Victims of Terrorism

A Comparative and Interdisciplinary Study

Orla Lynch, Javier Argomaniz

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781135005269
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Histoire
• Subtopic: Histoire de l'armée et de la marine

This book examines the politicisation of victims of terrorism and the reality of the victimisation experience within the broader field of terrorism and the resulting conflict.

Victims of terrorism are a unique group of individuals whose experience is overlooked in the current literature on terrorism. Since 9/11, terrorism has risen to global prominence and has become a key topic of interest with regards to media attention and national security. As a result, many European countries (as well as the USA) have had to take active steps to protect and provide for the victims of terrorism, particularly given the nature of victimisation post-3/11 (Madrid) and 7/7 (London). Recently, we have also seen an increase in the political currency of the terrorist victim; for example, the lobbying activities and political involvement of the victims of ETA terrorism and the exceptionally powerful lobby in the USA that sees the involvement of victims of terrorism and their families in policy-making and law-enforcement transformations.

This book is based on extensive field work in Northern Ireland, London and Spain and presents the results, which focus on the needs and experiences of victims of terrorism and political violence, and critically analyses these findings comparatively and in their own right. The aim is to assess the provision of support initiatives in Northern Ireland, mainland UK and Spain and understand if victims' needs are being met by these initiatives but most importantly to construct a picture of the local and international interpretation of the experience of victimisation by terrorism.

This book will be of much interest to students of terrorism and political violence, victimology, criminology, security studies and IR.

1 Victims of terrorism An introduction

DOI: 10.4324/9780203725320-1

Orla Lynch

Javier Argomaniz

Terrorism is a complex symbolic act that seeks through threat of or actual violence to have both a psychological and physical impact. Terrorism, by its very definition, attempts to be anxiety-inspiring and manipulative but also destructive and lethal (Wilkinson, 2011; Schmid and Jongman, 1988; English, 2009; Horgan, 2005). As the recipients of such threats and/or actual violence, victims of terrorism serve as the conduits to the intended and broader audience, oftentimes government or the wider population. Being a victim of terrorism then is the sum of many complex interactions including the personal experience of trauma and a politically or religiously motivated ideology.

Victims of terrorism, while increasingly visible on the international stage, remain a peripheral topic in the broader debates on terrorism and a fundamentally under-researched subject in the academic sphere. While victims are often seen as incidental to efforts to understand terrorism, most authors acknowledge that victims of terrorism are constituent elements of the communicative act that is terrorism and symbols of an ultimate target (Schmid, 2013). Thus, naïvely, often victims are considered relevant only insofar as they allow terrorist groups to reach an audience who is the actual intended recipient of their political message. They are only rarely considered central to the process itself.

However, victims of terrorism are first and foremost the victims of a traumatic personal experience (Tanielan and Stein, 2006). While various arguments exist as to the whether victims of terrorism are a particular victim population (Letschert and Pemberton, 2008), it is clear that the personal experience of victimisation through terrorism is mediated by the political and public nature of a terrorist attack. Being a victim of terrorism often involves a faceless enemy, a complex political or religious motivation, knowledge that the attackers are benefiting from exceptional treatment (i.e. special judicial measures), but also in situations of ongoing conflict, re-victimisation through public portrayal as being somewhat complicit in the experience, repeat victimisation, ongoing threats, being forced into exile or being threatened into denial of victimhood.

Given the complexity of becoming and being a victim of terrorism, and the consequences for the individual and society of this experience, it is perhaps surprising that within the field increasingly referred to as terrorism studies, the economic, psychological, medical and social needs of the victims have suffered relative neglect although, like other subject areas, they have started to attract interest in the post-9/11 environment (Schmid, 2012).

Victims' support organisations

Victims of terrorism, like the victims of other serious crimes, are not a uniform population and often share only the isolated traumatic and violent experience inflicted upon them. In other cases, there are pre-existing relationships between groups of victims, be it due to their nationality, association with a particular community, ideological beliefs or opposition to those who used violence against them. In both instances, exemplified by the victims of the London transport bombings in 2005 (7/7) in the former (not a uniform population) and the victims of the Troubles in Northern Ireland in the latter (with pre-existing relationships), they are increasingly visible due to the activities of support and lobby organisations who seek to act on their behalf. The rise of victims’ organisations, specifically terrorist victims’ associations, could be seen to be due to international reluctance to address victims’ issues, the reactionary nature of national responses and the difficulties in dealing with the complexity of terrorist victimisation within existing victim support services (Schmid, 2012).

Regardless of the origins of such support initiatives, what is clear is that these organisations now dominate the national and international stages in terms of victims’ voices. While these organisations are now highly visible, knowledge of their activities and academic accounts of their work is limited. A similar observation was made in 2007 by Hoffman and Kasupski and while there is some increased analysis and documentation of these organisations, we are still in need of a significant academic contribution.

A part of the issue, and one that will be dealt with later in this volume, is that many of these organisations are transient. They emerge in reaction to a particular attack, the anniversary of an attack or the occurrence of a similar attack, and often fade away as the event loses social and political currency. This is particularly the case with online groups/organisations. In the case of the longer-lasting organisations, for example WAVE Belfast and ATV Spain, we have a much better picture of the aims, motives, funding, personnel and affiliations of the groups.

A further issue to consider, and again one that will be dealt with in greater detail later in the volume, is the politicisation of these organisations, and their manipulation by and of political parties and the media. This is also an issue for individual victims. An extreme example of media abuse is the case of John Tullock, whose phone was hacked in the aftermath of the 7/7 bombings (Hill, 2012); an alternative, more positive experience can be seen in the BBC documentation of the experience of the Disappeared in Northern Ireland, albeit after a very protracted campaign (BBC One – The Disappeared, 2013). The politicisation of victims and victims’ organisations follows a similar fate, of both successful and exceptionally unsuccessful interactions. In the case of the Spanish victims of terrorism there has been what one could term a very successful exclusionary strategy whereby a dominant narrative has emerged in politics of the importance of respecting the innocent victims of terrorism and clearly separating them from the illegal perpetrators of that violence, predominantly ETA. In Northern Ireland, given the existence of a divided society, there is no such dominant political narrative, and multiple and competing narratives are part of the environment of victims’ organisations.

While media and political issues, both national and international but also, and very importantly, local, are a significant element in the experience of victims’ support organisations, they are not the only frameworks that structure the organisational and operational nature of the groups. Importantly, the individuals, the families and the communities are key stakeholders in managing terrorist victimisation and these groups must be considered when taking a holistic approach to understanding victims’ experiences. In effect, in conceptualising the experience of victims of terrorism, and in particular their needs, it is essential to draw upon all of the stakeholders mentioned above. Being a victim of terrorism cannot be understood as a catastrophic one-off experience that occurs in a political vacuum. It cannot be understood as a violent trauma in isolation from the societal perceptions of the perpetrators and regardless of political efforts to the contrary; it cannot be understood as a simplistic dichotomy of the innocent versus the perpetrators. Terrorism is a complex social phenomenon and being a victim of terrorism means dealing with being the recipient of this complexity. Finding ways to assist in navigating the experience must involve a multilevel understanding.

Definitional issues: terrorism as a contested concept

In thinking about victims of terrorism and considering the definitional issues surrounding the term ‘victim’, it is clear that on many fronts clarity is lacking. However, the complexity does not stop there; defining the term terrorism for use in this context adds further complications.

Terrorism is a term used in many conflicts, waxing and waning in popularity with the progress of the conflict concerned. There are numerous debates that are currently ongoing as to the appropriate meaning and application of the concept: legal debates (Gearty, 2007), political debates (English, 2009; Horgan, 2005), sociological debates (Jackson et al., 2009) and international debates (Malone, 2005); and were we to address the output from these deliberations we would fill many volumes. But it is important to point out the meaning we in this study attribute to the term terrorism.

Given the imprecise nature of the word, its divisive qualities and inexact application, it is worth considering in fact if ‘victims of terrorism’ is a useful phrase to describe a population who on the surface appear to have experienced very different but equally traumatic events. Comparing victims of terrorism across conflicts has its limitations due in part to the history of the violence, the state response to the violence, the perception of the violence in broader society and the nature of the perpetrators. In Spain, the term terrorism is used widely to describe the victims of sub-state violence; however, in Northern Ireland, the use of the term terrorism reflects the differences between its two societies (Hamber, 2005). On the other hand, the term terrorism has a global currency, especially since the events of 9/11. Importantly given the social perception of terrorism, its perpetrators and thus its victims, its status as a strategic and even existential threat to a western way of life and the media obsession with the phenomenon, there is increasing reason to assume these factors impact on the experience of the victims.

Most importantly, in this volume, rather than trying to come to an agreement on the appropriate definition of victims and terrorism across the contexts of our research population, we have decided to mirror the use of the term terrorism by the victim participants, but equally we recognise and mirror the use of alternative descriptors of the violence they have suffered. For example, in the case of the Spanish sample, there is a clear reference to the sub-state nature of the violence they experienced and the term terrorism is used overwhelmingly in this instance to describe the extra-legal violence perpetrated by such individuals and groups; this word, however, is not embraced by the supporters and sympathisers of the perpetrators of violence.

In Northern Ireland the connotations of the term are more complicated and its meaning generally depends on the community affiliations of the individual using it. For example, the participants in this study, who could be loosely categorised as republican, on the whole used the term terrorism in an ironic manner, where the incongruity between the general meaning and their experience was to be highlighted. These individuals more readily applied the term to the actions of the state than did the loyalist community members who participated in this project. Those individuals who might be generally termed loyalist used the term terrorism in a similar manner to the Spanish participants: to describe sub-state illegal violence. While these generalisations do not reflect the entirety of opinions encountered in the Northern Ireland sample, what this demonstrates is the divisive possibilities inherent in using the term, but also how it can come to reflect existing divisions in the societies in which it is used. For these reasons, the terms used in this study reflect the language choice of the participants. Therefore the term political violence was used in reference to Northern Ireland unless the term terrorism was specifically mentioned by a participant, and the term terrorism was used in the Spanish sample unless an alternative was suggested.

For the purposes of the overall study, to enable the selection of participants and to position the research in the broader field, the authors recognise that for the purposes of understanding terrorist victimisation, terrorism could include violence or the threat of violence carried out to bring about political change. The perpetrator of the violence was irrelevant for the purpose of definition. This intentionally broad definition was employed to ensure that victims could participate based on the widest reach possible.

Victims' needs

This volume aims to increase our understanding of the role of victims’ organisations in supporting victims of terrorism. This will be achieved through the presentation of the findings of a multisite project in the series of chapters that follow. The project that informed these chapters was conducted in Northern Ireland, the mainland UK (referred to as GB), Spain and the Basque Country between 2011 and 2013. It involved teams from two universities, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos and the University of St Andrews. The overall focus of the project was the issue of victims’ needs and the support initiatives offered in response to these needs for victims of terrorism in the United Kingdom and Spain. This project sought to examine the role of victims’ support organisations in the UK and Spain in an effort to understand the experience of victims of terrorism in each context. The choice of the UK and Spain as case studies was due to the fact that these two states have suffered extensive terrorist activity throughout the last four decades and are the two European members who have amassed the most victims with respect to ethno-nationalist, jihadist and and other forms of ideologically motivated terrorism. Through understanding the experience of victims in these settings the authors developed best practice recommendations applicable across the EU and potentially internationally.

The aim of this project was not to replicate previous research that has catalogued the needs of victims of terrorism in various contexts but to analyse how victims’ needs are understood and constructed by the participants and how they differ across contexts and within organisations. The rationale behind the comparative analysis of victims’ experiences was to highlight overall trends and patterns that could constitute the basis of policy recommendations that could be then applied to all cases of terrorist victimisation.

It became apparent early on in this research process that there were important differences evident in the experiences of UK victims and Spanish victims, but also in the experience of the victims of the ongoing conflicts (NI and Basque Country) and the one-off attacks (7/7 and 11M – the 11 March 2004 Atocha train bombings in Madrid). Thus how the character of the victimising violence fundamentally shapes the experiences of the victims became a key theme. At the same time, important similarities as regards the needs of the victim have been found across cases and it is clear that a series of policy measures could be generated across contexts.

The richness of the data accessed as part of this project provides us with a detailed and in-depth look at the experience of victims of terrorism in both states, but importantly deconstructs many of the unquestioned positions that have dominated the limited literature that exists in the field.

This volume consists of the work of some of the key academic contributors to the field. Prof. Rogelio Alonso of Universidad Rey Juan Carlos managed the Spanish research team and, with Dr Agata Serranò, conducted significant fieldwork in both Spain and the Basque Country. Dr Orla Lynch and her colleague Dr Javier Argomaniz at the University of St Andrews managed the UK fieldwork and, along with Dr Cheryl Lawther and Dr Carmel Joyce, conducted data collection in London, Manchester and Northern Ireland.

The interdisciplinary nature of the team brought strength and depth to the analysis and what emerged is the result of a coordinated effort to create a conceptual understanding of the needs of victims of terrorism, in particular how these needs are understood and ultimately met.

This book reports on four of the major sites of data collection – Northern Ireland, GB, Spain (including the Basque Country) – and the online presence of groups. The analysis of each site was initially conducted independent of the other locations, but the final analysis is the product of an overarching analysis of the entire findings. And while the teams in each location worked closely with each other, each chapter is the work of the named author and does not represent the position of the entire research team.

Chapter outline

This volume begins with an overview of the conceptualisations and politicisation of victims of terrorism. In order to inform and situate the analysis that will be presented later, this chapter examines the literature that addresses the issue of ‘who is a victim’ in violent conflicts. Given the complexity and competitive nature of claims to victimhood, particularly though not exclusively in the aftermath of violent conflict, defining who is considered a ‘victim’ or ‘combatant’ can become inherently politicised, mirroring the divisions of the conflict itself. This chapter seeks to critically analyse the construction and politicisation of victimhood, particularly as it pertains to victims in transitional societies. Three key areas will be considered: the first concerns constructions of victimhood. Challenging one-dimensional and static notions of ‘victims’ and ‘combatants’, this discussion will argue that these terms are not monochromatic but are embedded in individual heterogeneity and the broader socio-political context in which acts of political violence can occur. With this backdrop in mind, the chapter will continue to critically explore the expropriation and politicisation of victimhood within the political sphere. Framed within a competitive and legitimising narrative, the politicisation of victimhood can be one of the sharpest pre- and post-conflict debates and provide an avenue for the continuation of the conflict by other means. However, seeking to capitalise on partisan interpretations of victimhood can extend to the conduct of victims’ groups. While arguably created to promote the psychosocial needs of victims or advance broader efforts at conflict transformation, as a selection of examples from Argentina, Spain and Northern Ireland will illustrate, victims’ groups can professionalise and politicise the notion of victimhood. This chapter will argue that uncoupling these complexities is vital to understanding how victimhood is constructed and often politicised in conflictual settings.

Building upon this literatur...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title Page
• Series
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Notes on contributors
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Victims of terrorism: an introduction
• 2 The construction and politicisation of victimhood
• 3 Victims’ needs and dealing with the past
• 4 Victims’ issues in Northern Ireland and Spain: a conceptual and theoretical overview
• 5 The needs of victims in the United Kingdom: results
• 6 The needs of victims of terrorism in Spain
• 7 The use of online tools by victims of terrorism and victims’ networks
• 8 European instruments concerning the rights of victims of terrorism: meeting needs?
• 9 Meeting the needs of victims of terrorism: lessons for the international context
• 10 Best practice recommendations for supporting victims of terrorism
• Bibliography
• Index