چکیده:
The word terrorism was first used to describe the Jacobin reign of terror during the French Revolution, which resulted in thousands of deaths and caused widespread terror among the French people. Although 'terrorism' gained global attention after the September 11 attacks, the subject of 'state terrorism' has received less attention. The major difference between state terrorism and non-state terrorism lies in the perpetrators and designers; meaning that the executors and designers of non-state terrorist acts are individuals, groups, and parties, whereas the executor and designer of state terrorist acts is a specific government or several governments. Some researchers have distinguished between state terrorism and state sponsorship of terrorism; according to Harry Henderson, state terrorism is the use of terror and threats by a government against its own citizens, while state sponsorship of terrorism, such as training, weapons, money, or providing sanctuary, is used as a tool to advance a state's foreign policy. In this research, the aim is to define 'state terrorism' while examining the perspectives and theories of prominent scholars in the field of terrorism and the criticisms raised against it.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Approximately speaking, it can be said that since the formation of the international community and the realization of the necessity to combat terrorism, countries and the international community have adopted three strategies in the process of fighting terrorism, each of which has achieved some successes, but none has been capable of a fundamental confrontation with the phenomenon of terrorism and has not been able to prevent terrorist acts in the long term.
Security Council The Security Council of the United Nations is the only authority that has the right to the legal use of force in international interactions, while it expands its powers and duties in combating terrorism, yet no effort has been made—neither by countries that claim to have a global responsibility in fighting international terrorism, nor by any of the organs of this organization—to provide a specific, comprehensive, and inclusive definition that is accompanied by international consensus.
Findings show that adopting a multilateral approach and focusing on the commonalities of the world Islam, the discussion of Islamic human rights and defending the oppressed, and the joint and coordinated actions of Islamic countries in making coordinated decisions in international assemblies, as well as the power of non-governmental organizations' actions in Muslim and non-Muslim countries to pressure the governments of men in the region, is the most effective way to fight terrorism in the Islamic world.
A multilateral approach makes the coordinated actions of regional actors more effective, reduces the costs of fighting terrorism, reduces foreign interference in regional issues, eliminates the roots of the formation of terrorist groups and actions contrary to international laws, and ultimately provides the basis for comprehensive development in the Islamic world by establishing security and stability in the region.
(
, 
, 
)
