 All right. Good morning. How are you doing today? Is everything all right? We Are going to switch our attention focus a little bit from What is going at state level? I mean among the states in the international relations within the Middle Eastern region now to a To a field where we deal mostly with so-called non-state actors, so Of course states are the primary units of analysis In our study in our department in our discipline But non-state actors have become much more important in some respects, of course or at least capture the attention of the secured analysts of course government officials security forces and One when I say non-state actor, of course, there are different definitions of non-state actors But in our literature we mostly refer to the terrorist organizations or organizations that use Force violence as a means of achieving their goal So That means we are going to talk about terrorism Today and next Tuesday and most likely next Friday and then the following week on Tuesday We will have this simulation and then the 31st of December will be the last day of the year will be the last day of classes So I believe there will be classes. I mean I'll be around so I would like to see around But if for some reason you just disappear and to visit your parents or Start celebrating the new year from the beginning from the beginning of today So it's up to you, but I would strongly recommend you to be present not only as you are now today But also on Tuesday next week and of course definitely on two on the simulation Class for the following Tuesday and next Friday You might somehow be excused if you are not here on 31st of December But I strongly recommend to be here anyway. All right. The terrorism is of course our subject today and I Attached to one of my emails two pieces of reading one from one by Zeynep Shuklan, she's actually a civilian expert at the center of Excellence Defense Against Terrorism and she's doing her PhD in the international relations department Middle East technically reversed and She is also a part being a you know PhD student who pursues a degree in International relations but also writes the speeches of high-ranking generals in Turkish chair and stuff So she's good in writing. She's good in compiling different ideas opinions and her piece actually Is is a chapter which will soon be published by IOS press in the Netherlands and This is an overview something that is useful for students at your level who don't have prior Exposure to anything substantial with respect to terrorism What are the definitions of terrorism? How did it originate? What are the roots and what are the issues that we are going to tackle and we are going to deal with? So this is something if you haven't done so you should have read already by today Because this is an attachment that I sent you on Tuesday. Yes this week If you haven't done so it is very essential that you read it Because you will be responsible for subjects that I cover in this chapter for the final exam the other is again from another Turkish Writer with whom someone you know, I believe as good as them are used to be a Professor in a different universe, but he joined us. I believe last year and He sent a space when I was and still I'm the editor of the journal which publish this defense against terrorism review and it was one of the very interesting compilation of theoretical approaches to terrorism because As you must have understood So far if you had a chance to read at least came through this two pieces of writing You must have acknowledged understood the biggest problem is What what do you think is? the most important problem among other you know the security implications of Terrorism of course it takes lives it claims the lives of most innocent people and Themselves because we're talking about what is called a suicide bombing suicide terrorism, but We are looking at the issue of course from all all sides all perspectives We're trying to do so in order to better understand the subject at hand. What are we dealing with? But there is one fundamental problem in dealing with this problem. I mean something that is essential you John Can you speak up a little bit? Yeah, the biggest problem is indeed The definition of terrorism which acts Constituent what we call a terrorist act. I mean how do we define whether an act is a terrorist act or it is something else When I say something else, I don't mean to undermine any other forms of violence or any other Definitional, you know use of force use of violence by non-state groups, but what I mean here is Unless there is a common understanding of what terrorism is or what constitutes terrorism It would be very difficult to take concerted actions. Why is it that important to have a definition? Why can't we deal with terrorism without having a common definition? actually This is indeed something that is also debated that is also challenged because there are experts who put forward very substantial arguments Claiming that there are actually definitions of terrorism or at least there's enough substance in order to be able to I mean Constitute as some sort of a ground upon which we can build a Model for dealing with terrorism or just you know or concentrate our efforts to deal with terrorism And they make references to some of the UN resolutions to some legal documents procedural issues and Within these documents they say and they are right and we'll be talking about these things and I will you know bring this information To the class next Tuesday because this is something that requires a little bit of time and it is not something that we can cover within one hour today so And these documents these definitions no matter whether these are officially acknowledged as being the definition of terrorism We don't actually need such definitions. They say in order to deal with terrorism, but Putting this aside for a while. We'll you know Come back to the issue. Why is it that important to have a definition? Why is it? Why can't we survive without having a definition of? Terrorism what why is it that important? Well, what is the significance of having a common understanding of terrorism? Comprehensive Yeah Understanding of the problem the causes and the consequences of terrorism is important in order to be able to deal with properly What else I mean, this is yes one reason why it is important to deal with terrorism, but what else Yeah, I mean This is again something that has been overly emphasized especially by Turkish officials and In the years when we were dealing with struggling against the pkk terrorism for instance since 83 84 when you know pkk started to take lives With their attacks especially in the southern part of Turkey and we had very hard time in explaining ourselves and makes sort of a convincing our allies within the North Atlantic three-door organization NATO and also within other you know institutional fora in in Europe or anywhere else and we could not mobilize support in our Fight against the pkk. So again, why is this that important? I mean sometimes States, you know for instance in in in the Context of Turkish Greek relations or in the context of Turkish Syrian relations As a much more specific example Turkey did not need any other country to deal with the problem. Yes other countries were involved especially Egypt Mubarak the president of Egypt took our initiative And try to convince How is the less side as well as the Turkish? President Suleyman Demirel to take such actions so as not to you know confront in in the battlefield and especially it was Officer and I said who should have been convinced to take certain actions such as not to give any more support to the pkk and then Turkey's tense powerful stance. It's Coercive diplomacy so to speak the paid. I mean and then what we have seen Was the result pretty much Turkey expected to see and we have been We were capable of solving the problem on a bilateral basis Yes with the intervention of some other Countries in terms of you know through their diplomatic Offices etc. But on a one-on-one basis Turkey was capable of solving the problem Also without the countries and this is not only peculiar to Turkish Syrian context or other cases where Countries may solve their problems. They're security problems with other countries on a bilateral basis, but is this the case With terrorism no and that's why this is important to have a common Definition if not a formal definition what we need is a common understanding Who are the so-called terrorist organizations or mentors terrorists? What kind of actions constitute terrorist act that must be? confronted with and concerted action By the community of peace-loving nations So this is therefore very very important and this is the if not the single most but one of the biggest obstacles in front of The measures that are required to dealing with terrorism so Being the academic advisor of NATO Center of Excellence Defense Against Terrorism Established by the Turkish Air Stuff and now in NATO organizations at international military organization with international stuff Over the past five years that I'm there. I'm helping them with putting together some activities of course academic activities or activities that have academic dimensions and so far, I don't know we have realized Endless number countless number of activities in extended from workshops to courses to symposia and Conferences and the the recurring theme the the most important theme that we You know refer back to it many times again and again is and Almost every single speaker regardless of the subject matter, which could be financial aspects of dealing with terrorism or legal aspects of dealing with terrorism or sociological ideological whatever a logical address Aspects of dealing with terrorism every single speaker. I mean there is not maybe one speaker who has not Touched upon this issue of lack of common understanding or lack of common definition of terrorism, which he or she sees as the most important obstacle in Effectively dealing with this issue. So therefore It is important to have one But are we going to have one in any time soon in the future or in the foreseeable future? It doesn't seem to be likely But again, as I said and as we'll be talking about later on this should not constitute a major obstacle yet it is one Because This is something that reminds me of the definition of aggression I don't know. We actually made some references to article 39 of United Nations chapter Which is the first article of chapter 7 the UN Charter has a number of chapters and as you know chapter 7 deals with issues the bridges of peace and measures that are that that can be taken against such violations which may also incorporate the use of force and chapter 7 of UN Charter Start with with article 39 and If you go and look at the article 39 You will see that there is reference to acts of aggression and article 39 being the first article of chapter 7 under the UN Charter is Significant in the sense that I mean you start I mean if you look at the issue from within the context of chapter 7 that means you may use course of diplomacy or force in order to convince or persuade the aggressor Which has come to an act of aggression actually and to remedy the situation remember we talk about Iraq Iraq Invading Kuwait. That was a violation of international law and this issue was Discussed at the United Nations Security Council within the context of chapter 7 and with article 39 UN UN Security Council members have acknowledged have recognized that there was an act of aggression and that Iraq was an aggressor but this being the case from 1945 to 1974 Well Approximately 30 years The the act of aggression or aggressor they were not defined and that was the of course one of the most interesting peers of Cold War and What was aimed with the United Nations? Charter was to you know establish a committee composed of that will be composed of the the Chiefs of General Staffs of the Five permanent members the major staff committee that would handle the situation you know with close coordination And to sort of display a huge power Because who could beat the five permanent members of the United Nations? Being the most important not only political but also militarily most important countries of the United Nations and What was expected to establish such a committee which would look into such issues which would constitute an act of aggression and In order to penalize or punish the aggressors which would have disturbed the international peace and stability But from 49 to 74 for 45 to 74 It was not possible to have a common understanding of which acts were Or would constitute an act of aggression What for instance the United States considered to be an act of aggression along with France or or United Kingdom China I mean the Communist China after taking seat in the United Nations Security Council and The Soviet Union well disagreed Or vice versa what the Soviet Union might have considered as an act of aggression United States and its western allies did not think alike. So therefore There was a deadlock in the United Nations Security Council in terms of taking decisions because it was not possible to define Which acts were constituting an act of aggression? Because unless you define an act of aggression You cannot go forward with other articles 40 41 42 which would pay the way to eventually not Like to be getting wet and down the road the use of force the same situation more or less applies to today's situation in respect to the issue of terrorism. I mean Without having a common understanding let alone a formal definition But at least an acknowledgement of which acts or which in sort of groupings which organizations Are or can be labeled as terrorist organizations organizations or which acts could be labeled as terrorist acts Without having this common understanding you cannot expand the the front Which would fight collectively and of course using with all the capabilities that would That would have against the terrorist organizations. So especially today In the modern age and more specifically After the end of the Cold War things have changed dramatically in many fields and also in the field of terrorism or terrorism studies or the study of terrorism has to incorporate new elements new Fresh looks into what is actually going on because the profile of terrorist organizations the profile of terrorism Profile of terrorists are changing so therefore This is important because terrorism today is not something that one single nation all alone can cope with if a country is Exposed to a certain degree of terrorism that country must be getting help assistance Or some sort of a cooperation from other nations Because what especially today we're talking about is not the terrorism that we used to you know know from our readings from from what we have seen in the media or on TV channels, but things are changing rather fast and Just like another thing terrorism also is globalized because I mean There is this principle Which applies even to today's situation, but it is not anymore sufficient to Explaining terrorism, but what is usually Believed by those who are dealing with terrorism either as an academic exercise or as part of intelligence or Units or security forces This belief has always been Upheld by many people that terrorist organizations cannot survive without state or without a state or states sponsoring them and this sponsorship is something that is not necessarily Relying on you know the financial assets being made available terrorist organizations It expands from providing shelter providing safe havens to terrorist organizations You know giving them a certain territory for their control like Becca Valley, for instance in Lebanon or today the Condom Mountains In northern part of Iraq or other places wherever terrorism is taking you know place so In the past terrorism was usually associated with state sponsorship Which is still the case. I mean this there is this type of terrorism did not just evaporate just still exist and maybe It is still one of the most important sort of Topics that one has to look into in order to understand what is going on but over the last Decade or so or you know after 9 11 we have seen clearly but prior to 9 11 there were some Clues there were some developments that would have provided hints or clues or some you know Points that we could you know understand Is that today's terrorism or terrorist organizations do not necessarily need a Sponsoring state. Yes, it is better from their perspective if they had states that would sponsor their activities But the type of terrorism that we are dealing with the so-called transnational terrorism or Global terrorism by transnational actors Which are not necessarily motivated by as they used to be as others have used to be I mean Ideological factors such as separatist terrorism ideological terrorism Which carry out activities in order to Elaborate a certain territory for instance like the Basque terrorism or Etta or like the IRA like the pkk like the Tamil Tigers or Others or there are some ideological terrorism which do not necessarily have some territorial claims But have some ideological political claims or you know carry out activities just for the sake of Advancing certain political thought not necessarily You know capturing a certain territory such as Redbury gaze or by the mine of so Or there are some fanatical Terrorist organizations. I mean not necessarily associated with a specific religion or Mono ethic Terrorism religion but such as the almshermikio for instance in the fact in the forest in Japan So these were terrorist groups Which had more or less a specific location that intelligence agencies through Infiltrating into this sort of groups by you know somehow recruiting some insider Insiders from within these groups or just you know through surveillance through other intelligence activities It would not be that difficult to locate more or less Where these people would be you know, you know training we'll be getting their training where these people would Somehow you know appear to be like Syria for instance, but of course not Syria only alone Iraq Iran and Other countries territories have been used by the terrorist organization the pkk for so many years for for the last two three decades With or without knowledge of these countries authorities, of course, I personally don't believe that the local authorities would not Would definitely have information about the activities of these groups. There is no such a thing that the local government or the governments of Certain countries whose territories have been used by terrorist organizations There's no possibility that these governments wouldn't know anything about them. So that would be impossible next impossible But of course there may be some difficulties in dealing with in coping with terrorist organizations and they may not see as being their problem because they may have to allocate large sums of large numbers of people and you know Conducting or carrying out some counter insurgents operations would be cost for them And they would be there would be no reason for them to deal with the terrorist organizations who are using their territories Because terrorist organization may not commit any activity may not stage any attack against these countries people so therefore Countries whose territory territories are being used by terrorist organizations may turn a loof May turn a blind eye To the activities of these organizations, but some Instead of turning a blind eye may just want to use terrorist organization organizations as a proxy element Especially that was the case during the Cold War period because during the Cold War period because of the The mutual assured destruction situation between the the two blocks the United States the Soviet Union NATO Warsaw Pact The idea was to not let the local conflicts escalate into a major conflict that would drag in the superpowers So many countries which had problems with other countries Had to find ways of dealing with these problems on their own Just like I mentioned at the beginning of the semester Turkey was told by its Western allies not to have any problem with its Middle Eastern neighbors because of France United Kingdom United States and other allies of Turkey within NATO They wouldn't like to see Turkey and Syria for instance Confronting each other in the battlefield that would drag in the United States or NATO countries and because Syria would have Close the alliance relationship with the Soviet Union that would also bring in the Soviets into the picture And then because of Turkish Syrian conflict there will be a major conflict between the two blocks so in the in the impossibility or in the extreme difficulty of having or fighting an open war in the battlefield Countries have used some proxy elements in order to damage the interests of other countries and because for instance in the During the Cold War years, especially starting with the 1960s Because Turkey and Syria as well as Iraq They all have embarked on large irrigation projects and therefore which increase the demand on the waters of the Euphrates and tiger servers Turkey Iraq and Syria have found themselves in a conflict over the waters of the Euphrates and one way to solve this conflict Of course might have been to have open confrontation that of course nobody wanted this to happen But this is you know what one can't think about a possible Resolution of conflicts other than diplomacy, but since Turkey ends a Syria could not fight or could not dare fighting each other and Syria was using the PKK is a proxy element in order to damage Turkey's interest which Retarded as you know very well for at least couple of decades and also cost it not only Billions and billions of dollars, but also lives of thousands of people security forces and civilian personnel Mini-person and civilian people and by way of giving support to the PKK So therefore terrorist organizations can be used as a proxy war tactic you do not sort of Involved in an open conflict, but you use terrorist organization which might damage or cause damages even more than The damage that you could cause maybe by way of fighting that country and this is not the only issue I remember Many years ago like seven eight years ago the Spanish ambassador was here in order to give us some you know some of his Experience and accumulation with respect to Spain's you know negotiations with the European Union Spanish Portuguese and Greek ambassadors were there and He was preaching on Us actually about you know The beauty of democratization and solving the terrorism problem this and that I asked him a question. I said Would you be able to? democratize yourselves because they had a bloody civil war they were under Franco regime and To some Spain is still not democratic. This is not my personal view, but some people think that way because there's still this you know Issue the Basque issue or other issues are not solved properly in view of other people But yet I asked him would you be able to democratize yourself and also improve your economy and then become a member of the European Union had friends not Sort of stopped its course political or otherwise supported the to the Basque issue He said no and thanks to cooperation cooperation that we Spain received from France after France decided not to Provide shelter or safe haven to some of the Etta members because they have not seen as they have not considered these people as being terrorists they consider them as Freedom fighters that they have considered these people as being you know people who were pursuing a political agenda rather than you know staging terrorist attacks, but their friends has changed its mind and French and Spanish Governments have cooperated against Etta and you know Etta and was somehow Lost to war I mean if there was a need so therefore Spain in a sense could save large sums of money that Spain would have otherwise allocated to the fight against her saved the lives of many people's civilians and security forces and also Was able to democratize its constitution so therefore it is of utmost importance that States that are or you know countries that are exposed to terrorism It is essential that they get support of other countries But the situation until recently and still is the case in some respects There are some case that we'll be talking about but the situation was the opposite terrorist organizations were getting support Knowing or unknowingly just either true Indifference or true active support a true active Coordination with terrorist organizations some states have seen this as or have used the terrorist organizations as an element of their form policy and some I as I said have just been remained aloof from what was going on remain indifferent to what was going on and by remaining Or staying indifferent that was also another type of support because terrorist organizations need to be dealt with Extreme coordination among intelligence organizations But and this is something other than you know underlining or emphasizing that Definition of terrorism is of utmost importance another issue Which always almost in every speech in every conversation in every writing anything that you can think of terrorism the other team that that is occurring is the need of intelligence sharing because We are dealing with an entity Which you do not necessarily? Know where actually it is you know the headquarters of or the capital of a state I Mean country X country Y every single country on the surface of earth Has a capital city you can know true intelligence through satellite pictures through human intelligence other type of Information collection you may have a great deal of information about other states The population the strength the weaknesses the number of troops of military capabilities economic capabilities on the ground resources I don't know all sorts of facilities technical or military or Sensitive you know parts so it is not difficult to Have an estimate about the the the capabilities or the extent of threat that may be posed by other states to you but even in the past and it is much more difficult to have an Accurate estimate today about what the capabilities capabilities of Terrorist organizations are You're dealing with a ghost. I mean especially today When we talk about transnational terrorism, I will give more or pay more emphasis on this special on Tuesday, but This is one of the biggest difficulties Even in the past even we for instance in dealing with ETA IRA PKK Tamils and others or red brigades and By the minor of all sorts of other ideological separatists whatever type of work of fanatical organizations even with them and today the situation is much more difficult it is highly difficult to have an Accurate estimate about the capabilities who the people are. I mean we whether there is a Hierarchical structure whether there is a chain of command who are involved in whatever type of Responsibilities within the terrorist organization. Where are they located? So this is very difficult and one way to have the most accurate information is to have intelligence and once a an intelligence organization Collects that information it has to share in theory or this is the ideal situation with other Intelligence units with other intelligence agencies of other countries, but this is in Practice almost next to impossible let alone sharing intelligence among states Intelligence services do not share intelligence with other departments of the state. I mean state mechanism and let alone sharing with other states or other Broke parts of a units of bureaucracy intelligence services do not Disclose information to other people within the same intelligence services It is because of the very nature of intelligence things must be a secret of course that was until WikiLeaks Well WikiLeaks Whatever information can be found there as many people have emphasized It's not a big deal. These are not things that people didn't know But actually what was important was that people have at least now an argument to blame each other but Secret or top secret or cosmic intelligence. They are not at least so far disclosed and not very likely to Especially top secret another type of information because well, maybe technologically possible, but still there will be a long way toward sharing effectively intelligence What the United States did right after 9 11 was to establish a committee with these which is known as 9 11 committee and 9 11 committee Established within the Senate of course with the help of experts and a large number of stuff They have published a book which I was strongly recommended to read And it was distributed freely in the United States in every library or just at a very very low price like something like 99 cents so And in this book you see the 15 or so different intelligence services extended from cost car to METR intelligence or CIA FBI et cetera and other organizations The lack of coordination was one of the reasons Why 9 11 could become a reality. I mean it was not something unthinkable There were different scenarios. There were different. I would say Writings or thoughts including mine before 9 9 11 and long before 9 11 that something similar Could happen, but what was of course? found to be Why this the reason why this has happened was Even though intelligence services in the United States in their individual capacity were somehow Tracking with the activities of those who were involved in 9 11 at some point They lost track with these people because of lack lack of coordination among themselves. So you see a country like the United States which has all sorts of military and technical and human capabilities to collect Accurate information accurate intelligence on a tiny basis that could be activated that could be actionable I mean, you know some measures could be taken on the spot right on time Even such a country which it's enormous capabilities and maybe that was the problem the enormity of the Capabilities, but yet they fail to stop 9 11 Well, some some of you might be thinking like some others the United States has Done this to itself. Well, I don't think they're so dumb people. So Therefore, I don't believe the United States did it to itself But there may be some other explanations as to whether they could expect such a huge damage Or maybe they were late in taking action. I don't know that these are issues that may be revealed to public in the coming decades, but the problem here Therefore is there is there are basically two major obstacles one is definition of terrorism which prevents states from cooperating with each other effectively and In the same way in the same context lack of coordination of cooperation in the area of intelligence sharing and These are interrelated because if states do not agree on Which activities or which acts are Terrorist acts or terrorist activities and which groups are terrorist groups or or freedom fighters Whatever and if they don't agree on that How can you expect these states to share intelligence? But even if for a second we presume we we think that states have come to a common understanding As to which acts are terrorist acts and which acts activities are terrorist activities And that that must be stopped prevented on a timely basis and then That it acquires Intelligence sharing even if they agree on the definition of terrorism the next step Intelligence cooperation or cooperation in the field of intelligence may not come because of the very nature of intelligence as I said because intelligence organizations intelligence agencies are very jealous about their Sources of information source of intelligence and they make some secondary tertiary considerations as to whether they the outcome that may be Gain Out of cooperation would it would this be detrimental in the second ray or 30? The following stages because once you disclose your source Then you expose your source to certain dangers and then you stop getting intelligence And you may be successful on this particular case But because of lack of sources or just disappearance of your source or just Elimination of your source by the enemy then you may be helpless in other cases in the future cases So therefore it is very difficult to expect intelligence cooperation Among states and also within the intelligence within the same state or even within the same intelligence service so therefore Terrorism is something that is far more difficult for statesmen for Poetations for everyone to cope with today to deal with and what is more of course threatening is almost this happens Terrorism is not going to go anywhere terrorist groups will not disappeared by themselves and As we have not seen luckily so far Well activities of terrorist Organizations may not remain at the same level where they have so far been successful to you know whatever activities They did but what is on the horizon which is not something negligible Well, maybe something not very very probable, but something which might be hugely cost of catastrophic is terrorism with weapons of mass destruction so therefore Unless a certain degree of common understanding and also sharing of intelligence is achieved We may not be able to deal with the catastrophic consequence of what may be lying ahead on the horizon which is terrorism with weapons of mass destruction and this will be the subject of next week's on Tuesday's discussion, and I will strongly recommend you and Bear in mind because I may very well think of Giving you a quiz unless I feel like you have read your articles Read the two pieces that I sent already and I will send you two or three other pieces and a PowerPoint which I will use here next Tuesday and Feminize yourselves with the subject because this is a subject which is actually a week a semester long topic But we are of course not able to deal with the issue through the entire semester So I strongly recommend you to read your Read the attachments as well as look at the PowerPoint before you come to class on Tuesday next week. I see you then