Religion and terrorism share a long history.

Indeed, many of the words we use in the

English language to describe terrorists and their acts are derived from the names of
religious groups active several centuries ago.1 An example of such kind of word can
be zealot. Even Rapoport (1984) said that before 19th century, religion provided the
only acceptable justification of terror.2 Even today, according to Global Terrorism
Index of 2014, main cause of terrorism was religious terrorism. 3 In laymans term,
religious terrorism can be described as terrorism driven solely by religious motivation.
Religious Terrorism should not be confused with Secular Terrorism. Secular terrorism
is where the perpetrators of violence have a socio-economic goal. Their aim is to
make a political statement and bring forth their demands to the adversarial party. The
main difference between the two is that secular terrorist uses violence as a mean to an
end, the religious terrorist sees violence as a sacramental act, as an end in itself, as
something to be pursued in response to a divine imperative.4 This leads to
unconstrained scale of violence in religious terrorism because of which religious
terrorism causes much more deaths and destruction than secular terrorism. Also,
secular terrorist appeal actual or potential supporters or those supposedly
disadvantaged in some way to support their cause, while religious terrorists undertake
such act for no one but themselves or in the name of a higher authority.5

I.

WHAT IS TERRORISM, SOCIOLOGICALLY?

As per Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, Terrorism means, the use of violent
actions in order to achieve political aims or to force a government to act. 6 Some
professors and authors of sociology say that there is a limited sociological
Involvement with terrorism and that and that there is little sociology of terrorism.
Giving reasons to it they say that terrorism seems to come and go in world history
1 Bruce Hoffman, Holy Terrorism: The Implications of Terrorism Motivated by a Religious
Imperative, Paper presented at the Worldwide Department of Defense Combating Terrorism
Conference, Virgina Beach, VA, June 8-11, 1993.
2 David C. Rapoport, Fear and Trembling: Terrorism in Three Religious Traditions, The American
Political Science Review, 78 (1984): 659.
3 George Arnett, Religious extremism main cause of terrorism, according to report, The Guardian,
November 18, 2014, accessed on March 31, 2016.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/nov/18/religious-extremism-main-cause-ofterrorism-according-to-report.
4 Anthony Stevens, The Roots of War and terror, (New York: Continuum, 2004), 83.
5 Vaughan Bowie, Bonnie S. Fisher, Cary Cooper, Professor Cary Cooper, Workplace Violence:
Issues, Trends and Strategies, (New York: Routledge, 2005), 168.
6 Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, 8th ed., s.v. "Terrorism.".

without having any long-term effects, making it seem a less significant agent of social
change and hence of less interest to sociologists. 7 In their article, Bergesen and
Lizardo (2004) defined terrorism as the premeditated use of violence by a non-state
group to obtain a political, religious, or social objective through fear or intimidation
directed at a large audience typically involving two different countries.8
While some others (Black (2004)) explain terrorism in pure sociological terms. Black
(2004) says that Pure Sociology explains human behavior with its social geometry. 9
He claims that violence is the use of force, and most violence is social control.
Further he says that terrorism is one of the forms of violence.10 He explains pure
terrorism as self-help by organized civilians who covertly inflict mass violence on
other civilians. He further includes foiled plans, attempts and threat to inflict mass
violence on civilians in pure terrorism. 11 For him terrorism is simply a form of social
control.
Senechal de la Roche (1996) proposed that terrorism arises with a high degree of
cultural distance, relational distance, inequality, and functional independence, together
comprising a condition of social polarization between the aggrieved and their
enemy. She also says that the extent of social polarization explains both the
occurrence of terrorism and its level of violence.12

II.

RELIGIOUS TERRORISM

A. WHAT IS RELIGIOUS TERRORISM?

Magnus Ranstrop (1996) says that "unlike their secular counter-parts, religious
terrorist are, . . . largely motivated by religion....13 Do Ce'u Pinto (1999) says that
religious terrorists are more likely to use indiscriminate violence.14 Badley (2002)15
said that religion has become a major ideological force in contemporary international
7 A. J. Bergesen & O. Lizardo, International Terrorism and the World-System, Sociological Theory,
22 (2004): 38.
8 ibid, at 38.
9 D. Black, The Geometry of Terrorism, Sociological Theory, 22 (2004): 14.
10 ibid, at 15.
11 supra note 4, at 16.
12 Roberta Senechal de la Roche, Collective Violence as Social Control, Sociological Forum, 11
(1996): 102.
13 Magnus Ranstrop, "Terrorism in the Name of Religion," Journal of International Affairs 50
(1996): 41-62.
14 Maria Do Ce'u Pinto, "Some Concerns Regarding Islamist and Middle Eastern Terrorism."
Terrorism and Political Violence 11 (1999): 72-96.
15 Thomas J. Badley, The Role of Religion in International Terrorism, Sociological Focus, 35
(2002): 83.

terrorism. Further he defined ideologies as systems of beliefs that justify behavior.

Further he gave four primary functions of ideologies:
(1) They polarize and mobilize populations toward specific objectives;
(2) They create a sense of security by establishing systems of norms and values in the
pursuit of common objectives; and
(3) They provide a basis for the justification and rationalization of human behavior.
He also says that ideologies provide the very basis for the political, economic, social,
and security institutions of a society. People demand change when these institutions
and ideologies fail. In these cases of uncertainty, people subscribe to new ideologies,
which they believe will provide solution to their existing problems. Charismatic
leaders generally advocate these ideologies. When various terror groups influence
ideologies, evolution of international terrorism takes place. When terror groups use
religion as tool to influence people subscribe to new ideologies and these new
ideologies are religious ideologies, it takes form of religious terrorism.
Badley (2002) also says that religious ideologies provide a voice for their
dissatisfaction with the status quo and become a way of organizing their hatred.16
Religious terrorism can be communal, genocidal, nihilistic, or revolutionary. Lone
wolves, clandestine cells, large dissident movements, or governments can commit it.17
B. USE OF VIOLENCE
Badley (2002)18 in his paper asserts that the use of political violence is a form of
communication. Further, violence becomes a primary form of communication when
other forms of communication fail.
Also, religious terrorists regard such violence not only as morally justified, but as a
necessary expedient for attainment of their goal.
C. CASE OF ISIS
ISIS stands for Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. It is also known by various other
names, on of which is Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, acronym for which, as
given by the United Nations and US Departments is ISIL.19 Ever since it proclaimed a
worldwide Caliphate and named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as Caliph, it calls itself as
16 ibid, at 84.
17 Gus Martin, Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives and Issues (California: Sage,
2013), 131.
18 supra note 10, at 83.

Islamic State (IS).20

Caliphate is considered as symbol of Islamic Authority all over the world. When
Ottoman Empire was defeated in World War I (as it took side of Germans and went
against Britain and France), newly formed Turkish Assembly was forced to abolish
Caliphate on March 24, 1924. Sunni Muslims have struggled since then to establish
new Caliphate. Various terror organizations have also tried to reestablish it. But ISIS
was the first to turn this dream into reality.21 If this situation is seen carefully, it will
be observed that there was no symbol of Islamic Authority since 1924. This was to
create restlessness in Islamic World. Further, Americas invasion of Iran in 2003 was
pulling of the trigger when old norms, morals and institutions finally failed. And for
establishing new set of norms and morals were in search and ready to adapt new
ideologies. At this point of time, various Islamic terrorist leaders gabbed the
opportunity to influence thinking of such people to adapt to new ideology, their
ideology, i.e. Wahabism.22 People following Wahabism interpret Islam in an extreme
way and promotes religious violence. They support war against anyone or everyone
who is not like them. The terrorist groups influence these vulnerable people by a mean
or tool called religion i.e. Islam. These terrorist organizations gave them hope to
reestablish Caliphate (at which they eventually succeeded). Islam divides the world
into two spheres: the house of Islam (dar-al- Islam) and the house of war (dar-al harb).
The house of war includes nations and territories that are under the control of nonMuslims and that do not submit to Sharia. Islamic terrorist groups interpreting it in an
extreme way say that these two houses will be under constant conflict until house of
war is transferred into house of Islam.23 They use religion as a tool to brainwash
vulnerable people to enter terrorist groups and fight against everyone who do not
accept Islam as their religion.

19 Ishaan Tharoor, ISIS or ISIL? The debate over what to call Iraqs terror group, Washington Post,
June 28, 2014, accessed on April 1, 2016.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/06/18/isis-or-isil-the-debate-over-whatto-call-iraqs-terror-group/.
20 William McCants, Who is Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi?, BBC News, March 8,
2016, accessed on April 1, 2016. http://waww.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35694311.
21 Jay Sekulow, Rise of ISIS: A threat we cant ignore (New York: Howard Books, 2014), 19.
22 Carol E. B. Choksy and Jamsheed K. Choksy, The Saudi Connection: Wahhabism and Global
Jihad, World Affairs Journal (2015), accessed on March 31, 2016.
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/saudi-connection-wahhabism-and-global-jihad.
23 supra note 16, at 17.

III.

CONCLUSION

Although terrorism is one of the most complex and term and hard to define in modern
history, so sociological involvement in terrorism is highly debatable, it is clear that
religion plays a central role in new terrorism, which is characterized by asymmetrical
tactics, cell-based networks, indiscriminate attacks against soft targets, and the
threatened use of high-yield weapons technologies.24 Rather than causing violence,
religion serves role of polarizing populations, which takes place when old ideologies
fail. Therefore, those who want to understand religious terrorism to stop or at least
reduce it, it is important to note that religion is not a cause of religious terrorism, but
it is just a tool, which is exploited by various leaders, who want to engage in political
violence. We are witnessing a shift in the political tectonic plates throughout the
whole of the Middle East and beyond which extends to Africa, and the wests
apparently surgical involvement will probably do little more than generate some
short-term satisfaction that we are doing something.25 This is because, with respect to
Islamic terrorism, only fighting terrorists cannot reduce Islamic terrorism. If one
terrorist is killed other vulnerable people will be brainwashed to join terrorist forces.
If it is understood that it is not fight against Islam and Islam is used as a tool (by
misinterpreting it) to influence people, maybe then, those vulnerable people can be
prevented from getting influenced by terrorist groups. Otherwise, the pace at which
ISIS and various other terrorist groups are expanding, the day of World War III isnt
far away when Islamic terrorist groups representing Islam will be on one side and rest
of the world on another, leading to annihilation of the society at large.

24 supra note 12, at 152

25 Giles Fraser, This is the third world war and this time we are on the fringes, The Guardian,
September 12, 2014, accessed on March 31, 2016.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2014/sep/12/this-third-world-war-this-time-we-onfringes.