В статье рассматриваются современные подходы к определению терроризма в международном праве. Анализируются различия между международно-правовым и криминологическим подходами к определению этого явления. Представлена авторская классификация террористических актов по масштабу, целям и характеру действий, что позволяет глубже понять природу этой угрозы. На основе исследования обосновывается важность интеграции различных методов борьбы с терроризмом на всех уровнях. В заключение делается вывод о необходимости комплексного подхода к противодействию террористическим угрозам.
Ключевые слова: терроризм, международное право, криминология, международные отношения, международная безопасность
Approaches to the definition of terrorism in the theory and practice of contemporary international law
Abstract. The paper examines contemporary interpretations of terrorism within the system of international relations. The differences between the international legal and criminological approaches to defining this phenomenon are analyzed. The author’s classification of terrorism is presented according to its scale, objectives, and nature of actions, which enables a deeper understanding of the nature of the threat. Based on the study, the importance of integrating various methods of combating terrorism at all levels is substantiated. The conclusion is drawn on the necessity of a comprehensive approach to countering terrorist threats.
Keywords: terrorism, international law, criminology, international relations, international security
In the modern system of international law, the concept of terrorism is interpreted ambiguously and includes a number of conceptual approaches defining its key features[1]. The term «terrorism» is associated with an ideological component – a certain set of views and values that form the basis of the activities of criminal communities. In most cases, terrorism is aimed at achieving destructive goals, which allows it to be correlated with the doctrine of negative impact on the main institutions of power. Through pressure on state and municipal bodies, as well as structures operating in the international arena, a targeted interference in the decision-making process occurs, which contributes to the deformation of the normal course of interaction within society.
A key characteristic of terrorism is its emphasis on intimidation, directed not only against specific groups but also against the public consciousness. The goal is often to demoralize society, incite panic, or foster distrust of the government. In some cases, the element of intimidation is treated as an optional feature of the criminal act’s subjective nature. Furthermore, terrorism often incorporates violent and unlawful methods, expanding its toolkit beyond traditional forms of attack.
The growing threat of terrorism prompts a review of not only domestic legislation but also approaches to regulating this phenomenon at the international level. From this perspective, the emphasis is on the social danger posed by terrorist actions and their impact on the collective security of states. Modern international standards, including the European Convention on Human Rights, obligate member states to ensure a balance between protecting the population and preserving fundamental rights[2]. For example, responding to terrorist incidents requires coordinated efforts to counter threats and implement preventive measures.
Criminological analysis views terrorism as a complex phenomenon encompassing not only acts of physical violence or threats, but also forms of activity such as propaganda, the integration of extremist ideas, and the organizational structure of terrorist groups. An important aspect is the presence of a stable ideological base that underpins the group’s activities and is perceived as an internal regulator of its participants’ behavior. This is complemented by the dynamics of the formation and operation of stable terrorist organizations with their own management and coordination systems.
In the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition, for example in the United States, terrorism is understood to encompass a broad range of illegal activities: from planning, financing, and directly implementing terrorist attacks to training and recruiting perpetrators, and creating armed groups and criminal organizations[3]. This also includes information assistance and dissemination of materials justifying violence, as well as online recruitment campaigns. Counteraction strategies are built on a comprehensive consideration of the entire chain—from the ideological indoctrination of new members to the technical implementation of attacks.
The concept of terrorism can be structured based on various criteria. The subjective criterion distinguishes “lone wolf” terrorist activity (individual terrorism), where either a single individual or a small autonomous group operates. The opposite is organized terrorism, where a large, structured group operates.
In terms of its purpose, terrorism is classified as state-sponsored, political, religious, nationalist, military, economic (selfish), and so on, which is important for adequately classifying and preventing threats. Based on the specifics of the crimes committed, terrorism encompasses such actions as attempts on the lives of government officials, hostage-taking, sabotage, and acts of cyberterrorism, which highlights the need to expand the list of illegal forms [4].
To summarize, terrorism as a phenomenon has multiple dimensions. Its characteristics, as interpreted under international law, include violations of legal norms, the use of violence, transnational nature, ideological motivation, and pressure on public institutions (see Table 1). Implementing a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy requires aligning national legislation with international standards, interagency cooperation, and monitoring contemporary forms of terrorist activity.
Thus, the presented analysis demonstrates that approaches to defining terrorism in the theory and practice of modern international law are based on a multi-layered understanding of this phenomenon. Terrorism combines ideological, organizational, and criminal characteristics and manifests itself in a variety of forms, from individual violence to complex collective actions affecting global security interests. The inclusion of aspects such as its transnational nature and impact on public institutions in legal interpretations underscores the complexity of the problem. This confirms the need to further refine international legal mechanisms, adapt legislation, and strengthen cooperation between states to effectively and balancedly counter terrorist threats.
In recent decades, the debate about the essence of terrorism has acquired particular relevance both in the practice of applying international law and in doctrinal literature. Despite a significant body of research, the UN has still not been able to develop a single legal definition of terrorism, which significantly complicates the development of coordinated measures to counter this phenomenon[5]. The reason is the presence of a variety of approaches dictated by differences in legal traditions, political interests, and the social structure of states participating in international relations [6].
One attempt to create a universal definition was the 1999 UN Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, which defines terrorist acts as actions aimed at causing death or serious bodily injury to civilians, if the purpose is to intimidate the population or coerce a government to take specific actions[7]. However, states often supplement this definition with specific features reflecting national security priorities. For example, Russian legislation defines terrorism not only as violent acts but also as the threat of their use to influence the decisions of government bodies or international organizations (Article 205 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
International practice records the evolution of views on terrorism, which is reflected, for example, in UN Security Council resolutions. In particular, Resolution 1373 (2001), adopted immediately after the events of September 11, requires states to tighten controls over financial flows, strengthen migration controls, and exchange data between intelligence agencies[8]. This approach demonstrates an emphasis on the interconnectedness of national and international measures to combat terrorism. Analysts note that effective international cooperation is only possible with the agreement of national definitions of terrorism, which is complicated by the presence of political conflicts of interest[9].
International regional organizations have made a significant contribution to the development of the theoretical basis for the fight against terrorism. Thus, the European Union in its Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA defines terrorist crimes as acts committed with the aim of seriously intimidating the population or unlawfully coercing state authorities, as well as destabilizing political and economic structures[10]. In the Council of Europe system, special attention is paid to human rights in counter-terrorism activities, which is recorded, for example, in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court emphasizes the need to maintain a balance between the effectiveness of counter-terrorism measures and the protection of individual rights (the case of Chagayev and Others v. Russia)[11].
An important aspect of modern scholarly approaches is the correlation of terrorism with the concept of unlawful armed conflict. Certain types of terrorist activity, such as attacks on armed forces or infrastructure, are considered in international humanitarian law through the prism of the Geneva Conventions 1949 and the Additional Protocols 1977. At the same time, the question of whether participants in illegal armed groups can claim the protections provided for prisoners of war or whether they should be considered exclusively as criminals is discussed[12].
The problem of cyberterrorism, which has been rapidly developing in recent years, deserves special attention. Modern terrorist groups use digital technologies to carry out attacks on critical information infrastructure, spread ideology, and recruit supporters. To date, international law lacks a universal treaty directly regulating cyberterrorism, which creates additional security challenges and requires the development of new legal response tools[13].
The complexity and transnational nature of terrorism necessitate the use of international criminal justice mechanisms. Although the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court does not explicitly identify terrorism as a separate category of crime, certain offences—such as crimes against humanity or war crimes—may encompass individual terrorist acts if they are committed as part of a systematic attack on a civilian population[14].
While noting the increasingly important role of non-governmental organizations and the expert community in shaping the global counter-terrorism agenda, it is important to emphasize the importance of ensuring public oversight and transparency in the activities of law enforcement agencies. Recent studies show that excessive restrictions on human rights may not only fail to improve the effectiveness of the fight against terrorism, but may even contribute to the growth of radicalization and alienation of certain groups of the population, as noted in reports by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International [15].
In conclusion, we emphasize that the diversity of interpretations of terrorism is explained by the complexity of the phenomenon and its volatility in the context of developing international relations, globalization, and technological progress. Prospects for a sustainable and coordinated response are possible only through ongoing dialogue between states, international organizations, civil society, and experts.
Bibliography
- Kilimnik E. V. The Threat of Domestic Terrorism in the United States from Former Military and Police Personnel / E. V. Kilimnik // Theory and Practice of World Science. 2022. No. 4. pp. 58-65;
- Kichenina V. S. Analysis of the US Experience in the Fight against Terrorism as a Threat to International Security / V. S. Kichenina, A. O. Stavtsova // Naukosphere. 2021. No. 1-2. pp. 205-209;
- Kudrin G. M. The United States and Counteraction to International Terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq / G. M. Kudrin // Skif. Issues of Student Science. — 2019. No. 9 (37). pp. 241-247;
- Khatsuk Zh. V. Concept and types of international terrorism / Zh. V. Khatsuk // Bulletin of the Yanka Kupala State University of Grodno. Series 4. Jurisprudence. 2023. Vol. 13, No. 3. P. 144-154
- Saul, B. Defining ‘Terrorism’: A Conceptual Minefield. In: Saul B. (Ed.), Research Handbook on International Law and Terrorism. Edward Elgar, 2014. pp. 1–24.
- McCormack, T. L. H., & Warner, R. Defining Terrorism: Legal and Political Implications. Netherlands International Law Review, 2007, 54(1), pp. 39–62.
- United Nations International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. 1999. — https://www.un.org/law/cod/finterr.htm
- United Nations Security Council, Resolution 1373. 2001. — https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1373(2001)
- Schmid, A.P. The Definition of Terrorism. In: The Routledge Handbook of Terrorism Research. Routledge, 2011. pp. 39–157.
- COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism. Official Journal L 164, 22/06/2002 P. 0003 – 0007.
- Европейский суд по правам человека. Чагаев и другие против России, жалоба № 63170/14, 2019 — https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/
- Cassese, A. Terrorism is Also Disrupting Some Crucial Legal Categories of International Law. European Journal of International Law, 2001, 12(5), pp. 993–1001.
- Hathaway, O.A., Crootof, R., Levitz, P., Nix, H., Nowlin, A., Perdue, W., Spiegel, T. The Law of Cyber-Attack. California Law Review, 2012. Vol. 100, No. 4, pp. 817–885.
- Cryer, R., Friman, H., Robinson, D., Wilmshurst, E. An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure. 3rd Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
- Human Rights Watch. In the Name of Security: Counterterrorism Laws Worldwide since September 11. Washington, 2012. — www.hrw.org
[1] Kichenina V. S. Analysis of the US experience in the fight against terrorism as a threat to international security / V. S. Kichenina, A. O. Stavtsova // Naukosphere. 2021. No. 1-2. P. 206
[2] Kilimnik E. V. The threat of domestic terrorism in the United States from former military personnel and police officers / E. V. Kilimnik // Theory and practice of world science. 2022. No. 4. P. 60
[3] Kudrin G. M. The USA and counteraction to international terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq / G. M. Kudrin // Skif. Issues of student science. — 2019. No. 9 (37). P. 246
[4] Khatsuk Zh. V. Concept and types of international terrorism / Zh. V. Khatsuk // Bulletin of the Yanka Kupala State University of Grodno. Series 4. Jurisprudence. 2023. Vol. 13, No. 3. P. 144-154
[5] Saul, B. Defining ‘Terrorism’: A Conceptual Minefield. In: Saul B. (Ed.), Research Handbook on International Law and Terrorism. Edward Elgar, 2014. pp. 1–24
[6] McCormack, T. L. H., & Warner, R. Defining Terrorism: Legal and Political Implications. Netherlands International Law Review, 2007, 54(1), pp. 39–62
[7] United Nations International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. — 1999. https://www.un.org/law/cod/finterr.htm
[8] United Nations Security Council, Resolution 1373. 2001. — https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1373(2001)
[9] Schmid, A.P. The Definition of Terrorism. In: The Routledge Handbook of Terrorism Research. Routledge, 2011. pp. 39–157.
[10] COUNCIL FRAMEWORK DECISION 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism. Official Journal L 164. 22/06/2002 P. 0003 – 0007.
[11] Европейский суд по правам человека. Чагаев и другие против России, жалоба № 63170/14. 2019 — https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/
[12] Cassese, A. Terrorism is Also Disrupting Some Crucial Legal Categories of International Law. European Journal of International Law, 2001, 12(5), Р 993–1001.
[13] Hathaway, O.A., Crootof, R., Levitz, P., Nix, H., Nowlin, A., Perdue, W., Spiegel, T. The Law of Cyber-Attack. California Law Review, 2012. Vol. 100, No. 4, pp. 817–885.
[14] Cryer, R., Friman, H., Robinson, D., Wilmshurst, E. An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure. 3rd Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[15] Human Rights Watch. In the Name of Security: Counterterrorism Laws Worldwide since September 11. Washington, 2012. — www.hrw.org
Информация об авторе:
Ли Исюань, аспирант Юридического института Российского университета дружбы народов имени Патриса Лумумбы (РУДН)
Information about the author:
Li Yixuan, a postgraduate student at the Law Institute of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)
Фото: lori.ru
