Valstybės teroras kovos su terorizmu kontekste: JAV santykių su Egiptu ir Uzbekistanu atvejis ; State terror in the context of global war on terror: case study of us relations with egypt and uzbekistan

Abstract

In the times of global war on terror there are no paid considerable attention for a state terror, even if this term is used more and more in political discourse defying a single states as being terroristic. Therefore the main research question is why in the era of global war on terror the international community are not fighting with a state terror, which undermines the same human lifes, rights and values as "terrorism" does? In this study, titled "State Terror in the Context of Global War on Terror: Case Study of US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan", the author analyses the concept of state terror in academic, political and juridical level. The main goal of this study is to analyze, why in the context of global war on terror the states are divided into separate categories: some states become enemies, others avoid criticism, even if they can be treated as state terror systems. In order to carry out the tasks set, the study has been divided into six chapters: In the first chapter there was determined a problem of state terror conceptualization. It was concluded that there are three main reasons: conceptualization, emotional and lack of information or data about state terror. The second chapter analyzed a juridical definition of state terror. The analysis of UN conventions and other counter terrorism law data proved that there is no legal definition of state terror and therefore any preventive instruments of fighting against it become neutralized. The study has thus confirmed the hypothesis, that the lack of a legal definition of state terror presupposes a legitimization of the term. In the third chapter there was analyzed an academic definition of state terror. Traditionally, terror is divided in a terror "from below" (widely known as "terrorism") and terror "from above" (state terror, or terror which is implemented by legal state forces). In the academic point of view, this study might be useful as giving a conceptual state terror term. The conceptualization was made on a basic of political, juridical and academic discourse, defining main criteria for identifying a state terror. These criteria were used for defining a state terror of Egypt and Uzbekistan. The study assumes that the lack of above mentioned concept (especially on juridical level) presupposes a legitimization of Uzbekistan and Egypt state terror as analysis in fifth and sixth chapter concerning US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan has proved. The study concludes that the lack of a legal definition of state terror gives a possibility for singles states to legalize and use its state terror. Therefore, the hypothesis that the main participating states in global war on terror (in this study case – US) doesn't fight against them because of the strategic, economic or other political interest as it was proved in analysis of US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan, was confirmed.