Can terror ever be legitimately employed in conflict Discuss with Essay

Can terror ever be legitimately employed in conflict Discuss with reference to examples - Essay Example During World War II, both the Allies and the Axis used terror as a weapon of winning the war. Different debates have questioned the legitimacy of using terror as a weapon for ending conflicts. Terrorism is viewed to bring negative effects to a nation; this is because in attaining its main objective, the central target is the civilians (Herman 2008, p. 13). Although it brings negative impacts to a nation, sometimes use of terror benefits the nation. For instance, it can assist in the acquisition of freedom. This was the case in South Africa during the time of Apartheid. Apartheid was abolished through the use of terror. Although war is thought to be associated with vast negative effects, sometimes violence can bring positive results to a group or a nation. In this paper, I will discuss whether terror can be legitimately employed in conflicts. According to different researchers, legitimating of terror is justifiable in some cases. In extreme cases, where democratic and peaceful methods have been exhausted, it is justified and legitimate to resort to terror. In situations of suffering and repression, with a ruthless, oppressive state and no possibility of having international relief, it is necessary to resort to violence in order to defend the citizens. A state engaging and using terror in order to fight and rescue its citizens uses terror in a legitimate and justified manner (Coady 2010, p. 21). It is the function of a state to protect its people without fear; hence, if the use of terror remains the only option for the state to use in order to fight for its people, it would be interpreted as necessary and justifiable. Each person or minority group has a right in expressing discontentment in a certain issue of concern. The state has the role of representing its people and should make facilitation of this possibility. In addition, it is