> Miami Herald</ref>

In 2001, Cuban Ambassador to the UN Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla called for ] to address all forms and manifestations of terrorism in every corner of the world, including&nbsp; — without exception&nbsp; — state terrorism. He alleged to the ] that 3,478 Cubans have died as a result of aggressions and terrorist acts. The Ambassador however did not claim that the U.S. had committed terrorist acts.<ref name="United"> since the ]</ref> He also alleged that the United States had provided safe shelter to "those who funded, planned and carried out terrorist acts with absolute impunity, tolerated by the United States Government."<ref name="United" />

====Operation Mongoose====
{{Further|], ], ], ], ]}}

An objective of the ] administration was the removal of ] from power. To this end it implemented ], a U.S. program of sabotage and other secret operations against the island.<ref>Domínguez, Jorge I. "The @#$%& Missile Crisis (Or, What was 'Cuban' about U.S. Decisions during the Cuban Missile Crisis.Diplomatic History: The Journal of the Society for Historians of Foreign Relations, Vol. 24, No. 2, (Spring 2000): 305-15.)</ref> Mongoose was led by ] in the Defense Department and ] at the ]. Samuel Halpern, a CIA co-organizer, conveyed the breadth of involvement: "CIA and the U. S. Army and military forces and Department of Commerce, and Immigration, Treasury, God knows who else&nbsp; — everybody was in Mongoose. It was a government-wide operation run out of Bobby Kennedy's office with Ed Lansdale as the mastermind."<ref>James G. Blight, and Peter Kornbluh, eds., Politics of Illusion: The Bay of Pigs Invasion Reexamined. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1999, 125)</ref> The scope of Mongoose included sabotage actions against a railway bridge, petroleum storage facilities, a molasses storage container, a petroleum refinery, a power plant, a sawmill, and a floating crane. Harvard Historian Jorge Domínguez stated that "only once in thousand pages of documentation did a U.S. official raise something that resembled a faint moral objection to U.S. government sponsored terrorism." <ref name=autogenerated4>Domínguez, Jorge I. "The @#$%& Missile Crisis (Or, What was 'Cuban' about U.S. Decisions during the Cuban Missile Crisis)." Diplomatic History: The Journal of the Society for Historians of Foreign Relations, Vol. 24, No. 2, (Spring 2000): 305-15.</ref> The CIA operation was based in ] and among other aspects of the operation, enlisted the help of the ] to plot an assassination attempt against ], the Cuban president; for instance, ] was one of the CIA case officers who directly dealt with ].<ref>{{cite news | author = Jack Anderson | title = 6 Attempts to Kill Castro Laid to CIA | publisher = The Washington Post | date = 1971-01-18}}</ref>

Dominguez wrote that Kennedy put a hold on Mongoose actions as the Cuban Missile Crisis escalated, and the "Kennedy administration returned to its policy of sponsoring terrorism against Cuba as the confrontation with the Soviet Union lessened." <ref name=autogenerated4 /> However, Chomsky argued that "terrorist operations continued through the tensest moments of the missile crisis," remarking that "they were formally canceled on October 30, several days after the Kennedy and Khrushchev agreement, but went on nonetheless." Accordingly, "the Executive Committee of the National Security Council recommended various courses of action, "including ‘using selected ]s to sabotage key Cuban installations in such a manner that the action can plausibly be attributed to Cubans in Cuba’ as well as ‘sabotaging Cuban cargo and shipping, and Bloc cargo and shipping to Cuba." <ref name=autogenerated1 /> Peter Kornbluh, senior analyst at the ] at George Washington University, raised the point that according to the documentary record, directly after the first executive committee (]) meeting that was held on the missile crisis, Attorney General Robert Kennedy "convened a meeting of the Operation Mongoose team" expressing disappointment in its results and pledging to take a closer personal attention on the matter. Kornbluh accused RFK of taking "the most irrational position during the most extraordinary crisis in the history of U. S. foreign policy", remarking that "Not to belabor the obvious, but for chrissake, a nuclear crisis is happening and Bobby wants to start blowing things up.".<ref>James G. Blight, and Peter Kornbluh, eds., ''Politics of Illusion: The Bay of Pigs Invasion Reexamined''. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1999, 125</ref>

Historian ] wrote that "scholars have understandably focused on...the Bay of Pigs invasion, the U.S. campaign of terrorism and sabotage known as Operation Mongoose, the assassination plots against ], and, of course, the Cuban missile crisis. Less attention has been given to the state of U.S.-Cuban relations in the aftermath of the missile crisis." In contrast Rabe wrote that reports from the Church Committee reveal that from June 1963 onward the Kennedy administration intensified its war against Cuba while the CIA integrated propaganda, "economic denial", and sabotage to attack the Cuban state as well as specific targets within.<ref name=autogenerated3>Stephen G. Rabe -Presidential Studies Quarterly. Volume: 30. Issue: 4. 2000,714</ref> One example cited is an incident where CIA agents, seeking to assassinate Castro, provided a Cuban official, Rolando Cubela Secades, with a ballpoint pen rigged with a poisonous hypodermic needle.<ref name=autogenerated3 /> At this time the CIA received authorization for thirteen major operations within Cuba; these included attacks on an electric power plant, an oil refinery, and a sugar mill.<ref name=autogenerated3 /> Rabe has written that the "Kennedy administration...showed no interest in Castro's repeated request that the United States cease its campaign of sabotage and terrorism against Cuba. Kennedy did not pursue a dual-track policy toward Cuba....The United States would entertain only proposals of surrender." Rabe further documents how "Exile groups, such as ] and the Second Front of Escambray, staged hit-and-run raids on the island...on ships transporting goods...purchased arms in the United States and launched...attacks from the Bahamas." <ref name=autogenerated3 />

Author ] has emphasized that despite the Kennedy administration's rejection of the "two track strategy," such a strategy did in effect continue for much time afterwards, characterized by the ] being consistently engaged in investigating and prosecuting groups such as ], while the same groups received funds, arms, and support from the ]. Eventually, in 1985, the leader of ], Eduardo Arocena, was successfully prosecuted for murder with the aid of an FBI investigation.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Miami|last=Didion|first=Joan|year=1987|city=London|publisher=Weidenfeld and Nicolson}}</ref> The extent of CIA involvement in these groups has been debated by historians, and Didion relates that some of these groups were more rogue due to a distrust of the CIA. Later terrorist acts by ex-CIA operatives from the Cuba project, such as the ] group's bombing of ] in 1976, were most likely carried out without CIA planning or knowledge as far as the public record shows.

====Allegations of harboring terrorists====
The Cuban revolution resulted in a large Cuban ] community in the U.S., some of whom have conducted long-term insurgency campaigns against Cuba.<ref name = "poptel-Cuba"> Cuba solidarity</ref> and conducted training sessions at a secluded camp near the Florida Everglades. These efforts are charged to have been directly supported initially by the United States government.<ref>Bohning,Don. The Castro Obsession: U.S.Covert Operations Against Cuba 1959-1965, Potomac Books,137-138</ref> The failed military invasion of Cuba during the administration of ] at the ] marked the end of documented U.S. involvement.

The Cuban Government, its supporters and some outside observers have charged that the group ], whose former secretary general Andrés Nazario Sargén acknowledged terrorist attacks on Cuban tourist spots in the 1990s<ref name = "poptel-Cuba"/> and conducted training sessions at a secluded camp near the Florida Everglades,<ref>. The Los Angeles Times.</ref> has, according to Cuba's official newspaper ], been supported by the ], the ] and, more directly, the CIA.


], reviewing Falk's ''Revolutionaries and Functionaries'', stated that Falk's definition of terrorism hinges on some unstated definition of "permissible"; this, says Schorr, makes the judgment of what is terrorism inherently "subjective", and furthermore, he claims, leads Falk to label some acts he considers impermissible as "terrorism", but others he considers permissible as merely "terroristic".<ref>{{Cite news
Marcela Sanchez says that the U.S. has also failed to indict or prosecute the alleged terrorists Guillermo and Ignacio Novo Sampoll, Pedro Remon, and Gaspar Jimenez.<ref name="sanchez" /><ref> by Kirk Nielsen, '']'', December 5, 2002</ref> Claudia Furiati has suggested Sampol was linked to ] and plans to kill President Castro.<ref>{{Cite book
|url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DEFD8133BF932A35756C0A96E948260
| edition = 2nd
|title=The Politics of Violence
| publisher = Ocean Press (AU)
|first= Daniel |last=Schorr
| isbn = 1875284850
|date=1 May 1988
| pages = 164
|newspaper=The New York Times
| last = Furiati
| first = Claudia
| title = ZR Rifle : The Plot to Kill Kennedy and Castro
| date = 1994-10
}}</ref> }}</ref>


In a review of Chomsky and Herman's ''The Political Economy of Human Rights'', Yale political science professor ] holds that the authors' case for accusing the United States of state terrorism is "shockingly overstated". Fishkin writes of Chomsky and Herman:
] a former ] operative, Posada has been convicted ] of involvement in various ] attacks and plots in the Western hemisphere, including involvement in the 1976 bombing of a ] that killed seventy-three people<ref>{{cite news|title=Link found to bombing| first= Andrew O.| last= Selsky| publisher= Associated Press| date= May 4, 2007| accessdate=2007-05-09}}</ref><ref>Castro: U.S. to free 'monster' Posada, '']'', Wed, April 11, 2007.</ref> and has admitted to his involvement in other terrorist plots including a string of bombings in 1997 targeting fashionable Cuban hotels and nightspots.<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref name="LA Times"></ref> In addition, he was jailed under accusations related to an assassination attempt on Fidel Castro in ] in 2000, although he was later pardoned by Panamanian President ] in the final days of her term.<ref> Guardian online.</ref><ref></ref>


<blockquote>They infer an extent of American control and coordination comparable to ]. ... Yet even if all evidence were accepted ... it would add up to no more than systematic support, not control. Hence the comparison to Eastern Europe appears grossly overstated. And from the fact that we give assistance to countries that practice terror it is too much to conclude that "Washington has become the torture and political murder capital of the world." Chomsky's and Herman's indictment of US foreign policy is thus the mirror image of the '']'' rhetoric they criticize: it rests on the illusion of American omnipotence throughout the world. And because they refuse to attribute any substantial independence to countries that are, in some sense, within America's sphere of influence, the entire burden for all the political crimes of the non-communist world can be brought home to Washington.<ref name=Fishkin>{{cite magazine
In 2005, Posada was held by ] in ] on the charge of illegal presence on national territory before the charges were dismissed on May 8, 2007. His release on bail on April 19, 2007 had elicited angry reactions from the Cuban and Venezuelan governments.<ref>, '']'', September 22, 2006</ref> The ] had urged the court to keep him in jail because he was "an admitted mastermind of terrorist plots and attacks", a flight risk and a danger to the community.<ref name="LA Times"/>
|last=Fishkin|first=James S.
|title=American Dream/Global Nightmare: The Dilemma of U.S. Human Rights Policy by Sandy Vogelgesang (W. W. Norton)<br/> The Political Economy of Human Rights Volume I: The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism <br/>Volume II: After the Cataclysm: Postwar Indochina and the Reconstruction of Imperial Ideology by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman (South End Press)
|magazine=]
|date=September 6{{ndash}}13, 1980
|volume=183| issue=10/11
|pages=37–38
}}</ref></blockquote>


Fishkin praises Chomsky and Herman for documenting human rights violations, but argues that this is evidence "for a far lesser moral charge", namely, that the United States could have used its influence to prevent certain governments from committing acts of torture or murder but chose not to do so.<ref name=Fishkin/>
On September 28, 2005 a U.S. immigration judge ruled that Posada cannot be deported, finding that he faces the threat of torture in Venezuela.<ref name="No deportation for Cuban militant"> (])</ref>


Commenting on Chomsky's ''9-11'', former US Secretary of Education ] said: "Chomsky says in the book that the United States is a leading terrorist state. That's a preposterous and ridiculous claim. ... What we have done is ], helped in ] and the ]. We have provided sanctuary for people of all faiths, including Islam, in the United States. We tried to help in ]. ... Do we have faults and imperfections? Of course. The notion that we're a leading terrorist state is preposterous."<ref>
Posada Carrilles is currently standing trial in El Paso, Texas, for lying to immigration authorities. The trial has been criticized internationally for not being a murder trial. However, the Obama administration's Department of Justice did add several counts to the perjury charge, relating to Posada's history of terrorism. In specific, he is accused of lying to immigration authorities about his admitted role in the 1997 tourism bombings in Cuba.
{{cite news
|title=American Morning with Paula Zahn
|url=http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0205/09/ltm.10.html
|newspaper=CNN
|date=May 9, 2002
|access-date=7 July 2011
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121026045701/http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0205/09/ltm.10.html
|archive-date=2012-10-26
|url-status=live
}}
</ref>


Stephen Morris also criticized Chomsky's thesis:
===Nicaragua (1979–90)===
{{See also|Iran-Contra affair}}
{{Further|]}}


<blockquote>There is only one regime which has received arms and aid from the United States, and which has a record of brutality that is even a noticeable fraction of the brutality of ], ], ], or the ]. That is the ] government in ]. But ... the United States was not the principal foreign supplier of Indonesia when the generals seized power (nor is there any credible evidence of American involvement in the coup). Within the period of American assistance to Indonesia, and in particular during the period of the ], the number of political prisoners has ''declined''. Finally, the current brutality of the Suharto regime is being directed against the people of ], a former colony of Portugal that Indonesia is attempting to take over by force ... not as part of its normal process of domestic rule.<ref>Morris, Stephen, Chomsky on U.S. foreign policy, ''Harvard International Review,'' December–January 1981, pg. 26.</ref></blockquote>
Following the rise to power of the left-wing ] government in ], the ] administration ordered the CIA to organize and train the ], a right wing guerrilla group. On December 1, 1981, President Reagan signed an initial, one-paragraph "Finding" authorizing the CIA's paramilitary war against Nicaragua.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB210/index.htm|title=The Iran-Contra Affair 20 Years On: Documents Spotlight Role of Reagan, Top Aides|date=2006-11-24|publisher=The National Security Archive}}</ref>


In 2017, declassified documents from the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta have confirmed that the United States government, from the very beginning, was ] in the campaign of mass killings which followed Suharto's seizure of power.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indonesiaatmelbourne.unimelb.edu.au/telegrams-confirm-scale-of-us-complicity-in-1965-genocide/|title=Telegrams confirm scale of US complicity in 1965 genocide|last= Melvin|first=Jess|date=20 October 2017|website=Indonesia at Melbourne|publisher=]|access-date=July 27, 2018|quote="The new telegrams confirm the US actively encouraged and facilitated genocide in Indonesia to pursue its own political interests in the region, while propagating an explanation of the killings it knew to be untrue."}}</ref><ref>
] professor, Frederick H. Gareau, has written that the Contras "attacked bridges, electric generators, but also state-owned agricultural cooperatives, rural health clinics, villages and non-combatants." U.S. agents were directly involved in the fighting. "CIA commandos launched a series of sabotage raids on Nicaraguan port facilities. They mined the country's major ports and set fire to its largest oil storage facilities." In 1984 the U.S. Congress ordered this intervention to be stopped, however it was later shown that the CIA illegally continued (See ]). Professor Gareau has characterized these acts as "wholesale terrorism" by the United States.<ref name="Gareau">
{{cite news|last=Scott|first=Margaret|date=October 26, 2017|title=Uncovering Indonesia's Act of Killing|url=https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/10/20/uncovering-indonesias-act-of-killing/|work=]|access-date=July 27, 2018|quote=According to Simpson, these previously unseen cables, telegrams, letters, and reports "contain damning details that the U.S. was willfully and gleefully pushing for the mass murder of innocent people."|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180625161434/https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2017/10/20/uncovering-indonesias-act-of-killing/|archive-date=2018-06-25|url-status=live}}
{{Cite book|last=Gareau |first=Frederick H. |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=State Terrorism and the United States |year=2004 |publisher=Zed Books |location=London |id=ISBN 1-84277-535-9 |pages=16 & 166}}</ref>
</ref><ref>
{{cite news|last=Head|first=Mike|author-link=Mike Head|date=25 October 2017|title=Documents show US participation in 1965-66 massacres in Indonesia|url=http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/10/25/indo-o25.html|work=]|access-date=July 27, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180727181153/https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/10/25/indo-o25.html|archive-date=2018-07-27|url-status=live}}
</ref> Without the support of the U.S. and its Western allies, the massacres would not have happened.<ref>
{{cite book|last=Robinson|first=Geoffrey B.|date=2018|title=The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965-66|url=https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11135.html|publisher=]|pages=22–23, 177|isbn=9781400888863|access-date=2018-07-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180820162717/https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11135.html|archive-date=2018-08-20|url-status=live}}
</ref> In 2016, an international tribunal in ] ruled that the killings constitute ] and it also ruled that the United States and other Western governments were complicit in the crimes.<ref>
{{cite news|last=Perry|first=Juliet|date=21 July 2016|title=Tribunal finds Indonesia guilty of 1965 genocide; US, UK complicit|url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/21/asia/indonesia-genocide-panel/index.html|work=CNN|access-date=July 27, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180613234256/https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/21/asia/indonesia-genocide-panel/index.html|archive-date=2018-06-13|url-status=live}}
</ref><ref>
{{cite news|last=Yosephine|first=Liza|date=21 July 2016|title=US, UK, Australia complicit in Indonesia's 1965 mass killings: People's Tribunal|url=http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/07/21/us-uk-australia-complicit-in-indonesias-1965-mass-killings-peoples-tribunal.html|work=]|access-date=July 27, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180727151655/http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/07/21/us-uk-australia-complicit-in-indonesias-1965-mass-killings-peoples-tribunal.html|archive-date=2018-07-27|url-status=live}}
</ref> Indian historian ] says that the complicity of the United States and its Western allies in the massacres "is beyond doubt," as they "provided the Indonesian armed forces with lists of Communists who were to be assassinated" and "egged on the Army to conduct these massacres." He adds they covered up this "absolute atrocity" and that the US in particular refuses to fully declassify its records for this period.<ref>{{cite book |last=Prashad |first=Vijay |author-link=Vijay Prashad |date=2020 |title=Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations |publisher=]|page=85 |isbn=978-1583679067 }}</ref> According to ], the Indonesian mass killings were not an aberration, but the apex of a loose network of US-backed ] campaigns in the ] during the Cold War.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bevins |first1=Vincent|authorlink=Vincent Bevins |title= ]|date=2020 |publisher= ]|pages=238–243 |isbn= 978-1541742406}}</ref> According to historian Brad Simpson:


<blockquote>Washington did everything in its power to encourage and facilitate the army-led massacre of alleged PKI members, and U.S. officials worried only that the killing of the party's unarmed supporters might not go far enough, permitting Sukarno to return to power and frustrate the Administration's emerging plans for a post-Sukarno Indonesia. This was efficacious terror, an essential building block of the ] policies that the West would attempt to impose on Indonesia after Sukarno's ouster.<ref>
Colombian writer and former diplomat Clara Nieto, in her book "Masters of War", charged the Reagan administration was "the paradigm of a terrorist state", remarking that this was "ironically, the very thing Reagan claimed to be fighting." Nieto charged direct CIA involvement, claiming that "the CIA launched a series of terrorist actions from the "mother ship" off Nicaragua's coast. In September 1983, she charged the agency attacked Puerto Sandino with rockets. The following month, frogmen blew up the underwater oil pipeline in the same port- the only one in the country. In October there was an attack on Pierto Corinto, Nicaragua's largest port, with mortars, rockets and grenades, blowing up five large oil and gasoline storage tanks. More than a hundred people were wounded, and the fierce fire, which could not be brought under control for two days, forced the evacuation of 23,000 people." <ref>Nieto, Clara. ''Masters of War: Latin America and United States Aggression from the Cuban Revolution Through the Clinton Years'', Seven Stories Press, 2003, 343-345</ref>
{{cite book|last=Simpson|first=Bradley|date=2010|title=Economists with Guns: Authoritarian Development and U.S.–Indonesian Relations, 1960–1968|url=https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=7853|publisher=]|page=193|isbn=978-0804771825|access-date=2018-07-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180625213245/https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=7853|archive-date=2018-06-25|url-status=live}}

</ref></blockquote>
Historian Greg Grandin described a disjuncture between official U.S. ideals and support for terrorism. "Nicaragua, where the United States backed not a counter insurgent state but anti-communist mercenaries, likewise represented a disjuncture between the idealism used to justify U.S. policy and its support for political terrorism... The corollary to the idealism embraced by the Republicans in the realm of diplomatic public policy debate was thus political terror. In the dirtiest of Latin America's dirty wars, their faith in America's mission justified atrocities in the name of liberty." <ref>Grandin, Greg. Empire's Workshop: Latin America, The United States and the Rise of the New Imperialism, Henry Holt & Company 2007, 89</ref> In his analysis, Grandin charged that the behavior of the U.S. backed-contras was particularly inhumane and vicious: "In Nicaragua, the U.S.-backed Contras decapitated, castrated, and otherwise mutilated civilians and foreign aid workers. Some earned a reputation for using spoons to gorge their victims eye's out. In one raid, Contras cut the breasts of a civilian defender to pieces and ripped the flesh off the bones of another." <ref>Grandin, Greg. ''Empire's Workshop: Latin America, The United States and the Rise of the New Imperialism'', Henry Holt & Company 2007, 90</ref>

====Nicaragua vs. United States====
{{Main|Nicaragua vs. United States}}
''The Republic of Nicaragua vs. The United States of America''<ref name="name">Official name: ''Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 1984 ICJ REP. 392'' June 27, 1986.</ref> was a case heard in 1986 by the ] which ruled in Nicaragua's favor, and found that the United States had violated ]. The court ruled that the U.S. was "in breach of its obligation under customary international law not to use force against another state" by direct acts of U.S. personnel and by the supporting ] guerrillas in their war against the ]n government and by mining Nicaragua's harbors. The ICJ ordered the U.S. to pay reparations. The U.S. was not imputable for possible human rights violations done by the Contras. The case led to considerable debate concerning the issue of the extent to which state support of terrorists implicates the state itself.<ref name=battle>{{Cite book|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=w6c5HoRUMekC&pg=PA156&dq=us+terrorism+nicaragua+support&hl=en&ei=-zLOS4nvGI2KNMb-kSI&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=us%20terrorism%20nicaragua%20support&f=false|title=Battling terrorism: legal perspectives on the use of force and the war on terror|author=Jackson Nyamuya Maogoto|year=2005|publisher=]|pages=156, 157|ISBN=9780754644071}}</ref> A consensus among scholars of ] had not been reached by the mid-2000s.<ref name=battle/> The Court found that this was a conflict involving military and para-military forces and did not make a finding of state terrorism{{Citation needed|date=March 2011}}.

U.S. foreign policy critic ] argued that the U.S. was legally found guilty of international terrorism based on this verdict.<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://dir.salon.com/story/people/feature/2002/01/16/chomsky/index_np.html?pn=2
|title=Noam Chomsky
|last=Hansen
|first=Suzy
|publisher=]
|date=January 16, 2002
|accessdate=2007-07-10
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.zmag.org/content/ForeignPolicy/chomskyglobeterr.cfm
|title=Who Are the Global Terrorists?
|last=Chomsky
|first=Noam
|authorlink=Noam Chomsky
|publisher=]
|date=May 19, 2002
|accessdate=2007-07-10}}</ref>

{{quote|The World Court considered their case, accepted it, and presented a long judgment, several hundred pages of careful legal and factual analysis that condemned the United States for what it called "unlawful use of force"&nbsp; — which is the judicial way of saying "international terrorism"&nbsp; — ordered the United States to terminate the crime and to pay substantial reparations, many billions of dollars, to the victim.|Noam Chomsky|interview on Pakistan Television<ref name = "chom">{{Cite web
| title =On the War in Afghanistan Noam Chomsky interviewed by Pervez Hoodbhoy
| work =chomsky.info
| url =http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20011127.htm
| accessdate=2006-07-30
}}</ref>}}

The essence of this view of U.S. actions in Nicaruaga was supported by ]: "hen a government provides weapons, technical advice, transportation, aid and encouragement to terrorists on a substantial scale it is not unreasonable to conclude that the armed attack is imputable to that government."<ref name=battle/>

===Guatemala (1954–96)===
{{Further|], ], ], ], ] }}

Professor of History, Stephen G. Rabe, wrote "in destroying the popularly elected government of ] (1950-1954), the United States initiated a nearly four-decade-long cycle of terror and repression" <ref>{{Cite book|title=Managing the Counterrevolution: The United States and Guatemala, 1954-1961 (review) |publisher=The Americas |page=Volume 59, Number 4 |month=April | year=2003 |pages=601–603 |author=Stephen G. Rabe}}</ref>

After the U.S.-backed coup, which toppled president ], lead coup plotter ] assumed power. Author and university professor, Patrice McSherry argued that with Armas at the head of government, "the United States began to militarize Guatemala almost immediately, financing and reorganizing the police and military."<ref name=" EvolutionofNationalSecurityState ">J. Patrice McSherry. "The Evolution of the National Security State: The Case of Guatemala." ''Socialism and Democracy''. Spring/Summer 1990, 133.</ref>

In his book "State Terror and Popular Resistance in Guatemala", Michael McClintock<ref>{{Cite web| title = About Michael McClintock | publisher = Human Rights First | url = http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/about_us/staff/mcclintock_m.htm | accessdate = 2007-07-03}}</ref> argued that the national security apparatus Armas presided over was "almost entirely oriented toward countering subversion," and that the key component of that apparatus was "an intelligence system set up by the United States."<ref name="AmericanConnection">Michael McClintock. ''The American Connection Volume 2: State Terror and Popular Resistance in Guatemala''. London: Zed Books Ltd., 1985, pp. 2, 32.</ref> At the core of this intelligence system were records of communist party members, pro-Arbenz organizations, teacher associations, and peasant unions which were used to create a detailed "Black List" with names and information about some 70,000 individuals that were viewed as potential subversives. It was "CIA counter-intelligence officers who sorted the records and determined how they could be put to use."<ref>McClintock 32-33.</ref> McClintock argues that this list persisted as an index of subversives for several decades and probably served as a database of possible targets for the counter-insurgency campaign that began in the early 1960s.<ref>McClintock 33.</ref> McClintock wrote:

{{quote|United States counter-insurgency doctrine encouraged the Guatemalan military to adopt both new organizational forms and new techniques in order to root out insurgency more effectively. New techniques would revolve around a central precept of the new counter-insurgency: that counter insurgent war must be waged free of restriction by laws, by the rules of war, or moral considerations: guerrilla "terror" could be defeated only by the untrammeled use of "counter-terror", the terrorism of the state.|Michael McClintock<ref>McClintock 54.</ref>}}

McClintock wrote that this idea was also articulated by Colonel John Webber, the chief of the U.S. Military Mission in Guatemala, who instigated the technique of "counter-terror." Colonel Webber defended his policy by saying, "That's the way this country is. The Communists are using everything they have, including terror. And it must be met."<ref>McClintock 61.</ref>

Utilizing declassified government documents, researchers Kate Doyle and Carlos Osorio from the research institute the ] documented that Guatemalan Colonel Byron Lima Estrada took military police and counterintelligence courses at the ]. He later served in several elite counterinsurgency units trained and equipped by the U.S. Military Assistance Program (MAP). He eventually rose to command ], the Guatemalan Military Intelligence services who were responsible for many of the terror tactics wielded throughout the 1980s.<ref name="NSAArchive-Guatemala03">
{{Cite web|url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB25/index.htm|title=Colonel Byron Disrael Lima Estrada |publisher=George Washington University NSA Archive (Republished)}}</ref>

===School of the Americas===
{{Main|Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation}}
Professor Gareau argued that the School of the Americas at Fort Benning (reorganized in 2001 as Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation), a U.S. training institution mainly for Latin American state security officials, is a terrorist training ground. He cited a UN report which states the school has "graduated 500 of the worst human rights abusers in the hemisphere." Gareau alleges that by funding, training and supervising Guatemalan 'Death Squads' Washington was complicit in state terrorism.<ref name="Gareaupp22">
{{Cite book|last=Gareau |first=Frederick H. |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=State Terrorism and the United States |year=2004 |publisher=Zed Books |location=London |id=ISBN 1-84277-535-9 |pages=22–25 and pp61-63}}</ref>

Defenders of the school argued that the alleged connection to human rights abusers is often weak. For example, ]'s sole link to the SOA is that he had taken a course in Radio Operations long before El Salvador's civil war began.<ref>{{Cite web|author=Paul Mulshine|title=The War in Central America Continues|url=http://216.247.220.66/archives/politics/watchwar.htm |accessdate=6 November 2007 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20021219221936/http://216.247.220.66/archives/politics/watchwar.htm |archivedate = 19 December 2002}}</ref> They also argued that no school should be held accountable for the actions of only some of its many graduates. Before coming to the current WHINSEC each student is now "vetted" by his/her nation and the U.S. embassy in that country. All students are now required to receive "human rights training in law, ethics, rule of law and practical applications in military and police operations."<ref>""</ref><ref>{{Cite web| author = Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation | title = FAQ | url = https://www.benning.army.mil/WHINSEC/about.asp?id=37 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web| author = Center for International Policy | title = Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation | url = http://www.ciponline.org/facts/soa.htm | accessdate = May 6, 2006 }}</ref>

===Chile===
Michael Stohl and George A. Lopez have accused the United States of supporting and committing State Terrorism in the period 1970-1973, during the overthrow of the socialist elected Chilean government of ]. Stohl wrote, "In addition to nonterroristic strategies...the United States embarked on a program to create economic and political chaos in Chile...After the failure to prevent Allende from taking office, efforts shifted to obtaining his removal." Money authorized for the CIA to destabilize Chilean society, included, "financing and assisting opposition groups and right-wing terrorist paramilitary groups such as ] ("Fatherland and Liberty")." ] was the codename for the secret ] operations to undermine ]'s government and promote a ]. In September 1973 the Allende government was overthrown in a violent military coup in which the United States is claimed to have been "intimately involved." <ref>"The State as Terrorist: The Dynamics of Governmental Violence and Repression" by Prof. Michael Stohl, and Prof. George A. Lopez; Greenwood Press, 1984. Page 51</ref>

Professor Gareau, wrote on the subject: "Washington's training of thousands of military personnel from Chile who later committed state terrorism again makes Washington eligible for the charge of accessory before the fact to state terrorism. The CIA's close relationship during the height of the terror to ], Chile's chief terrorist (with the possible exception of ] himself), lays Washington open to the charge of accessory during the fact." Gareau argued that the fuller extent involved the U.S. taking charge of coordinating counterinsurgency efforts between all Latin American countries. He wrote, "Washington's service as the overall coordinator of state terrorism in Latin America demonstrates the enthusiasm with which Washington played its role as an accomplice to state terrorism in the region. It was not a reluctant player. Rather it not only trained Latin American governments in terrorism and financed the means to commit terrorism; it also encouraged them to apply the lessons learned to put down what it called "the communist threat." Its enthusiasm extended to coordinating efforts to apprehend those wanted by terrorist states who had fled to other countries in the region....The evidence available leads to the conclusion that Washington's influence over the decision to commit these acts was considerable."<ref>State Terrorism and the United States: From Counterinsurgency to the War on Terrorism by Frederick H. Gareau, Page78-79.</ref> "Given that they knew about the terrorism of this regime, what did the elites in Washington during the ] and Ford administrations do about it? The elites in Washington reacted by increasing U.S. military assistance and sales to the state terrorists, by covering up their terrorism, by urging U.S. diplomats to do so also, and by assuring the terrorists of their support, thereby becoming accessories to state terrorism before, during, and after the fact." <ref name=autogenerated2>State Terrorism and the United States: From Counterinsurgency to the War on Terrorism by Frederick H. Gareau, Page 87.</ref>

Thomas Wright charged that Chile was an example of State Terrorism of a very open kind that did not attempt a facade of civilian governance, and that had a "September 11th effect" through the hemisphere. Wright, argued that "unlike their Brazilian counterparts, they did not embrace state terrorism as a last recourse; they launched a wave of terrorism on the day of the coup. In contrast to the Brazilians and Uruguayans, the Chileans were very public about their objectives and their methods; there was nothing subtle about rounding up thousands of prisoners, the extensive use of torture, executions following sham court-marshal, and shootings in cold blood. After the initial wave of open terrorism, the Chilean armed forces constructed a sophisticated apparatus for the secret application of state terrorism that lasted until the dictatorship's end...The impact of the Chilean coup reached far beyond the country's borders. Through their aid in the overthrow of Allende and their support of the Pinochet dictatorship, President Richard Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, sent a clear signal to all of Latin America that anti-revolutionary regimes employing repression, even state terrorism, could count on the support of the United States. The U.S. government in effect, gave a green light to Latin America's right wing and its armed forces to eradicate the left and use repression to erase the advances that workers&nbsp; — and in some countries, campesinos&nbsp; — had made through decades of struggle. This "September 11 effect" was soon felt around the hemisphere." <ref>Wright, Thomas C. State Terrorism and Latin America: Chile, Argentina, and International Human Rights, Rowman & Littlefield, page 29</ref>

Prof. Gareau concluded, "The message for the populations of Latin American nations and particularly the Left opposition was clear: the United States would not permit the continuation of a Socialist government, even if it came to power in a democratic election and continued to uphold the basic democratic structure of that society."<ref name=autogenerated2 />

===Philippines===
In "The Terrorist Foundations of US Foreign Policy", Professor of International Law ] argues that during the ], when the U.S. was "confronted by a nationalistic resistance movement in the Philippines," American forces were responsible for state terrorism. Falk relates that "as with the wars against native American peoples, the adversary was demonized (and victimized). In the struggle, U.S. forces, with their wide margin of military superiority, inflicted disproportionate casualties, almost always a sign of terrorist tactics, and usually associated with refusal or inability to limit political violence to a discernible military opponent. The dispossession of a people from their land almost always is a product of terrorist forms of belligerency. In contrast, interventions in Central and South America in the area of so-called "Gunboat Diplomacy" were generally not terrorist in character, as little violence was required to influence political struggle for ascendancy between competing factions of an indigenous elite." <ref>Falk, Richard. Terrorist Foundations of US Foreign Policy, in Western State Terrorism, Alexander George, ed.,Polity Press,110</ref>

In "Instruments of Statecraft" , human rights researcher Michael McClintock described the intensification of the U.S. role during the ]balahap rebellion in 1950, when concerns about a perceived communist-led Huk insurgency prompted sharp increases in military aid and a reorganization of tactics towards methods of guerrilla warfare. McClintock describes the role of U.S. "advisers" to the Philippine Minister of National Defense, ], remarking that they "adroitly managed Magsaysay's every move." Air Force Lt. Col. ] was a psywar propaganda specialist who became the close personal adviser and confidant of Magsaysay. The forte of another key adviser, Charles Bohannan, was guerrilla warfare. McClintock cites several examples to demonstrate that "terror played an important part" in the psychological operations under U.S. guidance. Those psywar operations that utilized terror included theatrical displays involving the exemplary display of dead Huk bodies in an effort to incite fear in rural villagers. In another psywar operation described by Lansdale, Philippine troops engaged in nocturnal captures of individual Huks. They punctured the necks of the victims and drained the corpses of blood, leaving the bodies to be discovered when daylight came, so as to play upon fears associated with the local folklore of the Asuang, or vampire.<ref></ref>

For McClintock, this Philippines episode is particularly important because of its formative influence on U.S. counterinsurgency doctrine. In his essay, American Doctrine and State Terror, McClintock explained that U.S. Army instruction manuals of the 1960s concerning 'counterterrorism' often referred to "the particular experiences of the Philippines and Vietnam." Noting that tactics similar to those used during the Huk Rebellion (from 1946–54) in the Philippines were cited in the manuals, he elaborated that the "Department of the Army's 1976 psywar publication, DA Pamphlet 525-7-1, refers to some of the classic counterterror techniques and account of the practical application of terror. These include the capture and murder of suspected guerillas in a manner suggesting the deed was done by legendary vampires (the 'asuang'); and a prototypical "Eye of God" technique in which a stylized eye would be painted opposite the house of a suspect."<ref>McClintock, Michael. ''American Doctrine and State Terror in Western State Terrorism''. Alexander George, ed., Polity Press, 134</ref>


==See also== ==See also==
*]
{{Wikiquote|State terrorism and the United States}}
*]
* ]
* ] *]
* ] *]
*]
* ]
* ] *]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]


==References== ==Notes==
{{Reflist|colwidth=35em}} {{Reflist|colwidth=35em}}

==References==
*{{cite book |last1=Bevins |first1=Vincent|authorlink=Vincent Bevins |title= ]|date=2020 |publisher= ] |isbn= 978-1541742406}}
* Blakeley, Ruth (2009). ''.'' ]. {{ISBN|0415686172}}
* Donahue, Laura K. "Terrorism and counter-terrorist discourse". In Hor, Michael Yew Meng, Ramraj, Victor Vridar and Roach, Kent (Eds.), ''Global anti-terrorism law and policy''. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2005 {{ISBN|0-521-85125-4}}
*{{cite book|editor1=Esparza, Marcia |editor2=Henry R. Huttenbach|editor3=Daniel Feierstein|title=State Violence and Genocide in Latin America: The Cold War Years (Critical Terrorism Studies)|publisher=]|year=2011|isbn=978-0415664578|url=https://www.routledge.com/State-Violence-and-Genocide-in-Latin-America-The-Cold-War-Years/Esparza-Huttenbach-Feierstein/p/book/9780415496377}}
*{{cite book |last=Prashad |first=Vijay |author-link=Vijay Prashad |date=2020 |title=Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations |publisher=] |isbn=978-1583679067 }}
* {{Cite book|editor-last=Sluka|editor-first=Jeffrey A.|title=Death Squad: The Anthropology of State Terror|publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press|year=1999|isbn=978-0-8122-1711-7|url=https://archive.org/details/deathsquadanthro00sluk}}
* Taylor, Antony James William. ''Justice as a basic human need''. Nova Science Publishers, 2006. {{ISBN|1-59454-915-X}}
* {{Cite book|last=Wright|first=Thomas C.|title=State Terrorism in Latin America: Chile, Argentina, and International Human Rights|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|date=February 28, 2007|isbn=978-0-7425-3721-7}}


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
* {{Cite book |last=Alexander |first=George |title=Western State Terrorism |publisher=Polity Press |month=December | year=1991 |pages=276 |isbn=9780745609317}} * {{Cite book |last=Alexander |first=George |title=Western State Terrorism |publisher=Polity Press |date=December 1991 |page=276 |isbn=978-0-7456-0931-7}}
* {{Cite book|last=Blum|first=William|title=Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II|publisher=Common Courage Press|year=1995|pages=457|isbn=1-56751-052-3}} * {{Cite book|last=Blum|first=William|title=Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II|publisher=Common Courage Press|year=1995|page=|isbn=978-1-56751-052-2|url=https://archive.org/details/killinghopeusmil00blum_0/page/457}}
* Campbell, Bruce B., and Brenner,Arthur D.,eds. 2000. ''Death Squads in Global Perspective: Murder with Deniability''. New York: St. Martin's Press * Campbell, Bruce B., and Brenner, Arthur D., eds. 2000. ''Death Squads in Global Perspective: Murder with Deniability''. New York: St. Martin's Press
* {{Cite book|last=Chomsky|first=Noam|title=The Culture of Terrorism|publisher=South End Press|month=January | year=1988|pages=269|isbn=9780896083349}} * {{Cite book|last=Chomsky|first=Noam|title=The Culture of Terrorism|publisher=South End Press|date=January 1988|page=|isbn=978-0-89608-334-9|url=https://archive.org/details/cultureofterrori00chom/page/269}}
* {{Cite book|last=Churchill|first=Ward|title=On The Justice of Roosting Chickens|publisher=AK Press|year=2003|pages=309|isbn=1902593790}} * {{Cite book|last=Churchill|first=Ward|title=On The Justice of Roosting Chickens|publisher=AK Press|year=2003|page=|isbn=978-1-902593-79-1|url=https://archive.org/details/onjusticeofroost00chur/page/309}}
* {{Cite book|editor1=Jackson, Richard |editor2=Smyth, Marie |editor3=Gunning, Jeroen|title=Critical terrorism studies: a new research agenda|publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-415-45507-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tMXaeS3azK8C}}
* Menjívar, Cecilia and Rodríguez,Néstor, editors, ''When States Kill:Latin America, the U.S., and Technologies of Terror'', University of Texas Press 2005,isbn=978-0-292-70647-7
* Menjívar, Cecilia and Rodríguez, Néstor, editors, ''When States Kill: Latin America, the U.S., and Technologies of Terror'', University of Texas Press 2005,{{ISBN|978-0-292-70647-7}}
* {{Cite book|last=Perdue|first=William D.|title=Terrorism and the State: A Critique of Domination Through Fear|publisher=Praeger Press|city=New York|pages=240|date=August 7, 1989|isbn=9780275931407}}
* {{Cite book|last=Perdue|first=William D.|title=Terrorism and the State: A Critique of Domination Through Fear|publisher=Praeger Press|location=New York|page=240|date=August 7, 1989|isbn=978-0-275-93140-7}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Pilger_John/Bush_Terror_Elite.html|title=Bush Terror Elite Wanted 9/11 to Happen|last=Pilger|first=John
* {{Cite book|editor-last=Selden|editor-first=Mark|title=War and State Terrorism: The United States, Japan, and the Asia-Pacific in the Long Twentieth Century|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|date=November 28, 2003|isbn=978-0-7425-2391-3}}
|publisher=Third World Traveler|date=December 12, 2002|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite book|last=Selden,|first=Mark, editor|title=War and State Terrorism: The United States, Japan, and the Asia-Pacific in the Long Twentieth Century|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|date=November 28, 2003|isbn=978-0742523913}}
* {{Cite book|last=Sluka,|first=Jeffrey A., editor|title=Death Squad: The Anthropology of State Terror|publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press|year=1999|isbn=978-0-8122-1711-7}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/august97/terror04.html|title=Understanding Terrorism|publisher=]|date=August 15, 1997|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite web|url=http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/nov2001/reic-n24.shtml|title=Bush nominee linked to Latin American terrorism|last=Vann|first=Bill|publisher=World Socialist Web Site|date=November 21, 2001|accessdate=2007-07-09}}
* {{Cite book|last=Wright,|first=Thomas C.|title=State Terrorism in Latin America: Chile, Argentina, and International Human Rights|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|date=February 28, 2007|isbn=978-0742537217}}
{{Refend}}


{{Terrorism topics}}
==External links==
* 1801-2004 timeline of 163 U.S. interventions. ].
*
* a review of ''War Without Fronts: The USA in Vietnam'' by Bernd Greiner


{{DEFAULTSORT:United States And State Terrorism}} {{DEFAULTSORT:United States And State Terrorism}}
] ]
] ]
]

]
]
]

Latest revision as of 21:31, 24 November 2024

Terrorism allegations against the U.S. This article is about allegations of US state terrorism. For terrorism sponsored by the United States, see United States and state-sponsored terrorism.

Protester with a sign reading "The U.S. is the #1 Terrorist State" at a demonstration against the Iraq War in 2003.
Part of a series on
Terrorism and political violence
By ideology
Religious
Special-interest / Single-issue
Related topics
Organizational structures
  • Methods
  • Tactics
Terrorist groups
Relationship to states
State terrorism
State-sponsored terrorism
Response to terrorism

Several scholars have accused the United States of involvement in state terrorism. They have written about the US and other liberal democracies' use of state terrorism, particularly in relation to the Cold War. According to them, state terrorism is used to protect the interest of capitalist elites, and the U.S. organized a neo-colonial system of client states, co-operating with regional elites to rule through terror.

Such works include Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman's The Political Economy of Human Rights (1979), Herman's The Real Terror Network (1985), Alexander L. George's Western State Terrorism (1991), Frederick Gareau's State Terrorism and the United States (2004), and Doug Stokes' America's Other War (2005). Of these, Ruth J. Blakeley considers Chomsky and Herman as being the foremost writers on the United States and state terrorism.

This work has proved controversial with mainstream scholars of terrorism, who concentrate on non-state terrorism and the state terrorism of dictatorships.

Notable works

Beginning in the late 1970s, Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman wrote a series of books on the United States' involvement with state terrorism. Their writings coincided with reports by Amnesty International and other human rights organizations of a new global "epidemic" of state torture and murder. Chomsky and Herman argued that terror was concentrated in the U.S. sphere of influence in developing countries, and documented human rights abuses carried out by U.S. client states in Latin America. They argued that of ten Latin American countries that had death squads, all were US client states. Worldwide they claimed that 74% of regimes that used torture on an administrative basis were U.S. client states, receiving military and other support from the U.S. to retain power. They concluded that the global rise in state terror was a result of U.S. foreign policy.

Chomsky concluded that all powers backed state terrorism in client states. At the top were the U.S. and other powers, notably the United Kingdom and France, that provided financial, military, and diplomatic support to Third World regimes kept in power through violence. These governments acted together with multinational corporations, particularly in the arms and security industries. In addition, other developing countries outside the Western sphere of influence carried out state terror supported by rival powers.

The alleged involvement of major powers in state terrorism in developing countries has led scholars to study it as a global phenomenon rather than study individual countries in isolation.

In 1991, a book edited by Alexander L. George also argued that other Western powers sponsored terror in developing countries. It concluded that the U.S. and its allies were the main supporters of terrorism throughout the world. Gareau states that the number of deaths caused by non-state terrorism (3,668 deaths between 1968 and 1980, as estimated by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)) is "dwarfed" by those resulting from state terrorism in US-backed regimes such as Guatemala (150,000 killed, 50,000 missing during the Guatemalan Civil War – 93% of whom Gareau classifies as "victims of state terrorism").

Among other scholars, Ruth J. Blakeley says that the United States and its allies sponsored and deployed state terrorism on an "enormous scale" during the Cold War. The justification given for this was to contain Communism, but Blakeley contends it was also a means by which to buttress the interests of U.S. business elites and to promote the expansion of neoliberalism throughout the Global South. Mark Aarons posits that right-wing authoritarian regimes and dictatorships backed by Western powers committed atrocities and mass killings that rival the Communist world, citing examples such as the Indonesian occupation of East Timor, the Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66, the "disappearances" in Guatemala during the civil war, and the assassinations and state terrorism associated with Operation Condor throughout South America. In Worse Than War, Daniel Goldhagen argues that during the last two decades of the Cold War, the number of American client states practicing mass murder outnumbered those of the Soviet Union. According to Latin Americanist John Henry Coatsworth, the number of repression victims in Latin America alone far surpassed that of the U.S.S.R. and its East European satellites between 1960 and 1990. J. Patrice McSherry asserts that "hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans were tortured, abducted or killed by right-wing military regimes as part of the US-led anti-communist crusade."

Definition

See also: State terrorism and Definitions of terrorism

The United States legal definition of terrorism excludes acts done by recognized states. According to U.S. law (22 U.S.C. 2656f(d)(2)) terrorism is defined as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience". There is no international consensus on a legal or academic definition of terrorism. United Nations conventions have failed to reach consensus on definitions of non-state or state terrorism.

According to professor Mark Selden, "American politicians and most social scientists definitionally exclude actions and policies of the United States and its allies" as terrorism. Historian Henry Commager wrote that "Even when definitions of terrorism allow for state terrorism, state actions in this area tend to be seen through the prism of war or national self-defense, not terror." According to Dr Myra Williamson, the meaning of "terrorism" has undergone a transformation. During the reign of terror a regime or system of terrorism was used as an instrument of governance, wielded by a recently established revolutionary state against the enemies of the people. Now the term "terrorism" is commonly used to describe terrorist acts committed by non-state or subnational entities against a state.

In State terrorism and the United States Frederick F. Gareau writes that the intent of terrorism is to intimidate or coerce both targeted groups and larger sectors of society that share or could be led to share the values of targeted groups by causing them "intense fear, anxiety, apprehension, panic, dread and/or horror". The objective of terrorism against the state is to force governments to change their policies, to overthrow governments or even to destroy the state. The objective of state terrorism is to eliminate people who are considered to be actual or potential enemies, and to discourage those actual or potential enemies who are not eliminated.

General critiques

This section contains too many or overly lengthy quotations. Please help summarize the quotations. Consider transferring direct quotations to Wikiquote or excerpts to Wikisource. (September 2017)

Professor William Odom, formerly the director of the National Security Agency under President Reagan's administration, wrote:

As many critics have pointed out, terrorism is not an enemy. It is a tactic. Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today's war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.

Professor Richard Falk holds that the US and other rich states, as well as mainstream mass media institutions, have obfuscated the true character and scope of terrorism, promulgating a one-sided view from the standpoint of First World privilege. He has said that:

If 'terrorism' as a term of moral and legal opprobrium is to be used at all, then it should apply to violence deliberately targeting civilians, whether committed by state actors or their non-state enemies.

Falk has argued that the repudiation of authentic non-state terrorism is insufficient as a strategy for mitigating it. Falk also argued that people who committed "terrorist" acts against the United States could use the Nuremberg Defense.

Daniel Schorr, reviewing Falk's Revolutionaries and Functionaries, stated that Falk's definition of terrorism hinges on some unstated definition of "permissible"; this, says Schorr, makes the judgment of what is terrorism inherently "subjective", and furthermore, he claims, leads Falk to label some acts he considers impermissible as "terrorism", but others he considers permissible as merely "terroristic".

In a review of Chomsky and Herman's The Political Economy of Human Rights, Yale political science professor James S. Fishkin holds that the authors' case for accusing the United States of state terrorism is "shockingly overstated". Fishkin writes of Chomsky and Herman:

They infer an extent of American control and coordination comparable to the Soviet role in Eastern Europe. ... Yet even if all evidence were accepted ... it would add up to no more than systematic support, not control. Hence the comparison to Eastern Europe appears grossly overstated. And from the fact that we give assistance to countries that practice terror it is too much to conclude that "Washington has become the torture and political murder capital of the world." Chomsky's and Herman's indictment of US foreign policy is thus the mirror image of the Pax Americana rhetoric they criticize: it rests on the illusion of American omnipotence throughout the world. And because they refuse to attribute any substantial independence to countries that are, in some sense, within America's sphere of influence, the entire burden for all the political crimes of the non-communist world can be brought home to Washington.

Fishkin praises Chomsky and Herman for documenting human rights violations, but argues that this is evidence "for a far lesser moral charge", namely, that the United States could have used its influence to prevent certain governments from committing acts of torture or murder but chose not to do so.

Commenting on Chomsky's 9-11, former US Secretary of Education William Bennett said: "Chomsky says in the book that the United States is a leading terrorist state. That's a preposterous and ridiculous claim. ... What we have done is liberated Kuwait, helped in Bosnia and the Balkans. We have provided sanctuary for people of all faiths, including Islam, in the United States. We tried to help in Somalia. ... Do we have faults and imperfections? Of course. The notion that we're a leading terrorist state is preposterous."

Stephen Morris also criticized Chomsky's thesis:

There is only one regime which has received arms and aid from the United States, and which has a record of brutality that is even a noticeable fraction of the brutality of Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Mao, or the Hanoi Politburo. That is the Suharto government in Indonesia. But ... the United States was not the principal foreign supplier of Indonesia when the generals seized power (nor is there any credible evidence of American involvement in the coup). Within the period of American assistance to Indonesia, and in particular during the period of the Carter administration, the number of political prisoners has declined. Finally, the current brutality of the Suharto regime is being directed against the people of East Timor, a former colony of Portugal that Indonesia is attempting to take over by force ... not as part of its normal process of domestic rule.

In 2017, declassified documents from the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta have confirmed that the United States government, from the very beginning, was deeply involved in the campaign of mass killings which followed Suharto's seizure of power. Without the support of the U.S. and its Western allies, the massacres would not have happened. In 2016, an international tribunal in The Hague ruled that the killings constitute crimes against humanity and it also ruled that the United States and other Western governments were complicit in the crimes. Indian historian Vijay Prashad says that the complicity of the United States and its Western allies in the massacres "is beyond doubt," as they "provided the Indonesian armed forces with lists of Communists who were to be assassinated" and "egged on the Army to conduct these massacres." He adds they covered up this "absolute atrocity" and that the US in particular refuses to fully declassify its records for this period. According to Vincent Bevins, the Indonesian mass killings were not an aberration, but the apex of a loose network of US-backed anti-communist mass killing campaigns in the Global South during the Cold War. According to historian Brad Simpson:

Washington did everything in its power to encourage and facilitate the army-led massacre of alleged PKI members, and U.S. officials worried only that the killing of the party's unarmed supporters might not go far enough, permitting Sukarno to return to power and frustrate the Administration's emerging plans for a post-Sukarno Indonesia. This was efficacious terror, an essential building block of the neoliberal policies that the West would attempt to impose on Indonesia after Sukarno's ouster.

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Blakeley, Ruth (2009). State Terrorism and Neoliberalism: The North in the South. Routledge. pp. 4, 20-23, 88. ISBN 978-0415686174. Archived from the original on 2015-06-14. Retrieved 2015-06-12.
  2. Sluka, p. 8
  3. ^ Sluka, p. 9
  4. Sluka, pp. 8–9
  5. Gareau, Frederick Henry (2002). The United Nations and other international institutions: a critical analysis. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 246. ISBN 978-0-8304-1578-6. Archived from the original on 2016-05-06. Retrieved 2016-01-05.
  6. Mark Aarons (2007). "Justice Betrayed: Post-1945 Responses to Genocide." In David A. Blumenthal and Timothy L. H. McCormack (eds). The Legacy of Nuremberg: Civilising Influence or Institutionalised Vengeance? (International Humanitarian Law). Archived 2016-01-05 at the Wayback Machine Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. ISBN 9004156917 pp. 71 & 80–81
  7. Daniel Goldhagen (2009). Worse Than War. PublicAffairs. ISBN 1586487698 p.537
    • "During the 1970s and 1980s, the number of American client states practicing mass-murderous politics exceeded those of the Soviets."
  8. Coatsworth, John Henry (2012). "The Cold War in Central America, 1975–1991". In Leffler, Melvyn P.; Westad, Odd Arne (eds.). The Cambridge History of the Cold War (Volume 3). Cambridge University Press. p. 230. ISBN 978-1107602311.
  9. McSherry, J. Patrice (2011). "Chapter 5: "Industrial repression" and Operation Condor in Latin America". In Esparza, Marcia; Henry R. Huttenbach; Daniel Feierstein (eds.). State Violence and Genocide in Latin America: The Cold War Years (Critical Terrorism Studies). Routledge. p. 107. ISBN 978-0415664578.
  10. Gupta, Dipak K. (2008). Understanding terrorism and political violence: the life cycle of birth, growth, transformation, and demise. Taylor & Francis. p. 8. ISBN 978-0-415-77164-1. Archived from the original on 2016-05-02. Retrieved 2016-01-05.
  11. Sinai, Joshua (2008). "How to Define Terrorism". Perspectives on Terrorism. 2 (4). Archived from the original on 2011-10-05. Retrieved 2011-07-06.
  12. U.S. Department of State (February 1, 2010). "Title 22 > Chapter 38 > § 2656f - Annual country reports on terrorism". Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute.
  13. Gupta, p. 8
  14. Sinai, Joshua (2008). "How to Define Terrorism". Perspectives on Terrorism. 2 (4). Archived from the original on 2011-10-05. Retrieved 2011-07-06.
  15. "Country Reports on Terrorism - Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism". National Counterterrorism Center: Annex of Statistical Information. U.S. State Department. April 30, 2007. Retrieved 2017-06-25.
  16. Williamson, Myra (2009). Terrorism, war and international law: the legality of the use of force against Afghanistan in 2001. Ashgate Publishing. p. 38. ISBN 978-0-7546-7403-0.
  17. Rupérez, Javier (6 September 2006). "The UN's fight against terrorism: five years after 9/11". U.N. Action to Counter Terrorism. Spain: Real Instituto Elcano. Archived from the original on April 11, 2011.
  18. Selden p. 4
  19. Hor, Michael Yew Meng (2005). Global anti-terrorism law and policy. Cambridge University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-521-10870-6. Archived from the original on 2019-03-03. Retrieved 2016-11-12.
  20. Williamson p. 43
  21. Gareau, Frederick H. (2004). State terrorism and the United States : from counterinsurgency to the war on terrorism. Atlanta: Clarity Press. p. 14. ISBN 978-0-932863-39-3.
  22. Wright, p. 11
  23. Odom, General William (December 2007). "American Hegemony: How to Use It, How to Lose It". Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 151 (4): 410.. Online copy available here Archived 2011-06-14 at the Wayback Machine
  24. Falk, Richard (1988). Revolutionaries and Functionaries: The Dual Face of Terrorism. New York: Dutton. ISBN 9780525246046.
  25. Falk, Richard (January 28, 2004). "Gandhi, Nonviolence and the Struggle Against War". The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research. Archived from the original on August 2, 2007. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
  26. Falk, Richard (June 28, 1986). "Thinking About Terrorism". The Nation. 242 (25): 873–892.
  27. Schorr, Daniel (1 May 1988). "The Politics of Violence". The New York Times.
  28. ^ Fishkin, James S. (September 6–13, 1980). "American Dream/Global Nightmare: The Dilemma of U.S. Human Rights Policy by Sandy Vogelgesang (W. W. Norton)
    The Political Economy of Human Rights Volume I: The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism
    Volume II: After the Cataclysm: Postwar Indochina and the Reconstruction of Imperial Ideology by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman (South End Press)". The New Republic. Vol. 183, no. 10/11. pp. 37–38.
  29. "American Morning with Paula Zahn". CNN. May 9, 2002. Archived from the original on 2012-10-26. Retrieved 7 July 2011.
  30. Morris, Stephen, Chomsky on U.S. foreign policy, Harvard International Review, December–January 1981, pg. 26.
  31. Melvin, Jess (20 October 2017). "Telegrams confirm scale of US complicity in 1965 genocide". Indonesia at Melbourne. University of Melbourne. Retrieved July 27, 2018. The new telegrams confirm the US actively encouraged and facilitated genocide in Indonesia to pursue its own political interests in the region, while propagating an explanation of the killings it knew to be untrue.
  32. Scott, Margaret (October 26, 2017). "Uncovering Indonesia's Act of Killing". The New York Review of Books. Archived from the original on 2018-06-25. Retrieved July 27, 2018. According to Simpson, these previously unseen cables, telegrams, letters, and reports "contain damning details that the U.S. was willfully and gleefully pushing for the mass murder of innocent people."
  33. Head, Mike (25 October 2017). "Documents show US participation in 1965-66 massacres in Indonesia". World Socialist Web Site. Archived from the original on 2018-07-27. Retrieved July 27, 2018.
  34. Robinson, Geoffrey B. (2018). The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965-66. Princeton University Press. pp. 22–23, 177. ISBN 9781400888863. Archived from the original on 2018-08-20. Retrieved 2018-07-27.
  35. Perry, Juliet (21 July 2016). "Tribunal finds Indonesia guilty of 1965 genocide; US, UK complicit". CNN. Archived from the original on 2018-06-13. Retrieved July 27, 2018.
  36. Yosephine, Liza (21 July 2016). "US, UK, Australia complicit in Indonesia's 1965 mass killings: People's Tribunal". The Jakarta Post. Archived from the original on 2018-07-27. Retrieved July 27, 2018.
  37. Prashad, Vijay (2020). Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations. Monthly Review Press. p. 85. ISBN 978-1583679067.
  38. Bevins, Vincent (2020). The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World. PublicAffairs. pp. 238–243. ISBN 978-1541742406.
  39. Simpson, Bradley (2010). Economists with Guns: Authoritarian Development and U.S.–Indonesian Relations, 1960–1968. Stanford University Press. p. 193. ISBN 978-0804771825. Archived from the original on 2018-06-25. Retrieved 2018-07-27.

References

Further reading

Terrorism
Main articles Terrorism topics
By ideology
Types and tactics
State involvement
Organisation
Historical
Lists
Memorials and museums
By country
Categories: