Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2

OLD TERRORISM, NEW TERRORISM: ‘9/11’ AND THE UNCHANGED TERRORISM DISCOURSE

ESKİ TERÖRİZM, YENİ TERÖRİZM: 9/11 VE ESKİMEYEN TERÖRİZM SÖYLEMİ

Pages
275–298
Publication Date
2018-08-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Secondly, it argues that the new terrorism has lost its analytic value as since it has been highly politicised.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article critically analyses the concept of ‘new terrorism’.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Following the attacks on 11th of September 2001 (aka 9/11) the term of new terrorism transformed into a political discourse and was deployed to efface and re-territorialize the destructive violence which was organically embedded in the Western societies as no exception.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Secondly, it argues that the new terrorism has lost its analytic value as since it has been highly politicised.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2001 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Deleuze · Guattari · Yeni Terörizm

Abstract

This article critically analyses the concept of ‘new terrorism’. Following the attacks on 11th of September 2001 (aka 9/11) the term of new terrorism transformed into a political discourse and was deployed to efface and re-territorialize the destructive violence which was organically embedded in the Western societies as no exception. In the light of this argument, terrorism discourses and counter-terrorism policies applied by the Western states in international society, some orthodox approaches on new terrorism will be problematized and corroded. This article aims to contribute to critical terrorism studies which apparently lack interest in Turkey in the following ways: firstly, the study suggests that the term of new terrorism is a concept that was invented in the academic field, and then confined into a political discourse. Secondly, it argues that the new terrorism has lost its analytic value as since it has been highly politicised.

Özet

Bu makalede “yeni terörizm” kavramı eleştirel olarak analiz edilmektedir. 11 Eylül 2001 Saldırıları’nı (9/11) takip eden süreçte yeni terörizm kavramı bir siyasal söyleme dönüşerek, Batılı toplumlarda da doğal biçimde içkin olarak var olan yıkıcı şiddeti maskelemek ve yenidenyeryurt sahibi yapmak için kullanılmıştır. Bu argüman bağlamında, Batılı devletlerin küresel terörizm söylemi ve terörle mücadele politikaları ele alınarak yeni terörizm üzerine mevcut yaklaşımlar sorunsallaştırılacak ve aşındırılmaya çalışılacaktır. Bu makaleyle, Türkiye’de eksikliği görülen eleştirel terörizm çalışmalarına; ilk olarak yeni terörizmin önce akademik alanda ortaya çıktığı ve daha sonra Batılı devletlerin tekeline almaya çalıştığı bir siyasal söyleme sıkıştığı savunularak katkıda bulunulması amaçlanmaktadır. İkinci olarak, yeni terörizmin siyasallaşmasına bağlı olarak analitik değerini kaybettiği savunulmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

AĞKAYA, O. (2018). OLD TERRORISM, NEW TERRORISM: ‘9/11’ AND THE UNCHANGED TERRORISM DISCOURSE. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2, 275–298. https://ajindex.com/articles/67631

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Akay, A. (1996). Yersiz-yurdsuzlaşma üzerine. Toplum-Bilim Dergisi, 5, (Gilles Deleuze Özel Sayısı): 15-18.
  2. Aydınlı, E. (2008). Before jihadists there were anarchists: A failed case of transnational violence. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 31 (10): 903-923.
  3. Bin Ladin, U. (2001). FBIS report: Compilation of Usama Bin Ladin Statements, 1994 – January 2004. (21 Ekim 2001). http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ubl-fbis.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 24.7.2017).
  4. Bozaslan, H. (2014). Ortadoğu: Bir şiddet tarihi (Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun sonundan El-Kaide’ye). İstanbul:
  5. İletişim Yayınları.
  6. Brown, C. (2007). The new terrorism debate. Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, 6 (3): 28-43.
  7. Burnett, J. ve Whyte, D. (2005). Embedded expertise and the new terrorism. Journal for Crime, Conflict and the Media, 1 (4): 1-18.
  8. Bush, G. W. (2001). Address to joint session of congress and the American people. (20.9.2001) http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010920-8.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 22.7.2017).
  9. Bush, G. W. (2001). President’s remarks at National Day of Prayer and Remembrance. (14.9.2001) https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010914-2.html (Erişim Tarihi: 23.7.2017).
  10. Chailand, G. (2015). Il n’y a rien à négocier avec les islamistes. (22 Kasım 2015), Libération, http://www.liberation.fr/planete/2015/11/22/gerard-chaliandil-n-y-a-rien-a-negocier-avec-les-islamistes_1415309, (Erişim Tarihi: 9.7.2017).
  11. CNN (2017). Deadliest mass shootings in modern US history: Fast facts, 10.11.2017, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-history-fast-facts/index.html, (Erişim Tarihi: 16.1.2017)
  12. Copeland, T. (2001). Is the ‘new terrorism’ really new? An analysis of the new paradigm for terrorism. The Journal of Conflict Studies, 21 (2): 91-105.
  13. Crenshaw, M. (2007), The debate over “new” vs. “old” terrorism. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago. Croft, S. ve Moore, C. (2010). The evolution of threat narratives in the age of terror: understanding terrorist threats in Britain, International Affairs, 86 (4): 821-835.
  14. Deleuze, G. (1995a). On A thousand plateaus. M. Joughin (Çev.) Negotitations: İçinde 25-34. New York: Columbia University Press.
  15. Deleuze, G. (1995b). Three questions on Six Times Two. M. Joughin (Çev.) Negotitations: İçinde 37-45. New York: Columbia University Press.
  16. Deleuze, G. ve Guattari, F. (1982). Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. R. Hurle