Democracy and Domestic Terrorism

Democracy and domestic terrorism

The relationship between domestic terrorism and democracy is very complex. Terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate political freedom, and is least common in the most democratic nations.^{[75][76][77][78]} However, one study suggests that suicide terrorism may be an exception to this general rule. Evidence regarding this particular method of terrorism reveals that every modern suicide campaign has targeted a democracy–a state with a considerable degree of political freedom.^[79] The study suggests that concessions awarded to terrorists during the 1980s and 1990s for suicide attacks increased their frequency.^[80]
Some examples of "terrorism" in non-democracies include ETA in Spain under Francisco Franco,^[81] the Shining Path in Peru under Alberto Fujimori,^[82] the Kurdistan Workers Party when Turkey was ruled by military leaders and the ANC in South Africa.^[83] Democracies, such as the United Kingdom, United States, Israel, Indonesia, India, Spain and the Philippines, have also experienced domestic terrorism.
While a democratic nation espousing civil liberties may claim a sense of higher moral ground than other regimes, an act of terrorism within such a state may cause a dilemma: whether to maintain its civil liberties and thus risk being perceived as ineffective in dealing with the problem; or alternatively to restrict its civil liberties and thus risk delegitimizing its claim of supporting civil liberties.^[84] This dilemma, some social theorists would conclude, may very well play into the initial plans of the acting terrorist(s); namely, to delegitimize the state.^[85]