In an international arena that is dominated by media-reported terrorist attacks, what matters most is not a definition of terrorism, but rather the effect of what is labelled terrorism. As a label, terrorism promotes a greater attention from the media and policy makers in the West. The term terrorism, which many associate exclusively with fanatical, radical Islamic sects, has distorted views towards organisational violence especially after 9/11. In turn, this has created the misconception that internationally based violence is synonymous with terrorism. However, there is no all-encompassing definition of terrorism; there are only common elements that are used to determine actions as such, 1 and accordingly promote fear. The very inadequacy of this classification of terrorism is exhibited prominently throughout Southeast Asia, and particularly upon analysis of the southern regions of Thailand and the Philippines, and also in Indonesia. This highlights the need for a shift away from the destructive connotations associated with such Western interpretations of terrorism to an inherently Southeast Asian approach that takes into consideration the unique social, political, economical, and historical background in which each of these organisations exists.
|Title of host publication||Beyond Human Rights and the War on Terror|
|Editors||Satvinder S. Juss|
|Place of Publication||Abingdon UK|
|Number of pages||16|
|Publication status||Published - 2019|
|Name||Routledge Research in Human Rights Law|
Hosen, N. (2019). Separatist, not terrorist: case studies from Southeast Asia. In S. S. Juss (Ed.), Beyond Human Rights and the War on Terror (1st ed., pp. 23-38). (Routledge Research in Human Rights Law). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351006064-2