Many factors have contributed to the development of the terrorist threat at the international and national levels, such as: as we see, what motivates an attack or who is attacked is part of what can determine the form of commemoration of the victims. Another difference is whether the attack takes place in Canada or abroad, and what percentage of Canadian casualties are.  Unfortunately, this important area of investigation does not yet appear to have been addressed in the scientific literature and therefore cannot be addressed in this report. As already mentioned, there are many examples where the term terrorism has been defined at the national level without agreement on a universal definition. Some examples of different national approaches are included in the literature recommendations for this module. Michael Kinsley was skeptical in a recent column in his online magazine Slate. “Perhaps the most accurate definition of terrorism is Potter Stewart`s famous obscenity standard: `I know it when I see it,`” Kinsley wrote. Alexander sees international law as the key to separating the legitimate use of force from terrorism. When insurgents wage “legal war” using tactics accepted by international law, they are not terrorists. In the first part of this article, I referred to the definition of terrorism proposed by Professor Boaz Ganor. This definition is as follows: A particular strength of this approach is that it was adopted by the General Assembly by consensus, that is, without a vote. Therefore, through the General Assembly Forum, it enjoys a high degree of legitimacy and therefore remains influential. However, because of the General Assembly, it is not binding.
This conclusion is also supported by the fact that it has not yet been possible to agree on a universal definition in the ongoing negotiations on the draft comprehensive agreement. It is true that General Assembly resolution 49/60 recognized the need for the progressive development and codification of counter-terrorism norms (para. 12). For those reasons, while resolution 49/60 remains important and influential, including through the annual readoption by the General Assembly of its resolutions on the elimination of terrorism, a possible legislative role remains uncertain. Most other regional conventions have adopted the approach of sectoral counter-terrorism conventions, which do not define terrorism but refer to the criminal law elements of certain offences. Regional conventions that fall into this category include: Donna Jo Napoli, professor of linguistics at Swarthmore College, researches the roots of the word, which she says is a clear and unambiguous meaning. Regardless of the scope of research that specifically addresses the negative and positive effects of commemoration, much of the general literature on memorials is sociologically and psychologically grounded. From a psychological perspective, memorials were examined in relation to people`s memories and as mechanisms for coping with trauma. For example, one research group presents commemoration as a method used by people to cope with feelings of guilt and responsibility sometimes associated with surviving traumatic events (Oliner, 2006).
This necessary process, called externalization, uses monuments to facilitate the use of “objects in external reality” in order to overcome the internal conflicts that afflict people`s consciousness after traumatic events (Oliner 2006, 884). From a sociological perspective, research on memorials is diverse and covers a wide range of topics such as the significance of memorials and the basic functions of memorial sites (Zitoun 2004; Low 2004). For example, Zitoun (2004), who deconstructs the meaning of monuments, argues that monuments have four main functions in society. First, they are used to reinforce notions of trust in the nation-State; second, memorials create ways in which people can interact with others; third, they function as places of mourning; And finally, they offer learning opportunities. In general, it is important to note that while the scope of research on memorials is broad and diverse, research in this area has only recently begun to incorporate the experiences of victims of terrorism into this particular discourse. The key elements of terrorism are obvious to many – violence, non-combatant targets, intent to spread fear, and political goals. But creating a watertight and universally accepted definition has proven difficult. Although there are many sectoral treaties dealing with specific criminal means and methods used by terrorists, none of the treaties [mentioned by the Special Court] contains, individually or collectively, a comprehensive definition of terrorism or establishes a general international crime of transnational “terrorism”.
At most, certain offences may be incorporated into customary law in certain contracts, such as hijackings or hostage-taking. In the absence of a general terrorist offence in contract law, no parallel customary rules can flow from these treaties. The sectoral approach was chosen precisely because states could not agree on “terrorism” as such. (Saul, 2012, p. lxxi). These regional instruments take different approaches to the criminal law elements needed to identify terrorism. “In short, [terrorism] is the threat and use of psychological and physical violence in violation of international law by state and sub-state authorities for strategic and political purposes,” says Yonah Alexander, terrorism expert and director of the Institute for Studies in International Terrorism at the State University of New York. Citing Schwartz (1998) and Langer (1998), Damphouse et al. (2003, 6) identify narratives as stories used to (in)directly influence the collective support needed to successfully erect memorials to tragic events.
Specifically, the authors state that such narratives typically convey messages, large or small, about the event in question. Important narratives include progressive and redemptive themes, while smaller narratives are dominated by dogmatic, toxic (narratives that focus on the pain associated with memory) and patriotic themes (Damphouse et al.