This violence is becoming not only infectious but also professional to a great extent. How this situation has emerged? Why terrorism is still a continuously growing phenomenon despite the so-called ‘war on terror’ and ‘zero tolerance to terrorism’? What is terrorism after all? What are the different perspectives on terrorism? Do terrorist have any special characteristics? Can terrorism be defined? What are diverse and different views and analyses in this matter?

Nassar Jamal presents an in depth picture on the real and historic causes behind terrorism. For him, as it were, every global citizen and leader in parliament is, among others, responsible for the current and widespread menace of terrorism. That is what Nassar says:

Recently, a former student of mine wrote me one of those rare but special notes that teachers occasionally receive. Lynn Weddle of the class of 1985 wrote, “I often am reminded of the many things I learned while in your class and how some of the things you mentioned became truly prophetic.” My former student went on to remind me of a statement I had made in class arguing that the Soviet Union was not the enemy we needed to fear but rather ‘a Third World country that we would never expect to wreak havoc on the US’. The events of September 11, 2001, reminded her of that statement. While the events of that dreadful day were a wake-up call to most Americans, terror has been a normal way of life for a long time to many people around the world. It certainly has been a part of my life since birth (Nassar i-iv).

Terrorism is, and terrorist incidents are, on the increase in Asia and Middle-East and West Asia, while these are on a decreasing trend in Europe and America. Terrorist violence and incidents have led to thousands of death every year from 700 to about 6000 in the world (Sengupta and Cockburn March 27, 2007).

This menace of terrorists’ violent and fatal incidents is beyond human description and definition. Various dictionaries and encyclopaedias define terrorism mainly in terms of acts of fatal violence and attacks against established and recognized institutions of State and its citizens and forces. Academics and experts do not fully agree with such simplistic meanings and definitions.

For Jimmy Carter, Palestinian people have always suffered at the hands of the Israel’s policy of ‘Apartheid’ against them (Carter 176). If this is so then what about Palestine’s’ sustained terrorists attacks not only aimed at Israel but also the different countries of the entire world. For Nassar, terrorism is use of excessive force, fatal attacks with the intention to create terror and panic in order to secure calculated political demands. He, however, finds – quite like Bjorgo (First Chapter) – institution of State more responsible for present-day terrorism.

Gurr and Cole believe that there are different levels of terrorist attacks and violence – the conventional and non-conventional. Terrorist groups are not gun-trotting armatures. They have there aims and purposes. As such there main objective is to accomplish their political aims through effective means of massive violence. They even use weapons of mass destruction especially nuclear, biological and chemical weapons [NBCs] (1-22).

Defining terrorism leads also to a major question. Are terrorists normal human beings? Are they primarily pathological cases? Yes, even terrorists of today are normal beings and their global system and networking is running parallel to governments all around the world. They are certainly not pathological at all. They are die hard and energetic persons living a normal life in this age of information technology.

Terrorism is now evolving as a profession and institution. Joseph Conard has pointed out its professional commitment to utter destruction beyond all shades of doubt:

A bomb outrage to have any influence on public opinion now must go beyond the intention of vengeance or terrorism. It must be purely destructive. It must be that and only that, beyond the faintest suspicion of any other object (Desai 1).

Sheer irresponsibility of the modern State vis-à-vis terrorists can be seen in the latter acquiring nuclear weapons.

The reality is that a number of terrorist groups have already employed chemical [and nuclear] weapons, e.g. Japan’s Aum Sinriklyo’s use of …in Tokyo subway system in 1995, and …..Terrorism is widely believed to be a new kind of warfare and the al Qaeda network and al Queda-inspired groups its foremost exponents (Weinberg 131-132).

The terrorists are now sharing their networked information bank the world over. They have acquired a hidden international identity nearly as powerful as the institution of the State. It is the State and its sponsored terrorism and counterterrorism that appear to have become direct and indirect source of the strength of terrorist groups the world over.

Terrorism will not end until there develops a strong faith in the power of non-violence on a larger general plane at the behest of every individual and organisation.