The article puts forward an answer to the following question: why is Iran, thirty years after the 1979 revolution, still at the center of world politics, & why is it, on top of that, a legitimate candidate for the status of one of global powers in the new, multi-polar international order. The author stresses that Iran has been the main obstacle to global ambitions of liberal democracy since 1989, & that it has developed a specific ideological & political system based on the idea of theocratic-republican dualism. Furthermore, after the end of the Cold War, it was convenient to the West to have Iran as the Antagonistic Other (and vice versa). The relative American failure in the war against Iraq (2003-) opened up for Iran the options of connecting on a wider basis with Russia, China, Venezuela & the countries of "Old Europe" (Germany & France). Since the relatively prosperous neighboring countries -- China & the four Asian tigers -- are also founded on dualistic principles, Iran did not have to be liberalized in the way that Eastern Europe was liberalized after the Cold War. As the author concludes, the election of Barack Obama for American president presents a new opportunity to normalize relations between Iran & the West, but the opportunity will be seized only if the USA is willing to accept the multi-polarity of international relations & to renounce the doctrine of liberal interventionism. Regardless of the outcome, however, there is still a very real danger of a conflict between Israel & Iran. Adapted from the source document.
The article puts forward an answer to the following question: why is Iran, thirty years after the 1979 revolution, still at the center of world politics, & why is it, on top of that, a legitimate candidate for the status of one of global powers in the new, multi-polar international order. The author stresses that Iran has been the main obstacle to global ambitions of liberal democracy since 1989, & that it has developed a specific ideological & political system based on the idea of theocratic-republican dualism. Furthermore, after the end of the Cold War, it was convenient to the West to have Iran as the Antagonistic Other (and vice versa). The relative American failure in the war against Iraq (2003-) opened up for Iran the options of connecting on a wider basis with Russia, China, Venezuela & the countries of "Old Europe" (Germany & France). Since the relatively prosperous neighboring countries -- China & the four Asian tigers -- are also founded on dualistic principles, Iran did not have to be liberalized in the way that Eastern Europe was liberalized after the Cold War. As the author concludes, the election of Barack Obama for American president presents a new opportunity to normalize relations between Iran & the West, but the opportunity will be seized only if the USA is willing to accept the multi-polarity of international relations & to renounce the doctrine of liberal interventionism. Regardless of the outcome, however, there is still a very real danger of a conflict between Israel & Iran. Adapted from the source document.
Tema ovog diplomskog rada je geopolitička strategija Saudijske Arabije u suvremenom svijetu. Bavi se utjecajem kojeg saudijsko kraljevstvo dobiva širenjem vehabizma te kakve posljedice to ostavlja na Bliski istok i ostatak svijeta. U radu će se analizirati savezništvo između Saudijske Arabije i Sjedinjenih Američkih Država koje je u prošlosti bilo okarakterizirano kao "nafta u zamjenu za sigurnost". Budući da se smanjila ovisnost Sjedinjenih Američkih Država o nafti, promijenio se i odnos između te dvije države. Danas je taj odnos okarakteriziran kao "preklapanje interesa" , vidljivih u odnosu koje te dvije države imaju prema Iranu koji želi zauzeti dominantnu poziciju na Bliskom istoku. Uz analizu geopolitičkih odnosa Saudijske Arabije, Sjedinjenih Američkih Država i Irana, u radu će se analizirati suvremeni saudijski utjecaj na ostale države Bliskog istoka. Na kraju rada istražit će se kakva je perspektiva saudijske države u budućnosti. ; This master thesis is about the geopolitical strategy of Saudi Arabia in contemporary world. It discusses the influence of Saudi kingdom through spreading of wahhabism and the impact which it has on both Middle East and the rest of the world. This thesis is going to analyze the alliance between Saudi Arabia and the United States, which in the past has been characterized as "oil in exchange for security". Since the dependence of the United States on oil has decreased, the relationship between the two countries has changed. Today, this relationship has been characterized as an "overlap of interests", visible in the relationship that these two countries have towards Iran, which wants to establish a dominant position in the Middle East. In addition to analyzing the geopolitical relations of Saudi Arabia, the United States of America and Iran, the paper will analyze contemporary Saudi influence on other countries in the Middle East. At the end of the thesis, the perspective of the Saudi state in the future will be explored.
Kurdi su koncentrirani na nepristupačnom području planina Zagros i Taurskog gorja što se smatra njihovim etničkim prostorom pod nazivom Kurdistan. Unatoč brojnosti, Kurdi nemaju vlastitu nacionalnu državu, već je prostor Kurdistana podijeljeno između četiri države- Turske, Irana, Iraka i Sirije. Svrha rada je pronaći glavne uzroke zbog čega Kurdi nisu iskoristili povijesnu priliku za osnivanje neovisne države nakon raspada Osmanskog Carstva i ispitati mogućnost za osnivanje Kurdistana u budućnosti. Radi tradicionalne podjele u kurdskom društvu na plemena i klanove, Kurdi su kasnije formirali modernu nacionalnu svijest i osjećaj pripadnosti jedinstvenom narodu. Kroz dvadeseto stoljeće slabi plemenska struktura, ali se podjela nastavlja u obliku političkog sukoba kurdskih stranaka oko ciljeva i metoda rješavanja kurdskog pitanja. Oprečni stavovi kurdskog naroda oko pitanja ujedinjenja kurdskih regija u jedinstvenu državu onemogućuje njihovo zajedničko istupanje. U daljnjem tekstu se ističe da međunarodna zajednica nije sklona osnivanju neovisne kurdske države jer bi spomenuto pridonijelo destabilizaciji već turbulentne regije. Regionalne sile neće dopustiti ugrozu vlastitog teritorijalnog integriteta, a velike sile koriste Kurde kao sredstvo za ostvarivanje pojedinih interesa u regiji. ; The Kurds are inhabiting an inaccessible area of the Zagros and Taurus mountains which is considered their ethnic space called Kurdistan. Despite of vast number of the Kurdish people, their independent country does not exist and the territory of Kurdistan is divided by 4 different countries – Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. The main purpose of this research was to discover the real reason why Kurds did not take an advantage of a historical opportunity to establish an independent country after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and to consider a possibility of establishing Kurdistan in the future. Because Kurds are traditionally divided into tribes and clans, later they have formed a modern idea of national consciousness and an ...
Rad se temelji na problematici razvoja državnosti Kurdistana, kao povijesnog i aktualnog političko-geografskog fenomena. Naime, riječ je o relativno velikoj zamišljenoj državi koja bi trebala postati nacionalna država Kurda - najvećeg naroda bez vlastite države na svijetu. Prostorni je obuhvat rada uglavnom vezan uz kompaktno naseljen kurdski etnički prostor u širokom pograničju Iraka, Irana, Sirije i Turske, dok vremenski okvir odgovara razdoblju od kraja Prvog svjetskog rata, kada europske kolonijalne sile kurdski etničkog prostor proizvoljno dijele među novoosnovanim artificijelnim državama, do suvremenoga doba. Relativno kasno konsolidiran, kurdski se nacionalizam pojavio kao svojevrsni odgovor na brutalnu represiju koju su Kurdi kao manjinski narod desetljećima proživljavali u postojećem sustavu država na Bliskom istoku, a nastanak vlastite države postao je ''ideal'' kolektivne svijesti širokih masa. Osnovna je pretpostavka kako razvoju državnosti Kurdistana u realnim i aktualnim uvjetima predstoji eliminiranje velikog broja teško premostivih prepreka. ; The master thesis is based on the issue of development of the statehood of Kurdistan as a historical and current political-geographical phenomenon. Namely, it is about a large, imaginary country that would become a nation-state of Kurdish people, the largest stateless ethnic group in the world. The spatial scope of the thesis is mainly related to the compactly populated Kurdish ethnic space in a large border regions of Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey, while the timeline matches the period since the end of The First World War when European colonial powers shared the Kurdish ethnic space among newly established, artificial states, up until the modern times. Consolidated Kurdish nationalism emerged relatively late as a sort of a response to the brutal repression experienced by Kurds as a minority group for decades in the existing systems of the countries in the Middle East and the creation of an idependent state became an ''ideal'' of the collective consciousness ...
Nakon gotovo tri desetljeća upravljanja "odozgo" ili primjene različitih koncepata i strategija Zapada objedinjenih u mantri europerspektive – Zapadni Balkan je ponovno u fokusu međunarodne javnosti kao novo geopolitičko žarište. Umjesto ciljane europeizacije, svjedočimo daljnoj balkanizaciji regije koja je posljedica neuspješnog djelovanja Europske unije, kao i suprotstavljenih interesa saveznika – SAD-a, NATO-a, Velike Britanije, EU-a i Njemačke. Takva konstelacija odnosa omogućila je jačanje utjecaja niza ne-zapadnih aktera – Rusije, Turske, Kine, Irana i Saudijske Arabije, čija prisutnost već niz godina snažno oblikuje sigurnosno ozračje na Zapadnom Balkanu. Sve je očitije da je angloamerički projekt posthladnoratovskog uređenja prostora bivše Jugoslavije značajno istrošen. Naime, obećani prosperitet i stabilnost regije su izostali, a zaostavština primijenjenih zapadnih politika je krajnje siromaštvo, iznimna nezaposlenost i iseljavanje, propast javnih politika i kontinuirano gospodarsko urušavanje, kao i ponovno "aktiviranje" postojećih kriznih žarišta: Bosne i Hercegovine, Kosova i Makedonije. ; After almost three decades of governance from above or application of different concepts and strategies of the West in the mantra of euro perspective – Western Balkan is again in focus of the international public. Instead of targeted Europeanization, we are witnessing the further Balkanization of the region as a result of the unsuccessful action of the European Union, as well as the conflicting interests of allies – the US, NATO, the United Kingdom, the EU and Germany. Such a constellation of relations made it possible to strengthen the influence of several non-Western actors – Russia, Turkey, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, whose presence has for many years strongly shaped the security atmosphere in the Western Balkans. It is increasingly evident that the Anglo-American project of post-Cold War landscaping of the former Yugoslavia has worn off significantly. Namely, the promised prosperity and stability of the region are missing, and the legacy of applied western policies is extreme poverty, extreme unemployment and emigration, the collapse of public policies and continued economic collapse, as well as the re-activation of existing crisis areas: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Macedonia.
Postoji značajan nedostatak podataka o biološkim parametrima morune Huso huso, najveće ribe u Kaspijskom moru. Ovim istraživanjem određivala se dob i indeksi rasta morune u svrhu procjene stanja njenog fonda u južnom Kaspijskom bazenu Irana od 1990. do 2011. Duljina vilice kretala se u rasponu između 113-420 cm, a masa od 8,0 do 725,0 kg. Parametri rasta bili su L∞ = 440 cm, K = 0,027 godina−1, t0 = - 5,8 godina. Dob pri prvom ulovu (tc) bila je 13,1 godina. Podaci o dugoročnoj strukturi dobi morune ukazali su na dob do 63 godine, a jedinke u dobi od 12-19 godina sačinjavale su 76,7% ukupnog ulova. Dužina generacije bila je 33 godine. Vrijednosti KF indeksa bile su blizu 1 ili > 1, što ukazuje da je moruna u povoljnom kondicijskom stanju u južnom Kaspijskom moru. Raspodjela vrijednosti dužine morune ukazala je kako 24,2% ulova čine juvenilni primjerci. Natemelju dobne strukture i dobi pri spolnom sazrijevanju, novačenje i prekomjerni ribolov utjecali su na zalihe morune. Ovim se, u budućim ribarstvenim politikama, preporuća povećati dužinu ili starost morune pri ribolovu. Mega-mrijesni primjerci morune su predstavljali 4,4% ulovljene ribe, što ukazuje na neujednačenu strukturu populacije. ; There is a significant lack of data for the biological parameters of beluga or great sturgeon, the largest fish in the Caspian Sea. The age, growth and fisheries indices for the stock status of beluga was investigated in the south Caspian Basin of Iran between 1990 and 2011. Fork lengths ranged between 113-420 cm and weights from 8.0 to 725.0 kg. The growth parameters were L∞ = 440 cm, K = 0.027 year−1, t = − 5.8 years. The age at first capture0(tc) was 13.1 years. The long-term age composition data showed age up to 63 years, and the ages 12-19 years comprised 76.7% of the total catch. The generation length was 33 years. The values of "KF" were close to 1 or >1, indicating that beluga sturgeon is in a favorable condition in the southern Caspian Sea. The length distribution showed that 24.2% of the catch is comprised of juveniles. Based on the age structure and age at first maturity, recruitment and growth overfishing occurred in beluga stocks. Therefore, increased length or age at first capture in future fishery policies should be implemented. The mega-spawners represented 4.4% of the fish captured and revealed an unhealthy population structure.
Indijski vladar Aśoka (273/269.–232. pr. Khr.) ostavio je znatan korpus natpisa na širokome prostoru svojega carstva o načelima svoje vladavine. Njegovi su pretci osvojili gotovo čitavu Indiju i područja današnjega Afghanistana i dijela Irana. On je vodio samo jedan rat u Kaliṅgi za istočnu obalu Indije. Strašne posljedice toga rata jasno je opisao na vlastitim natpisima. Potom je obustavio ratovanje i odlučio osvajati svijet načelima (buddhističke) pravednosti. Održavao je diplomatske odnose sa susjednim državama i imao poklisare u svim helenističkim kraljevstvima. Četrdesetak godina gradio je drugačiju Indiju i slao misionare da grade drugačiji svijet. Njegove su misli o ratu, miru, pravednosti i brizi za sva bića jedinstvene u povijesti politike. Loza je Aśokina vladala još pedesetak godina poslije njega, otprilike do 185. g. pr. Khr. Potom je na vlast u dijelu carstva došla brahmanistička loza Śunga (185.–73. pr. Khr.), a sjeverozapad su stali osvajati grčki vladari iz Baktrije, a zatim i neki iranski i drugi narodi. Śunge su vjerojatno zaslužni za neku vrst brahmanističkoga preporoda i vjerojatno je da je za njihova vladanja zaokružen narativni dio velikoga ratničkoga epa Mahābhārata. Možda je u to vrijeme ispjevan i bitan dio misaonoga spjeva Bhagavadgītā u okviru toga epa. U njem se raspravlja koliko je rat grijeh, i u kojem slučaju je dužnost, a nije grijeh ratovati. Tu se brahmanistički nazor prepoznatljivo upušta u polemiku s buddhističkim (ne spominjući ga imenom). U kontekstu takve polemike između buddhizma i brahmanizma (a i jinizma) formulirale su se neke od najznatnijih ljudskih dilema u odnosu na rat, nasilje, pravdu i nenasilnost, i stvorili su se obrisi etičkih pogleda na ljudsko djelovanje i život uopće, koji nas i danas jednako mogu potaći na razmišljanje i zauzimanje stava prema životu i drugim ljudima i živim bićima. I buddhizam i brahmanizam razvili su svoje temeljne pojmove o ljudskoj obvezi da se djeluje iz dužnosti bez obzira na vlastitu korist, s krajnjom svrhom da se ostvari opće dobro i održi svijet. Na taj su način izrazili svojevrstan kategorički imperativ da se djeluje u skladu s idealnim općim zakonodavstvom (dharmom, bilo u buddhističkome ili brahmanisičkome smislu), a indijski su ga mislioci izrazili na takav način dvije tisuće godina prije Kanta. Razlika između brahmanističkoga i buddhističkoga shvaćanja ipak je u tome što po brahmanističkome shvaćanju treba toj svrsi težiti djelujući samozatajno iz dužnosti, bez obzira na moguće nanošenje patnje drugima, dok po buddhističkome shvaćanju tu svrhu treba ozbiljiti upravo iz milosrđa koje nas navodi na najveće napore da bismo ljude i druga osje- ćajuća bića spasili od patnje i tjelesne i duševne propasti. Mnogi buddhistički i jinistički nazori i vrijednosti bili su ipak s vremenom prihvaćeni i u hinduizmu. ; The Indian emperor Aśoka Maurya (273/269 – 232 BC) left behind him an important corpus of inscriptions, describing the leading principles of his rule, which were disseminated over the vast territory of his empire. His ancestors conquered almost the whole of India and of contemporary Afghanistan, as well as parts of Iran. He waged only one war in Kaliṅga in order to incorporate the eastern coast of India into his realm. He described the horrible consequences of this war very openly in his inscriptions. He decided to stop waging wars therafter, and to "conquer" the world by means of righteousness in accordance with Buddhist principles. He cultivated diplomatic relations with neighbouring countries and had ambassadors in all the Hellenistic kingdoms. He invested fourty years of his rule in efforts to shape a different India, and sent missionaries to shape a different world. His thoughts on war and peace, on righteousness and care for all sentient beings are unique in human political history. The dynasty of Aśoka, the Mauryas, ruled some fifty years after his death, until 185 BC. After this, the Brahman dynasty of the Śuṅgas (185 – 73 BC) rose to power in the eastern part of the former empire. The northwestern part of the empire was conquered by the Greek rulers of Bactria, and later by Iranian peoples like the Parthians and the Scythians, and other invaders. It is very likely that we have to thank the Śuṅgas for a Brahmanist revival, and the narrative part of the great heroic epic the Mahābhārata was most probably completed during their rule. It is also possible that an essential portion of the famous philosophical and religous poem Bhagavadgītā, which was incorporated into this epic, was composed during the same period. The poem discusses under which circumstances war is a sin, and under which circumstances it is a duty to fight. The Brahmanical or Hindu world¬view here polemically opposes the Buddhist one without naming it explicitly. Some of the most salient dilemmas concerning war and peace, violence and non¬violence, duty and compassion found their expression within the context of the polemics between Brahmanism or Hinduism and Buddhism (and Jinism as well), and ethical views concerning human activity and life in general, which emerged on these grounds, can incite us even today to take our stand with regard to life and to other people and sentient beings. Both the Buddhists and the Hindus formulated their basic concepts of human obligation to act out of duty without regard to personal utility with the ultimate aim of promoting universal good and maintaining further existence of the world. This amonuts to the categorical imperative to act in accordance with what would be an ideal universal legislation (dharma, either in the Buddhist or in the Brahmanist sense), as it found its expression in India two thousand years before Kant in Europe. However, the difference between the Brahmanical and Buddhist conception is that, in the Brahmanical world¬view, this aim should be attained through the self¬denying fulfilment of our duty, irrespectively of the potential pain inflicted on others, while in the Buddhist view, this aim should be achieved through compassion that urges us to invest the greatest efforts to protect other people and sentient beings from pain and physical and spiritual ruin. However, many Buddhist and Jinist views and values were, through the course of time, also incorporated into the Hindu world¬view.
Utemeljen na polazištima kritički orijentiranih sigurnosnih studija i studija terorizma, rad propituje metodološke, epistemološke pa i ontološke aspekte fenomena državnog terorizma. Tvrdi se kako je državni terorizam sustavno zanemareno područje znanja o terorizmu, iako je empirijski vrlo evidentan fenomen. U prvom dijelu rada propituje se klasična i suvremena politološka, sociološka, pravna i filozofska misao važna za razumijevanje države, sigurnosti, terorizma i državnog terorizma. Počevši od Weberove definicije države kao nositeljice monopola na nasilje i njegova koncepta razlikovanja vladavine (Herrschaft) i sile (Macht) tvrdi se da monopol na silu ne podrazumijeva korištenje svakog oblika sile i da država ne može biti ekskulpirana u situacijama kada koristi silu koja ima sva obilježja terorizma. Upravo za ključnim obilježjima terorizma traga se u drugom dijelu rada gdje se analizira postojeće znanje o terorizmu i državnom terorizmu. Na temelju postojećih definicija koje čine bazu od ukupno 373 definicije, sadržajnom i frekvencijskom analizom, dolazi se do operacionalne definicije terorizma i državnog terorizma. Izlučenih šest konstitutivnih elemenata terorizma ukazali su da je državni terorizam organizirana upotreba sile i nasilja ili prijetnja upotrebom nasilja kojom se posredstvom intencionalnog širenja straha odnosno terora, a na temelju anticipiranih reakcija širih psiholoških učinaka, nastoje ostvariti politički ciljevi, a kojega provodi i/ili sponzorira država. U fokusiranoj studiji s mnogo slučajeva u trećem dijelu analizira se državni terorizam na empirijskim primjerima dvadeset i jedne države (N=21). Slučajevi su selektirani na stogodišnjem dijakronijskom kontinuumu, počevši od 1914. godine i sarajevskog atentata na austro-ugarskog prijestolonasljednika Franju Ferdinanda pa do recentnih primjera protuterorističkih politika. Kroz povijesnu perspektivu, komparativnom metodom uz primjenu dizajna najrazličitijih slučajeva, potvrđena je polazna pretpostavka: terorizam jest ciljno racionalno sredstvo za postizanje političkih ciljeva država i njegova je pojavnost neovisna o tipu političkog režima. Kvalitativna i kvantitativna obilježja državnog terorizma nerijetko se razlikuju kako između tako i unutar triju poduzoraka (režima), no usprkos kontekstualnim razlikama, može se utvrditi da je u totalitarnim režimima državni terorizmu ekstremnih razmjera i predstavlja važnu polugu vladavine, dok je u autoritarnima, a napose u demokratskima riječ o fokusiranijem državnom nasilju, najčešće sa specifičnim oblicima djelovanja. ; The basis of this doctoral work rests on the fact that the state terrorism is ignored in the context of mainstream security and terrorism knowledge. Security studies as well as rapidly growing terrorism studies are predominantly focused on non-state terrorism. Critical voices which indicating the importance of the state terrorism phenomenon have emerged in the mid-1990s. Based on the starting points of critically oriented security studies and terrorism studies, this work analyzes the methodological, epistemological and even ontological aspects of the phenomenon of state terrorism. It is argued that the state terrorism is systematically neglected area of knowledge, although it is very evident phenomenon. In the first part of this doctoral work the classical and the contemporary political, social, philosophical thought and jurisprudence important for the understanding of the state security, terrorism and state terrorism have been examined. Max Weber's concept of the state and difference between legitimate domination (Herrschaft) and coercive power (Macht) in the exercise of sovereign state functions is at the center of theoretical discussions. We claim that this distinction remained outside of much Western scholarship. Their concepts are based on logic of what the state and its relations to society should be not what it is. In contrast to this mainstream normative oriented model we examine the empirical reality which is laden of state terrorism examples. Therefore, the second part of this work is dedicated to analysis of existing knowledge about terrorism and state terrorism. The emphasis is on the definitions of terrorism, so for this purpose the database of 373 terrorism definitions was constructed. Definitions collected from the scientific and academic sources, the expert sources, the available official sources of various institutions and organizations, news, etc. were subjected to content and frequency analysis. Those analyses indicated six key elements used for defining state terrorism, which is relevant to the selection of empirical cases. It is found that the state terrorism is the use of organized force and violence or threat to use violence as a means of intentional spreading fear and terror based on the anticipated reactions of broader psychological effects which seeks to achieve political objectives and which is conducted and/or sponsored by the state. It is not an ideology, but the strategy and tactic that can be used by all, including the states. Despite the fact that the most of the definitios are actor-neutral and that their contents coincide, there is no unified definition. According to such understanding, the third part is a focused study with a lot of cases (N=21) where the unit of analysis was state terrorism and analytical sub-units were states (cases) selected from the one century time span (1914th-2014th) complemented with the most recent cases (until the end of 2016th). Thus, it is a diachronic analysis (cross-historical analysis). Since the selected cases differ in several relevant independent variables (social, economic, geographic, cultural) the comparative analysis is based on the most different systems research designs. The basic criterion of comparison was the regime (totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic) in accordance with the tipology of Juan Linz. The main aim of such typology and case selection was to test the general thesis: terrorism is an integral instrument of state action that occurs in all types of political regimes and which states used/use as a form of rational choice to achieve their goals. The third part includes political and sociological analysis of primary and secondary sources for each case (state). The analysis of state terrorism included Italy during Mussolini, Nazi Germany, Lenin and Stalin Russia/Soviet Union, communist Poland, Mao Zednog's China, North Korea regime and Idi Amin's Uganda as a totalitarian regimes. The second group of states are, according to Linz proposal, authoritarian regimes. Here is a Serbian example of state sponsored terrorism in Sarajevo 1914 and assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Another example is Yugoslavia from the mid of 1960 even if it is not purely clear is it predominantly totalitarian or authoritarian regime. Other examples are the rule of Francisco Franco in Spain, death squad in Argentina, Gaddafi's Libya, the rule of Shah Reza Pahlavi in Iran and Suadi Arabia sponsoring of terrorism. Within a democratic cluster the United States of America, Israel, United Kingdom, France, Russian Federation, modern Turkey and Macedonia were analysed. The main findings in turn suggest that the state terrorism was/is practiced in totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic systems, was/is used in war or peace, was/is used by the rich and the poor countries of different cultural, political, economic, geographic and other features. In other words, terrorism is an universal form of state action, but the specific context of each of the analyzed cases does not provide the right to generalize or compare countries according to the basic independent variables - the type of regime. Divided societies and various social cleavages like political (ideological), ethnic, cultural, language, religious, economic and other are evident in the most of the internal state terrorism cases. Although the contexts of countries are quite heterogeneous, in each case analyzed rationality is a common feature of state terrorism. Statet are trying to achieve political goals in the most effective way, what is decisively for using a specific form of violence or threats of violence that we call terrorism. Although it is one of the most frequently used terms in the social sciences, it is evident that terrorism is not conceptually cleared. It is deeply socially constructed concept which depends on a variety of interests. This also affects the contemporary counterterrorism policy. Within the science and policy, terrorism is predominantly viewed as a war and/or criminal. Terrorism is not treated as a phenomenon that is generated from the political area and counterterrorism policies do not target the real causes of terrorism. The perspective of terrorism as a war and crime which is imposed by politics that cooperates with science, leads to a spiral of violence. Illegal and immoral state counterterrorism actions lead to the even more brutal reactions of non-state groups. This trend is especially noticeable from September 9/11 when the "war on terror" started. From this moment it is especially evident that in the name of national security, the degradation of democratic values and endangering human rights and civil liberties have begun. This is best reflected in the new security policies, counterterrorism laws and the state of emergency institute. Also, the democratic deficits are obvious in the examples of interventions in other countries. Illegal character of the war in Iraq shows that international law is not a guarantee nor law nor justice. Those are some contemporary examples of state illegal actions which could be classified as state terrorism in democratic states, but the history is full of state terrorism evidence. Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes in the 20th century, as well as some actual examples, suggesting that the scientific community is biased and ignores the important historical facts as well as contemporary trends. By securitization of terrorism concept, the state harnessed science to its own interest – first of all creating counterterrorism policies. Instrumented science can act only within the limits defined by the state. The main characteristic of the joint state and scientific activity is hypocrisy where identical phenomena do not have identical names. State and science are taking a morally superior position, so state terrorist actions are called "necessary security measures", and terrorism as a pejorative term is reserved only for non-state actors. Further scientific and political ignoring of state terrorism topic, denying a unique definition of terrorism, refusing the recognition of state crimes that fall into the category of terrorism and insistence on counterterrorism as war strategy only feeds the modern evil of non-state terrorism. As long as there is not a change of paradigm in which the force will be firmly under the auspices of the law and policy of double standards will not exist, it is not realistic to expect that the state will eliminate the problem of contemporary non-state terrorism.