Terrorism and Counter Terrorism as Counter-Cosmopolitanism

The plan of the chapter will involve consideration of terrorism as contrary to cosmopolitanism and then the assessment of counter-terrorism. It is not implied that both aspects are to be equated either in normative or practical terms. The errors of states must not to be endorsed or ignored, but those states labelled liberal democracies can lay claim to underlying justifications and resources (including legislation and formal courts and inquiries) which are unavailable to, or even rejected by, non-state terrorist groups. Of course, not all states can conceivably be labelled as liberal democracies, and state terrorism has resulted in far more damage to cosmopolitanism than all revolutionary terrorism in history (Conquest, 2007). It is also intended to focus mainly on examples from within the United Kingdom. That focus may be justified by its prominent counter-terrorism strategy and infrastructure (including laws), but at the same time an expressed official commitment to ‘put respect for human rights at the centre of our response to the terrorist threat ...’. Whether this mature polity can keep this promise provides a good test for the viability of cosmopolitanism in the context of counter-terrorism. Ultimately, it must be asked whether terrorism and counter terrorism are inevitably forces of counter-cosmopolitanism or can reconciliation with high ideals be secured?