Skip to main content

Assassination as Terrorist Tactic

Assassination is a tactic used by nearly all terrorist groups, although far less frequently than other types of armed attacks. Assassination, when used as a terrorist tactic, is the targeted killing of a country’s public officials or individuals who represent the political, economic, military, security, social, religious, media, or cultural establishments. The killings can be motivated by ideology, religion, politics, or nationalism. Most terrorist groups conduct assassinations to eliminate enemies, intimidate the population, discourage cooperation, influence public opinion, decrease government effectiveness, gain media attention, or simply to exact revenge.

Simple terrorism-related assassinations can be carried out with a minimum of personnel, training, or equipment, and they are usually successful when aimed at public figures who are protected least. An example of such an attack was the 2004 killing of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a Dutch-Moroccan extremist in the Netherlands. By contrast, assassination operations directed against highly protected individuals, such as heads of state, are difficult and costly. Although impressive when successful—such as the 2007 killing of former Pakistan prime minister and party leader Benazir Bhutto—these operations are rare and prone to failure. Similar to attacks on other hard targets, they require extensive planning, financing, personnel, training, and equipment.


There have been 26 incidents of terrorism-related assassination attempts in the United States over the past 100 years. The last events of this type were in 1990, when Jewish Defense League founder Meir Kahane and Qur‘anic scholar and teacher Rashid Khalifi were killed by extremists linked to foreign terrorism. Only eight of these attacks may be directly or indirectly attributed to foreign groups or state sponsors of terrorism. The majority of US assassination attempts have been conducted by homegrown violent extremists with little or no connection to foreign organizations and most often directed against public figures having minimal security, if any. 

Terrorism-related attempted assassinations of highly protected public figures are an extremely rare occurrence in the United States, with the 1950 attempt on President Truman by Puerto Rican nationalists the only one that truly qualifies as such. Robert F. Kennedy, whose killer claimed an international nexus due to Kennedy’s support for Israel, is on the chart but cannot be considered a highly protected official. He had minimal personal security when he was killed, and it was this assassination that generated future Secret Service protection for presidential candidates. Anyone who does not have a high level of security should vigilantly pay attention to their surroundings, vary their everyday routines and travel, and be aware of individuals loitering nearby.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Constitution of Malaysia: An Introduction Part 5

7 (1) No person shall be punished for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made, and no person shall suffer greater punishment for an offence than was prescribed by law at the time it was committed. (2) A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence except where the conviction or acquittal has been quashed and a retrial ordered by a court superior to that by which he was acquitted or convicted.

Brexit: A lesson for Malaysians

Yesterday, Britons through a referendum made a decision to leave European Union. The ruling Conservative Party divided on this referendum and David Cameron in favour of ‘Remain’ was defeated outright. Even though he is disagreed with the decision of Britons, he announced that he is resigning from his premiership in respect of people’s decision. We can expect in a mature democracy country like United Kingdom this is vastly anticipated to be transpired.   A few days ago, the current Chief Commissioner of Malaysian Anti-Corruption of Commission made a statement that he is stepping down from his position and there are some rumours indicating that a few prominent officers from the said Commission will either resign or retire. It’s very eccentric news for Malaysians as it will have a profound impact on bribery and corruption issues in Malaysia as a whole. Recently, the results of two by elections were won by Barisan Nasional, the ruling party of Malaysia. Many promises had been...

Trump's role in the Israel-Hamas ceasefire

As the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, scheduled to commence on Jan 19, 2025, approaches, it is essential to examine the potential impact of president-elect Donald Trump on this event and Middle East security. Considering Trump’s past foreign policy actions, especially those concerning Israel, alongside the wider geopolitical environment, his prospective role in shaping the ceasefire and future peace initiatives is intricate and layered. Historical influence Trump’s initial term as president was characterised by a robust endorsement of Israel, a position that resonated with his domestic political supporters and simultaneously altered US foreign policy, thereby impacting the wider dynamics of the Middle East. Key actions during this period included the formal acknowledgement of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the transfer of the US embassy to that city, and the withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement. These measures solidified his rapport with Israeli leadership and exemplified his ...