The media has focused on urban terrorist attacks in New York, London and Madrid but paid little attention to the impact of terrorism – much of it state-led – in cities in the south. The effects of urban terror – on livelihoods, development and governance – are greatest in the cities of less developed countries.

A paper from the London School of Economics, in the UK, shows that cities in the world’s poorer countries experience terrorist acts with greater frequency and with more devastating effect than in economically advanced countries.

When cities in developing countries – particularly those in the Islamic world – are discussed in relation to terrorism, it is often in the context of ‘breeding grounds’ for international terrorists, trained and headed for urban targets in the north. What is forgotten is that many cities in the south have been targeted – from Karachi and Mumbai, to Nairobi and Bogotá.

When examining terrorism in cities of the developing world, it is important to think carefully about which of the many definitions of terrorism to use. Differentiating terrorism from civil war is not straightforward in a country like India where separatist causes are common. In a violent city such as Bogotá, in Colombia, it is often difficult to know where terrorism begins and violent crime ends.

The author defines terrorism by three main elements: a) violent acts threatened or used; b) violent acts directed against civilian targets; and c) violent acts threatened or perpetrated for political objectives. Unlike conventional typologies used in the ‘war on terror’, this includes acts of state terrorism.

Some of the most substantial acts of political violence against cities and citizens are state-led:

• Israel’s attempts to counteract Palestinian terrorism have sought to prevent Palestinians from forming viable urban centres.
• In 2002, in Asia alone, some 1.8 million people were evicted from their homes by brutal state-led evictions in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia and elsewhere
• In 2005, in Zimbabwe, the state forcibly displaced some 700,000 urban residents.
• Many of the most devastating episodes of state terror – in Kabul, Baghdad and Gaza – have been backed by the USA: urban civilians have been targeted for the purpose of spreading fear and exerting dominance.

The ‘them’ and ‘us’ attitude prevalent in international security discourse –  and creeping into development discourse – is  misleading and damaging to both development cooperation and global security. Insisting on a clear divide between ‘them’ and ‘us’ serves to fuel intensifying cycles of violence born of ‘terrorism’ and ‘counter-terrorism’.

It is important to realise that:

• Aerial bombardment is, in effect, the terrorism of the rich, terror perpetrated against cities where poor people are particularly vulnerable.
• Many of the resources directed towards reducing terrorism since 11 September 2001 have not targeted root causes – such as the occupation of Palestine – but instead have been channelled into surveillance, emergency planning and training intelligence services.
• This diversion of aid has detrimental effects on other development sectors and on preparedness to deal with more serious urban hazards such as floods and epidemics.
• A secondary effect of terrorism is the rise of gated communities in which better off-residents opt out of public services and local democracy.

Source(s):
‘Cities, Terrorism and Urban Wars of the 21st Century’, Crisis States Research Centre, London School of Economics, Working Paper No, 9, by Jo Beall, February 2007 (PDF) Full document.
Further details about this research project ‘Crisis States Research Centre - Phase 2’ can be found on the DFID Research for Development website Full document.

Funded by: UK Department for International Development (R8488)

id21 Research Highlight: 27 April 2008

Further Information:
Jo Beall
Crisis States Research Centre
Room U610, London School of Economics
Houghton Street,
London WC2A 2AE, UK

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7849 4631
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7955 6421
Contact the contributor: j.beall@lse.ac.uk

Crisis States Research Centre, London School of Economics, UK

Other related links:
'A new geography of conflict: slum wars of Nicaragua'

'Global responses to global threats: sustainable security for the twenty-first century'

'Transitional justice for collaborators in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict'

'Building democracy in Palestine'

'Different paths to peace and justice in northern Uganda'

'Service delivery for sustainable peace'

'Potentials and limits of community-based service delivery in post-conflict situations'