A Theoretical Perspective on Political Violence

Diaspora Politics and Transnational Political Violence

How does the absence of a generally accepted definition on terrorism, codified under international law, affect national policies that target diasporas in host states? The attempt to develop one generally accepted and overall recognized definition of terrorism sparked a heated debate within the international community and the academia. Until February 2018, 14 major international conventions regarding terrorism have been concluded and came into force, without a single and clear definition of what terrorism entails. This absence of a single definition can enable states to adopt different ‘abusive’ policies and legislations, targeting specific actors or groups in the society under the official banner of fighting terrorism. This becomes particularly relevant when it is linked to diaspora communities, as they generally become the first targets of such restrictive policies and legislation. This episode analyzes this problematic in an interview with Prof. Boldizsár Nagy, an expert in international law. The central argument proposed here is that the failure of the international community to develop a single definition of terrorism, and an international counter-terrorism regime compatible with human rights, might actually be one of the reasons which enables states to adopt arbitrary policies that marginalize and stigmatize diasporas in host states.