United States and state terrorism

This article is about allegations of US state terrorism. For terrorism sponsored by the United States, see United States and state-sponsored 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.[1]

This work has proved controversial with mainstream scholars of terrorism, who concentrate on non-state terrorism and the state terrorism of dictatorships.[1]

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.[2]

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.[3]

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.[3]

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.[4] 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").[5]

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.[1] 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.[6] 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.[7] 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.[8][9] 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."[10]

2026

During the second presidency of Donald Trump, media sources, politicians, and others have described US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities, particularly during Operation Metro Surge, as terror.[11][12][13][14]

In February 2026, in a court case on the immigration policy of the second Trump administration, Judge Sunshine Sykes wrote "Beyond its terror against noncitizens, the executive branch has extended its violence on its own citizens".[15][16]

Definition

See also: State terrorism and Definitions of terrorism

The United States legal definition of terrorism excludes acts done by recognized states.[17][18] According to U.S. law (22 U.S.C. 2656f(d)(2))[19] terrorism is defined as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience".[20][21][22] There is no international consensus on a legal or academic definition of terrorism.[23] United Nations conventions have failed to reach consensus on definitions of non-state or state terrorism.[24]

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.[25] 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."[26] 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.[27]

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".[28] 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.[29]

General critiques

The classification of United States foreign policy as "state terrorism" is a subject of intense academic and political debate, centering on the definition of terrorism and the extent of US responsibility for the actions of its allies. William Odom, formerly the director of the National Security Agency under President Reagan's administration, argued that because terrorism is a tactic rather than a specific enemy, the United States' history of supporting such tactics makes its modern rhetoric appear hypocritical.[30] This sentiment is shared by professor Richard Falk, who asserts that the term "terrorism" should be applied neutrally to any deliberate targeting of civilians, whether by state or non-state actors. Falk suggests that focusing solely on non-state groups is an insufficient strategy for peace and has even argued that those resisting US policy might invoke a Nuremberg Defense.[31][32][33] However, critics like Daniel Schorr argue that Falk's definitions are inherently subjective, leading to inconsistent labels of what acts are "permissible."[34]

Further criticism of the "state terror" label comes from political scientist James S. Fishkin, who, in reviewing the work of Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, argues that they overstate American omnipotence. Fishkin contends that while the US may provide "systematic support" to brutal regimes, it lacks the direct "control" once exercised by the Soviet Union over Eastern Europe. He suggests the moral charge against the US should be a failure to use its influence to prevent atrocities, rather than being the primary architect of them.[35] Similarly, former US Secretary of Education William Bennett and Stephen Morris have dismissed the "terrorist state" label as preposterous, pointing to US interventions in Kuwait, Bosnia, the Balkans, and Somalia as evidence of a liberating foreign policy. Morris specifically argued that most brutal 20th-century regimes operated independently of American aid.[36][37]

Despite these defenses, the debate often centers on the 1965–66 Indonesian mass killings.[38] While earlier scholars like Morris claimed limited US involvement, 2017 declassified documents from the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta confirmed the government was deeply involved in the campaign.[39][40][41] Historians such as Vijay Prashad and Brad Simpson note that the US provided lists of targets and encouraged the military to carry out the massacres to ensure the ouster of Sukarno and the rise of neoliberal policies.[42][43] This led to a 2016 ruling by an international tribunal in The Hague, which found the US and other Western governments complicit in crimes against humanity.[44][45] Journalist Vincent Bevins characterizes these events not as an aberration, but as the peak of a broader network of US-backed anti-communist mass killings across the Global South during the Cold War.[46]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b c Blakeley, Ruth (2009). State Terrorism and Neoliberalism: The North in the South. Routledge. pp. 4, 20–23, 85–96. ISBN 978-0415686174. Archived from the original on 2015-06-14. Retrieved 2015-06-12.
  2. ^ Sluka, p. 8
  3. ^ a b 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. Vol. 3. Cambridge University Press. p. 230. ISBN 978-1107602311.
  9. ^ Bevins, Vincent (2020). The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World. PublicAffairs. p. 228. ISBN 978-1541742406. Using numbers compiled by the US-funded Freedom House Organization, historian John Coatsworth concluded that from 1960 to 1990, the number of victims of US-backed violence in Latin America "vastly exceeded" the number of people killed in the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc over the same period of time.
  10. ^ McSherry, J. Patrice (2011). "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.
  11. ^ Singh, Maanvi (2026-01-24). "ICE raids turn life into a daily terror for Minneapolis schoolkids: 'This is a generational trauma'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2026-01-26.
  12. ^ "'It's not even policing': ICE agents unleash "terror in communities they pass through'". France 24. 2026-01-26. Retrieved 2026-01-26.
  13. ^ "'We're being terrorized.' What Mainers are seeing as ICE launches operation in the state". PBS News. 2026-01-23. Retrieved 2026-01-26.
  14. ^ Helmore, Edward (2026-01-24). "'Heartbroken, horrified': Democrats outraged over Minneapolis shooting". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2026-01-26.
  15. ^ "Enforce Judgment – #116 in Lazaro Maldonado Bautista v. Ernesto Santacruz Jr (C.D. Cal., 5:25-cv-01873)". CourtListener.
  16. ^ THANAWALA, SUDHIN (19 February 2026). "Federal judge accuses Trump administration of 'terror' against immigrants in scathing ruling". AP News.
  17. ^ 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.
  18. ^ Sinai, Joshua (2008). "How to Define Terrorism". Perspectives on Terrorism. 2 (4): 9–11. JSTOR 26298341.
  19. ^ 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.
  20. ^ Gupta, p. 8
  21. ^ Sinai, Joshua (2008). "How to Define Terrorism". Perspectives on Terrorism. 2 (4). Archived from the original on 2011-10-05. Retrieved 2011-07-06.
  22. ^ "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.
  23. ^ 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.
  24. ^ 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.
  25. ^ Selden p. 4
  26. ^ 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.
  27. ^ Williamson p. 43
  28. ^ 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.
  29. ^ Wright, p. 11
  30. ^ 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
  31. ^ Falk, Richard (1988). Revolutionaries and Functionaries: The Dual Face of Terrorism. New York: Dutton. ISBN 9780525246046.
  32. ^ 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.
  33. ^ Falk, Richard (June 28, 1986). "Thinking About Terrorism". The Nation. 242 (25): 873–892.
  34. ^ Schorr, Daniel (1 May 1988). "The Politics of Violence". The New York Times.
  35. ^ 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.
  36. ^ "American Morning with Paula Zahn". CNN. May 9, 2002. Archived from the original on 2012-10-26. Retrieved 7 July 2011.
  37. ^ Morris, Stephen, Chomsky on U.S. foreign policy, Harvard International Review, December–January 1981, p. 26.
  38. ^ 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.
  39. ^ 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.
  40. ^ 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.'
  41. ^ 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.
  42. ^ Prashad, Vijay (2020). Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations. Monthly Review Press. p. 85. ISBN 978-1583679067.
  43. ^ 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.
  44. ^ 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.
  45. ^ 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.
  46. ^ 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.

References

Further reading

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.