CONFRONTING ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC: AN AMERICAN DILEMMA?

• Published date: 01 July 2002
• Date: 01 July 2002
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2002.tb00095.x
• Author: AUSTIN T. TURK

REACTION ESSAY

CONFRONTING ENEMIES FOREIGN AND

DOMESTIC: AN AMERICAN DILEMMA?

AUSTIN

T.

TURK*

University

of

California,

Riverside

Terrorism has moved from the periphery to the center of public

awareness and fear. Debate over what is terrorism and who

is

a terrorist is

increasingly sharpened and simplified, as political agendas and media

framing overshadow analytical concerns. The meaning of terrorism and

the identification of terrorists appear to depend largely on whose interests

require what enemies. Smith and his colleagues are among the few who

have tried, with notable success, to make terrorism a subject of empirical

research instead of polemics. In the American Terrorism Study, they have

been examining the federal government’s efforts to define and control

terrorism. Their most recent report analyzes the processing of

international terrorism cases, in comparison to the treatment of domestic

cases.

The findings are disquieting, for no clear guidance is provided to either

those who prize legality or those who war against terrorism. What has

been learned? What is to be done?

The

U.S.

government has long attempted to deal with political terrorists

as if they were ordinary criminals. There was an implicit assumption that

terrorism is a foreign phenomenon. The rationale was both political and

legalistic. To recognize violence as a political act could open the door to

“guerrilla theater” in the courts, or even to the possibility of serious

debate over the merits of radical arguments. To treat political offenders as

a special class of dangerous subversives could lead to such denials

of

due

process rights as occurred in Attorney General Palmer’s raids

of

1920.

After Watergate, Attorney General Levi went to the opposite extreme,

making it nearly impossible

for

the FBI

to

investigate American citizens

suspected of domestic security

or

terrorism-related offenses. Those few

terrorists who were apprehended were prosecuted as common criminals.

Not until

1983

were the investigative rules changed, permitting more

thorough investigation of domestic cases and establishing separate (and

classified) guidelines for investigating international terrorists. Since then,

the rules have been further modified, and the FBI’s jurisdiction has been

*

Austin

T.

Turk wrote the entries on “Assassination” and “Terrorism” in the

Encyclopedia

of

Crime and Justice (New York: Macmillan Reference USA,

2002).

VOLUME

1

NUMBER

3

2002

PP

345-350