The relationship between terrorist act and poorness has been a ferociously debated one ; justly so because terrorist act is non a uni-dimensional construct. Terrorism if understood as uni-dimensional, terrorist act would be excessively simplistic. The battalion of causes runing from economic to psychological can non be reduced to a individual factor. Terrorism and the apprehension of the causes behind terrorist act are context, part and clip specific. There will ne’er be a cosmopolitan apprehension of the causes for terrorist act since all terrorist Acts of the Apostless frequently do non hold the same causal factors and there are different motivations behind different Acts of the Apostless of terrorist act. Poverty is neither a necessary nor a sufficient factor of terrorist act but is a conducive factor of terrorist act. It is a possible factor that leads to terrorism, non the merely. Therefore we can merely reason that poorness is non an of import or widely seen insouciant factor of terrorist act. Poverty is of class of import to understand terrorist act but to state that poorness causes terrorist act is wrong. Poverty can be a seen as one for the factors that could promote or lend to terrorist act. Poverty by itself does non take to terrorist act.
There have been a figure of bookmans who have argued against the position that poorness causes terrorist act. Krueger and Maleckova argue that the relationship between terrorist act and poorness is indirect and weak ; it has little to make with economic sciences and with mention to Hezbollah, members were frequently non from poorness afflicted backgrounds. [ 1 ] They argue that poorness causes terrorism through indirect agencies for illustration poorness could give rise to civil wars. Berrebi’s proved that with mention to Hamas of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, there was a positive relationship between engagement in these groups and criterion of life. It compliments the Krueger and Maleckova survey, poorness is non lot straight associated with terrorist act. [ 2 ] James Piazza’s survey on economic factors on terrorist act showed that multiple factors of refering poorness and economic development were non significantly related to terrorist act. [ 3 ] Michael Freeman attributes the terrorist act and force in states such a Egypt and Saudi to the foreign policies of those states instead than their regional economic issues. [ 4 ] Alberto Abadie’s in his survey finds that the terrorist act hazard is non significantly higher for states that are hapless and political freedom is a better forecaster of terrorist act. [ 5 ] Overall it clear that poorness and terrorist act portion an insignificant relationship, factors other than 1s of economic nature such as political dimensions/views plays an of import function
History besides shows us that more frequently that terrorists frequently came from privileged backgrounds and were non necessary in a state of affairs of poorness that made them take the way of terrorist act. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, attempted bomber of flight 253 on Dec 25,2009 was in fact from a affluent background and take a lifestyle non characterized by poorness. [ 6 ] Janet Kunciw in her study for the Air Command and Staff College looks at profiling the terrorist, terrorists are frequently from upper in-between category and privileged backgrounds and enjoy advantages that are non sole to the remainder of the state [ 7 ] . Strentz attempts to understand the psychosocial profile of the terrorists, he distinguishes between three types of terrorists, the leader and follower are characterized by in-between category backgrounds whereas the chance or condemnable component is frequently from lower category background. [ 8 ] It is questionable whether there are such clear division between follower and the self-seeker in the existent universe. Russell and Miller in their survey found that across assorted terrorist groups about two tierces of the members were from a center or upper category economic background. [ 9 ]
US Secretary of State John Kerry, in a talk mentions the nexus between poorness and terrorist act. He says that there is an obvious nexus between poorness and terrorist act, he goes on the say that poorness is linked to the degrees of panic around us. [ 10 ] The apprehension of this statement would be that a higher degree of poorness leads to higher degrees of terrorist act. This is nevertheless non true, poverty no uncertainty has a conducive consequence to terrorist act but reasoning for a positive correlativity between poorness and terrorist act is unsafe.
Over the last century, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Sudan have been some of the countries that have been worst affected by terrorist act. Harmonizing to the World Bank informations, in 2011, 35.8 % of the Afghan population was below the poorness line. In 2012, 18.9 % of the Iraqi population was below the poorness line. In Pakistan, 12.4 % of the population was below the poorness line. In 2009, 46.5 % of the Sudanese population was under the poorness line. [ 11 ] Based on this information it might look that states affected by poorness give rise to terrorist act, but nevertheless this is non true. Although poorness may play a function, poorness does non entirely give rise to terrorist act. If poorness were to do terrorist act, the states that were most affected by poorness would hold produced the most terrorists and been the largest genteelness land for terrorists. This is nevertheless non the instance based on World Bank informations, we see that other states that are farther down in the poorness index and have higher degrees of poorness are non characterized with Acts of the Apostless of widespread terrorist act. Madagascar, Ethiopia, Malawi and Liberia are farther down in the gross national per-capita index. [ 12 ] But these states do non look to be characterized by widespread terrorist act. If the poorness leads to terrorism were true, these states should hold become the hub of panic activity.
Robert Barro in his article negotiations about the how persons from less educated and lower income backgrounds make uneffective terrorists as compared to those from more privileged backgrounds. [ 13 ] This is of import because of the inherently political nature of terrorist act, and more frequently than non political argument has been limited to the elite.
Poverty does look to be an of import factor in aberrant behavior. If hapless persons took to terrorism as a agency of gaining money, terrorist act would hold been more widespread. Petty offense would be a possible consequence of poorness, but this is non the same as terrorist act. Terrorism goes beyond personal addition, the end is inherently political and generalising poorness as a cause of terrorist act is misdirecting. Another interesting angle to this argument is whether we look at terrorists as rational or irrational histrions. Looking at terrorists as rational histrions is the manner frontward ; it can assist understand motivations and assist undertake the phenomenon. Looking at terrorists as irrational histrions is unsafe because it prompts alibis for prosecuting in terrorist act as causes of terrorist act. If we look at terrorists as irrational, the cause factors are traveling off from internal temperaments and to external state of affairss such as poorness. Looking at poorness as a insouciant factor displacements attending from other rational ends of prosecuting in terrorist act, to catalyst political alteration, set up a merely society.
No point of view is without unfavorable judgment, there are some dangers in taking the position that poorness does non do terrorist act and that there is no direct nexus. Some instances in history prove that the relationship between poorness and terrorist act are in fact straightforward. In the instance of Ajmal Amir Kasab, we see that poorness that a supreme function to play in the procedure of his engaging in Acts of the Apostless of terrorist act. The question pictures released by media shows the Mumbai Police interrogating Kasab which is widely available on the cyberspace shows the of import function poorness played. In the picture Ajmal Kasab negotiations about how he engaged in Jihad for fiscal addition and he was invariably told about how this would assist him get the better of poorness by his group and male parent, Kasab was promised that if he martyred a large amount of money would be given to his household. [ 14 ] Although in the picture Kasab cites this as the lone ground, it is extremely improbable that no other factors played a function.
Although poorness relief will most likely contribute to a better economic and political clime which could cut down the incidence of terrorist act, more frequently than non, overemphasising the insouciant nexus between poorness and terrorist act is non a good analysis of the causes for terrorist act. The authorities by all agencies should set about stairss to cut down poorness as a hindrance to terrorist act but by no agencies can this be the lone policy, this could be an country that can assist cut down terrorist act but the most of import facet lies in undertaking the utmost political motive of terrorists.