CHAPTER ONE

1.0   Introduction

In recent years, the world has become increasingly aware of the terrorist activities that have been taking place and their impacts on the lives of people as well as the social, economic, and political stability of nations. The negative impacts of terrorism in the world can no longer be underestimated and their understanding has never been more important than it has become, especially after the world became aware of what happened in the United States on September 11, 2001. Terrorist attacks have claimed the lives of many people destroying property worth millions of dollars (Drakos & Kutan, 2003). Industries have been decimated and countries have cautioned their citizens against visiting terrorism destinations that have been associated with terrorism, which harms the entire industry.

Having established the level of awareness that has been created and the increasing concern on the impacts of terrorism, the issues affecting the future of our security needs to be resolved by all means necessary. This resolution can only begin with the understanding of just precisely how terrorism impacts on security, with particular attention of Sudan, which has been one of the most vulnerable destinations. Considered as one of the world’s most popular tourism destinations, Sudan needs to be studied, both in terms of existing literature as well as empirically.

1.1   Background of the Study

        Terrorism is violence or threat of violence calculated to create an atmosphere of fear or alarm and thereby bring about some social and political changes. This definition is in line with the explanation offered by a South American Jurist more than 30 years ago, according to him “Terrorism consists of acts that are in themselves may be classic-crimes, murder, arson, the use of explosives, but that differ from classic crimes in that they are excited with the deliberate intention of causing panic and terror within an arranged or organized society1. It is the use of violence and most especially the fear it causes among people for political objectives.2

It was also defined by the Terrorism Research Center as “the systematic use of physical violence against non combatants but with an audience greater than the immediate victim in mind to create a general climate of fear in a large population in order to affect some kind of political and social changes”3.

The United States Federal Bureau of investigation (FBI) defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimate or coerce a government, the population or any segment thereof in furtherance of political and social objectives”4. In basic terms, terrorism is an act of inflicting terror upon the people in the process of achieving personal or political objectives5.

Although from the above definitions, it can be rightly concluded that there is no precise or widely accepted definition of the concept of terrorism, it is generally believed that terrorism is the use of covert violent actions in order to achieve certain objectives. It is a form of covert attack directed at targets that are outside a certain range of clearly military targets. Though the terrorist attack on the world trade centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington DC constitute a prime case, most terrorist attack are aimed at domestic regimes or other targets within the terrorist own country7.

Terrorism is not new on the world stage. Northern Ireland had been dealing with terrorists for more than forty years, Israel with Palestinian terrorists for much the same period and Spain with Basque terrorists.

Although the use of terrorism as a political tool extends far back into history, recent decades have seen a rise in the practice for several reasons. One is the overwhelming advantage in weapons that governments usually have over dissident groups. Because many governments are armed with aircraft and other high tech weapons that are unavailable to opposition forces, it has often become nearly suicidal for armed dissidents to use conventional tactics.

Second, terrorists’ targets are now more readily available than in the past: people are more concentrated in urban areas and even in large buildings; there are countless airline flights, and more and more people travel abroad. Third, the mass availability of instant visual news through television and satellite communications makes it easy for terrorists to gain an audience. This is important because terrorism is not usually directed at its victims as such; rather it is intended to frighten others. Fourth, technology has led to the creation of increasingly lethal weapons that terrorists can use to kill and injure large numbers of people. These technological “advances” include biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological weapons7.

Terrorists attacks are relatively regular event. In 2000 there were 423 international terrorist attacks – many of these carried out across national borders and there were many other incidents of domestic terrorism. However, through this time, Americans worried little about terrorism for example, in a survey conducted in 1999 that asked Americans to name two or three top foreign policy concerns, only 12 percent of the respondents mentioned terrorism as a worry.8

This American’s sense of security was shattered by the September 11, 2001 terrorists attacks which included the destruction of the World trade Center, major damage to the pentagon, the crash of a hijacked airliner in Pennsylvania, and the deaths of over 3,000 people.

Soon thereafter President George W. Bush responded by announcing a war on terrorism9. An American led coalition of forces intervened in Afghanistan, toppling the Taliban government that had supported Al Qaeda and attacking Al Qaeda forces in the country. Later President Bush charged that Iraq, Iran and North Korea constituted an “axis of evil” that, among other things were guilty of state terrorism. In March 2003, the United States, in alliance with Great Britain and other countries known as the coalition of the Willing attacked Iraq, arguing in part that Iraq’s support of terrorism made it an international threat and an outlaw nation.10

Terrorist make use of various means in achieving their aims, irrespective of whether it is individual group or state sponsored terrors. Some of which are briefly stated as follows:

Kidnapping: Seizure of one or more victims are then moved to a hideout. This method is regularly abducted by the Niger Delta Terrorists Movements.

Barricade Hostage: Seizure of a facility with whatever hostages available, these is made cotangent on meeting terrorist demand.

Bombing: Major bombing is the use of any type of explosives or device for terrorist purposes, including those delivered through mail when sufficient demand or casualties occurs, the terrorists group claims responsibility. Example Commuter bombing in 2004 March that killed 191 people and wounded 1,8000. and July 7: London bombings – Bombs explode on one double-decker bus and three London Underground trains, killing 56 people and injuring over 700, occurring on the first day of the 31st G8 Conference. The attacks are the first suicide bombings in Western Europe.

Hijacking: An attempt to seize an airplane, ship or other vehicle with whatever hostage maybe in it, to force some actions or movement to another country upon an agreement by authorities involved to terrorists demand.

Armed attack: An attempt to seize or damage facility with no intent to hold for negotiating purposes.

Assassination: An attempt whether successful or not to kill a pre selected victim usually with small arms or letter bombs, are executed form this small category, in many cases, there is a specific intended victim.

Sabotage: this is willful destruction of properties by any means including bombing.

Exotic Pollution: The use of exotic substances such as atomic, chemical or biological to contaminate materials of the targeted state. For example, the introduction of mercury into orange shipped form Israel.

Threat for hoax: The stated intent by a terrorist group to carry out an attack or a false alert of authorities about the coming of terrorists attack by a named group.

Most of these means terrorists adopt in carrying out their activities are becoming obsolete because of the fact that most governments that are more effective in combating terrorist elements.

Few governments are as inclined as they were some years ago to release captured terrorists simply to avoid further terrorists attacks. Most government have adopted non concessions, non negotiations politics in dealing with hostage cases or situation.11

Physical security around likely target has increased for example, it has become more difficult now, although it is still possible to smuggle weapons abroad through airlines. Embassies are becoming virtual fortress (especially after the terrorists attack on the United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998).

Diplomatic and top executives often travel in armored limousines with armed body guards (for example, the coming of former United States President Bill Clinton into Sudan and Ghana with armored limousines and several CIA and FBI agents). But despite these undeniable achievements, the total volume of terrorist’s activities in the world has increased. At the same time terrorism has become bloodier and the terrorist seem to be less reluctant to inflict casualties. The latest fear exercise after the September 11th incident is the fear of terrorist making use of instruments of mass destruction in achieving their aims12.

One aspects of the problem of definition of the term terrorism is the difficulty in distinguishing between terrorism and a freedom fighter for example, the man who attacks a plane and proceeds to kill some or all the passengers.

The man who wrap bomb around his waist and drives into a shopping mall causing maximum damages of government may well be a freedom fighter to his kith and kin.

1.2   Statement of Problem

Terrorist has been a big problem Sudan has faced this recent years. Terrorism was introduced in sudan in the year 1990; though the federal government of sudan has put in much effort to eradicate terrorism from their boarder and within the country, the major problem is that the united state of America has lebelled sudan among the place  for terrorist recruitment; though the sudanese government has put a stop to terrorism in their boarder.

1.3   Objective of the Study

The core and central point of this research work goes to the research topic itself, as the objective of this work, to ascertain terrorism and its implication on global security in Sudan. Other objectives of this research work is listed below.

1. To evaluate the danger that’s behind terrorism to the development of sudan.
2. To establish possible solutions for the negative impacts of terrorism on the tourism industry.
3. To establish the specific impacts that terrorism has had on tourism in Sudan.
4. Finding out the implications of the dual strategy employed by the Sudan, in the war against terrorism.
5. To unearth the various ways in which terrorism affects the tourism industry.
6. Analyzing the impacts of terrorist activities on global security.
7. To make possible suggestions that can reduce the menace of terrorism in the country of Sudan.

1.4   Research Question

This research work is guided with five four research question which will be administered and distributed to the research respondents. Research question are:

1. What are the danger that’s behind terrorism to the development of sudan?
2. What are the possible solutions for the negative impacts of terrorism on the tourism industry?
3. Is there issues of terrorism in your area and how has it affect your security guarantee?
4. How can terrorism be eradicated or reduced in our country Sudan?

1.6   Research hypothesis

Two hypothesis was chosen to be tested in the research work, and this hypothesis will be tested using the t-test formula and standard deviation for its calculation and analysis. Hypothesis are:

1. H1 – there is a significant relationship between terrorism and security threats.
2. H2 – there is no significant relationship between terrorism and security threats.
3. H1 - The war on terrorism has had serious negative impact on global security. For example, it has created room for rival alliance camps and has also led to arms proliferation
4. H2 - The war on terrorism had no negative impact on global security.
5. H1 – terrorism has jeopardies the safety and guarantee of our security in Sudan.
6. H2 – terrorism has not jeopardies the safety and guarantee of our security in Sudan.

1.7   significance of the Study

This thesis is significant in various ways to various sectors, as will be seen below; Studies in this subject have exhaustively pin pointed the negative impact of terrorism on global security, which no doubt has so far affected the peace and stability of the international community. it will present in a precise manner, the effects of terrorism to security threats in the Sudan and the nation at large. It is believed that the findings of this research work should provide detailed information on how to tackle with the issue of terrorism in our nation. It is also expected that the study will be of benefit to all the citizens of this country, as it will create awareness of the implication of terrorism in our country Sudan.

It is possible that by the outcome off this thesis that terrorism will reduce in a great dear.

The research will also be beneficial to the researcher. This is because the study will expose the researcher to so many related areas in the course of carrying out his research. This will enhance the researcher’s experience, knowledge and understanding on the manner of terrorism and its implication on global security level.

1.8   Scope of the Study

This thesis will cover terrorism, its implication on global security of the 21th century. The Study concentrate on areas of on which terrorism has effected and its degradation to the nation, while the case study was chosen at sudan

1.9   Limitation of the Study

During the course of performing/researching this project work, the researcher encountered a lot of challenges as well as opposition which ranges from financial constraints, time factor, sourcing of material etc. this factors in their own ways, slowed down the speed progress of this work that resulted to the researcher not being able to finish the research work on time as is required

The research would have research on a wider range but because of this limitation, the researcher now narrowed it Sudan as a case study from 1990s to 2007.

1.10 METHODOLOGY

In order for us to achieve the stated objectives of this study, information for the study were derived from secondary data, through content analysis of documents, articles, international journals, magazines, monographs and books related to the study. This was largely due to the fact that data were obtained from libraries, archival sources and the internet.

1.11 Definition of Key Concepts

TERRORISM: “Terror” comes from a Latin word “terrerre” meaning “to frighten”. The terror cimbricus was a panic and state of emergency in Rome in response to the approach of warriors of the cumbri Tribe in 105BC.

The definitions of terrorism have proved controversial. Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of terrorism in their national legislation. Moreover, the international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term, “terrorism” is politically and emotionally charged. In this regard, the international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term foundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self determination. These divergences have made it impossible for the United Nations to conclude a comprehensive convention on international terrorism that incorporates a single, all encompassing, legally binding, criminal law definition of terrorism. Moreover, since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism; “criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public by a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

Nevertheless, by distinguishing terrorists from other types of criminals and terrorism from other forms of crimes, we come to appreciate that terrorism is;

- Ineluctably political in aims and motives

- Violent – or, equally important, threatens violence

- Designed to have far reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victim or target

- Conducted by an organization with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure (whose members wear no uniforms or identifying insigma) and perpetrated by a sub national group or non-state entity.

Terrorism thus is defined as political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols). Such acts are meant to send a message from an illicit clandestine organization.

Terrorist attacks are usually carried out in such a way as to maximize the severity and length of the psychological impact. Each act of terrorism is a performance devised to have an impact on many large audiences.

Terrorists also attack national symbols to show power and to attempt to shake the foundation of the country or society they are opposed to. This may negatively affect a government, while increasing the prestige of the given terrorist organization and/or ideology behind a terrorist act.

Terrorism is a political tactics; like letter writing or protesting which is used by activists when they believe that no other means will affect the kind of change they desire. This change is desired so badly that failure to achieve change is seen as a worse outcome than the deaths of civilians.

        The terms “terrorism” and “terrorists” (someone who engages in terrorism) carry strong negative connotations. These terms are often used as political; labels to condemn violence or the threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, unjustifiable or to condemn an entire segment of a population. Those labelled “terrorists” by their opponents rarely identify themselves as such, and typically use other terms or terms specific to their situation, such as separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, revolutionary, vigilante, militant, paramilitary, guerilla, rebels, patriots or any other similar meaning word in other languages and cultures, like Jihad, Mujaheddin and Fedayeen are similar Arabic words which have entered the English lexicon. The pejorative connotations of the word can be summed up in the aphorism, “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. This is exemplified when a group using irregular military methods is an ally of a state against a mutual enemy, but later falls out with the state and starts to use those methods against its former ally. More recently, Ronald Reagan and others in American administration frequently called the Afghan Mujahideen, “freedom fighters”, during their war against the Soviet Union, yet twenty years later, when new generations of Afghan men are fighting against what they perceived to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks are labelled “terrorism” by George W. Bush.

WAR: War is a behavior pattern exhibited by many primate species including humans. The primary feature of this behaviour pattern is a certain state of organized violent conflict that is engaged in between two or more separate social entities. Such a conflict is always an attempt at altering either the psychological hierarchy or the material hierarchy of domination or equality between two or more groups. In all cases, at least one participant (group) in the conflict perceives the need to either psychologically or materially dominate the other participant. Amongst humans, the perceived need for domination often arises from the belief that an essential ideology or resource is somehow either so incompatible or so scarce as to threaten the fundamental existence of the one group experiencing the need to dominate the other group. Leaders will sometimes enter into a war, under the pretext that their actions are primarily defensive, however when viewed objectively, their actions may more closely resemble a form of unprovoked, unwarranted, or disproportionate aggression. In all wars the group(s) experiencing the need to dominate other groups is unable and unwilling to accept or permit the possibility of a relationship of fundamental equality to exist between the groups who have opted for group violence (war). The aspect of domination that is a precipitating in all wars, that is, one group wishing to dominate another, is also often a precipitating factor in individual one-onone violence outside of the context of war; that is one individual wishing to dominate another.

GLOBAL SECURITY: Global security consists of the measures taken by nations and international organizations, such as the United Nations, to ensure mutual survival and safety. These measures include military actions and diplomatic agreements such as treaties and conventions.

As cold war tension receded, it became clear that the security of citizens was threatened by hardships arising from internal state activities as well as external aggressors. Civil wars were increasingly common and compounded existing poverty, disease, hunger, violence and human rights abuses. Through neglect of its constituents, nation states have failed in their primary objective. The state centric notion of security has been challenged by more holistic approaches to security. Among approaches which seek to acknowledge and address these basic threats to human safety are paradigm which includes cooperative, comprehensive, collective measures aimed to ensure security for the individual and, as a result, for the state.

To enhance international security and potential threats caused by terrorism and organized crime, increased cooperation within police forces internationally has been applied. The international police, INTERPOL, shares information across international borders and this cooperation has been greatly enhanced by the arrival of the internet and the ability to transfer documents, films and photographs world wide instantly.

Governments’ first Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs were created in 1991 to eliminate the former Soviet Union’s nuclear, chemical and other weapons and prevent their proliferation. The programs have accomplished a great deal; deactivating thousands of nuclear warheads, neutralizing chemical weapons, converting weapons facilities for peaceful use, and redirecting the work of former weapons scientist and engineers, among other efforts.

The search for security remains the overriding concern for many peoples and nations. But the definition of what constitutes security and the strategies for attaining it varies greatly. For billions of people, the quest is to ‘secure’ basic needs: food, water, shelter and health care. In other words, freedom form wants. For others, it is to secure other fundamental human rights: freedom of expression, freedom from oppression, freedom from fear. Even among states, security has different definitions. For some, it is the achievement of economic or military parity or superiority. For others, the projections of power and influence and for still others, the resolution of grievances and disputes. The challenges, regardless of which aspect of security we consider, the current global picture is one of failure on many fronts. If we look at the quest to secure basic needs, we are struck by the persistent inequality in the global distribution of wealth.

        Yet, which ever definition of security we use, there are a number of commonalities. The first commonality is that security threats are all interconnected. Poverty is frequently coupled with human rights abuses and lack of good governance which results in a deep sense of injustice, anger and humiliation. This in turn provides an ideal environment for breeding violence of all types, including extremism, civil strife and interstate wars. And it is in regions of long standing conflict where countries are most frequently driven to increase their standing or seek greater security through the pursuit of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. A surge in the sophistication of extremist networksunderscores the potential for nuclear and radiological terrorism.

POLITICS: The struggle for power which itself is the authority to determine or formulate and execute decisions and policies, which must be accepted by the society……it is the struggle for power of governance, especially executive authority (Onyekpe 1998: 16) according to this argument, the struggle for or the acquisition of power and the reaction of the society to it, depend greatly on the level of political development of the country.

Hijacking: An attempt to seize an airplane, ship or other vehicle with whatever hostage maybe in it, to force some actions or movement to another country upon an agreement by authorities involved to terrorists demand.

PLURALISM: Implies the existence of many groups of people, whether tribal, ethnic, political or religious.  Therefore, a religious pluralistic society will refer to an environment where there are many religious beliefs, concepts or ideologies.

Reference

Andreani G. (2004). “The War on Terror: Good Cause Foreign Concept”.

Survival Journal. Vol. 46, No. 4 January.

Angela, C. and Paul, S. (2006). War: Ends and Means. Albany: State

University of New York Press.

Baylis, J. and Steve, S. (ed.) (1997). International Security in the Post-

Cold War Era. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Burton, J.W. (1967). International Relations: A General theory. London:

Cambridge University Press.

Bush, G. (1988). Terrorist Group Profiles. Washington DC: U.S

Government Printing Office.

Clausewitz, C. (1976). On War. Princeton and New Jersey: Princeton

University Press.