Customer Reviews

Inside Terrorism

5 star:		(18)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Bruce Hoffman, long one of RAND's key terrorism-wallahs and an affiliate of St Andrews University has written an excellent book on a controversial topic.

There was a fair amount of literature on terrorism prior to September 11th and, my, but there's even more now. A lot of it was a load of old rubbish prior to September 11th and even more of it is now. Hoffman's book is a work of substance which in itself puts it ahead of much of the pack.

"Inside Terrorism" covers a variety of areas. It opens with a discussion about the lengthy (and continuing) debate that surrounds the issue of defining terrorism - an issue which has stumped everyone from academics to the UN. What and who exactly IS a terrorist? Hoffman doesn't provide a clear cut, definitive answer but he does provide clear coverage of what is framing the argument, along with some of the possible answers which are being put forward. Whether you consider this level of debate to be self-indulgent and ivory tower or not (as I increasingly do, interesting thought it is) it is important to know that the debate does exist and what it's all about as it goes to the heart of some real-life anti-terrorism policy making, especially with regard to multilateral attempts to curb terror groups.

Hoffman moves on to cover Post-colonial ethnic or nationalist terror groups, international terrorism, Religion and terrorism, Terrorism, Media and public opinion, Terrorist methods and mindsets and the potential future of terrorism. All in all, it adds up to a fairly comprehensive introduction to the subject. Some of Hoffman's conclusions aren't to everybody's tastes, but terrorism is an inherently controversial and hotly debated issue, it's the nature of the beast.

Overall, this is an excellent overview and introduction to the subject of terrorism. Certainly better than the recent work of Walter Laqueur. The newcomer to the subject would also be well advised to check out Christopher Harmon's "Terrorism Today" as well, along with Paul Wilkinson's "Terrorism and Democracy". Ken Booth's "Worlds in Collision" is an excellent collection of essays by various authors that is ideal for somebody with an interest in the post-September 11th world.

Hoffman's writing style is not immediately engaging (I found the book far more digestible on a second reading), but this is still an excellent work for the beginner. In a field that is both crowded and shallow, Hoffman has produced a book of genuine substance and for that he deserves credit.

I found Inside Terrorism extremely readable, yet with the obvious authority of high quality research. Hoffman draws in the reader with skill I rarely see in nonfiction writing. This extremely complex issue so often in the forefront of today's world is dealt with in a unique yet straightforward manner. This is a 'must read' for anyone that travel, reads the newspaper or watches the evening news.

The initial chapter on 'defining terrorism' helped me start to extract from the media over-usage of this term, the relevant issues that differentiate 'terrorism' from other forms of violence. The evolutionary nature of the term is profiled showing the historic development of what is now seen exclusively in a pejorative sense. Understanding the background, historic development and indeed, the elements that makeup the essentials of terrorism, will allow the reader to evaluate the news from an informed, rather than agenda driven position.

Having provided an understanding of what the real issues are, the author moves the reader through the various types of terrorism, explaining them in adequate but not suffocating detail. Like an NFl highlight film, the reader is taken through a historical framework that keeps the readers interest while exploring the salient points. The examples read like the Sunday paper as the vivid reality jumps out at you. There is a feeling of 'insider information' without the talk show hype. This provides at last, a basis for real understanding of the frequent news stories that become such a blur of tedious detail.

This book went much futher than a historic recount of terrorism. While dates and incidents are included, they serve as interesting and helpful examples of the issue and don't become a tedious history text. Particularly interesting to me was the description and explanation of the different ideological styles. Left and right wing, ethno-nationalist, millenarian, separatist and religious motivations are unraveled in a systematic and clear manner. Similarities and differences are made evident and the importance of these aspects become clear.

In Short, this book dealt with a complex and confusing issue in a way I could understand, remember and use when I read or listen to the news.

In the wake of the 9/11 disaster a plethora of books has been published on the nature and structure of the terrorist threat. Some are quite good, but others are absolute nonsense. Interestingly, some of the best books on both terrorism and counter-terrorism predate 9/11 and were written before counter-terrorism became the cottage industry it is today.

This book by Bruce Hoffman in cooperation with the Rand Corporation was published in 1998 and remains one of the best books available on the nature of terrorism. Hoffman provides a useful and on the whole an accurate explanation of the differences between secular, religious, transnational, and state sponsored terrorism providing useful examples of each. He also provides a good deal of probably accurate information on terrorist motivations and operational procedures. Finally he was prescient enough to recognize that the phenomenon represented by Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda represent an ideological movement rather than a structured organization. After four years of the so-called, `Global War on Terrorism' this fact is slowly sinking into U.S. Government circles. Hoffman only lightly touches on the related issue of the al Qaeda financial structures, but notes the relatively small amounts of money actually required for most terrorist operations.

As indicated Hoffman does not limit this book to Islamic religious terrorism but also delves into motivations and operations techniques of secular terrorism as well. Perhaps most importantly given the July 2006 Near-East crisis, he uses Hezbollah as an example of the dangerous nature of state sponsored terrorism. All in all a sound book that contains markedly better information on terrorism than many more recent books and reflects the fruits of sound scholarship.

For the general reader, Hoffman provides probably the best introduction to terrorism from an historical perspective. It is instructive to view the tragic events of September 11th from that perspective. Terrorists' motives as well as their strategic objectives and tactical means have differed (sometimes significantly) over the centuries. Hoffman does a brilliant job of reviewing and explaining a wide variety of separate acts of terrorism. All terrorists (religious or secular) are extremists. Frankly, I continue to have problems with the term "fundamentalists" because so many historical figures now revered acted upon the most fundamental of principles for which they were prepared to die...and many did. Like heroism, terrorism is in the eye of the beholder. Case in point: those involved with the Resistance in occupied France during World War Two. To his credit, Hoffman presents the material with great precision but without bias. It remains for each reader to formulate value judgments. Especially now, this is a "must read" for those of us who struggle to understand events on a recent Tuesday.

Bruce Hoffman offers a fascinating and enlightening examination of the confusing nature of modern terrorism. I especially enjoyed the opening chapter on the toils of anyone trying to lay down a definition of the word "terrorism" itself. Overall, it is a must read for anyone trying to make heads or tails of today's "new-generation" terrorism. I strongly recommend it!

I found "Inside Terrorism" being a highly comprehensive as well as a very informative book. Since this book was my first contact with the topic "terrorism" I was quite surprised how easy but nevertheless detailed Hoffman introduces the readder to this complex subject. Although one might think that is a boring book, it is everything but boring... believe me, I'm a student and I know a LOT about boring books

This book provides an excellent historical context for the history of terrorism. His extensive facts, figures, and percentages give necessary insight into the field. He delves into the worst parts of terrorism, but does not shy from also writing of groups like Hezbollah's charities etc.

Hoffman does his best to not only define terrorism but provide timely information in an unbiased manner. This book is my textbook for my college Crime and Terrorism class. This has become an extremely useful tool and would recommend that it be read to better understand the psychology of terrorists and the concept of terrorism.

In his book, Hoffman takes the time to explain the roots and framework of terrorism is detail. The motives and agendas of terrorists are analyzed and we get a very good picture of how international terrorism works as we even get a glimpse into the minds of such dangerous characters. Another book that explains the next step of terrorism with the reality of very dangerous and devastating nuclear terrorist attacks is the powerful thriller THE CONSULTANT by Alec Donzi.

Just for the record, I'm reviewing the 2006 edition of this book, so it is no longer as out of date as the previous edition. And it is a very interesting book. We learn definitions of terrorism, we see what terrorism is, how terrorists recruit, how many of them think, what some of them say, how they get publicity, how they take advantage of media opportunities ("Don't shoot, Abdul! We're not on prime time!"), and so on.

We also read about circumstances in which terrorists may decide that mass murder (involving huge numbers of deaths as opposed to spectacular but less deadly acts of terror) makes sense.

Can terrorist groups be defeated? Of course they can. Most of them do not last long. A few such groups do last for a while, especially if they get some support from one or more nations. But even these can be defeated.

Bruce Hoffman makes the point that while media coverage is essential for terrorists, the net effect of such coverage is mixed: audiences are eager to follow the exploits of terrorists, but much of the media coverage of terrorism is negative, and most of the audience is opposed to terrorism.

The author recommends patience and determination in the fight against terrorism. And I think that human civilization always has a chance against any terrorist foe. If not, the terrorists will, of course, destroy themselves along with the rest of us.

Terrorists often claim that their victory is inevitable. But it rarely is. After all, most terrorist goals are incredibly arbitrary. Without the use of violence, terrorists would rarely have any chance of even temporary success, and in the long run, they usually have no chance. Almost all terrorist groups are therefore at a big long-term disadvantage.

Still, I think we may be overlooking something here: what about those cases in which terrorism is not the first option of some greedy extremists? What about those rare cases in which it is a minor option of reasonable people?

For example, suppose some of us decided to try to accomplish some possibly dubious but possibly reasonable goal, such as the expansion of the Church of Latter Day Saints to 30 million members, or autonomy for Poles, Kurds or Tibetans. Would terrorism be our first choice? No. We would realize that our goals were not so arbitrary as to be impossible without violence. We'd be patient and slowly move towards success.

But now suppose that, with the Church of Latter Day Saints increasing in numbers, some nations, including the United States, decided on a controversial policy of genocide to get rid of all Mormons! Oops! Now what? Well, in that case, terrorism might well be one of several options for those trying to change such a strange and catastrophic policy. And in that case, with the goal of terrorism simply being to stop the genocide, the terrorist aims would be anything but arbitrary and dubious. I think it is always important to notice the difference between the wild actions of extremists and those of people who are merely trying to defend themselves. And I feel that many people, including some experts on terrorism, fail to emphasize this sufficiently. Even in this book, we see the author point out that in some cases (such as in South Africa), terrorism can help achieve goals. Hoffman does explain that in this case, the terrorist goals were very coherent and relatively reasonable, but he fails to emphasize the fact that without violence on either side, those goals were likely to be achieved! I think we also see a little confusion about the false similarities some people see in Jewish terrorism versus Arab terrorism. Much of the Jewish terror in the 1940s was indeed arbitrary, but at least it was in support of a goal (Jews getting human rights in the Levant) that was going to be achieved if neither side used any violence. Much of the Arab terror was also arbitrary, but it was in support of a very different goal, namely the permanent obliteration of human rights for Jews in the region. That goal had no chance of being achieved without violence. I think the author should have been clearer about such differences. After all, the former kind of terrorism has goals that are indeed likely to be achieved in the long run, and moreover, mere achievement of such goals is not much of a threat to society. The goals of the latter form of terrrorism have little chance of being achieved in the long run and constitute a great threat to everyone.

In spite of these minor complaints, I like this book very much. It is comprehensive and useful, and I recommend it.