Research has it that few, if any, revolutionaries in the developing world would describe their behavior as terrorism. Many cold wars’ and post-cold war revolutionaries engaged in what could be defined as terrorism. In this paperwork, I am going to conduct an intensive research about the Soviet Union sponsoring the Cuban troop presence in Africa during the 1970s that resulted to the bloody war, particularly, the wars in Angola, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Mozambique. I will be providing answers to the following questions as to whether the Soviet Union was engaging in state-sponsored terrorism by sponsoring the Cuban troops, and finally comparing the U. S. support of their allies with that of the Cuban troops. I will be discussing this paperwork from my perspective as to whether these tactics were acts of terrorism (Shubin, 2014).
I will start my paperwork by defining the term state sponsored terrorism. State sponsored terrorism is defined as the administration support of paramilitary associations that are said to be occupied in the act of terrorism. From this definition, it is, therefore, clear that the Soviets Union was engaging itself into terrorisms by practicing these acts- sponsoring the Cuban troops. In order to make myself clearer, I will be defining the term terrorism too. It is important to note that a lot of people have a vague idea of what terrorism is, hence lacking a tangible, more exact, and a precise definition of the word terrorism. Through a literature research, examples have been provided of what terrorism entails, for example, any desperate acts as the killing of the chief of state, the bombing of a house, the carnage of civilians by an armed unit, or the on purpose contagion of over the defy medication in a chemist’s shop all are described as events of terrorism.
Newspapers also plays a major part when it come to drawing a vague picture of what terrorism is, for example nearly any especially repugnant act of violence that is apparent as heading for or against the community, whether it involves the actions of opposing administration or administration themselves, common illicit or prearranged crime organization, uprising individuals or crowds who connects in a confrontational complaint, distinct extortionists or person psychotics is often tagged as terrorism in a newspaper.
According to my stand, terrorism is, thus, brutality, or evenly important, the threat of brutality used and intended for in quest of, or in service of, opinionated aim. Hence, anyone who attempts to further his or her views by a system of coercive threats through preparation, scheming, and certainly performing methodical act is indeed practicing the act of terrorism (Shubin, 2014).
Research has it that in 1975, a former Portuguese colony of Angola became independent, thereby, triggering an authority effort between three groups. During that era, the Marxist guerrilla group, which was the Popular Movement for the Independence of Angola, seized authority with the support of the Soviet Union arms and Cuban troops. It is now clear that the soviets union were willing to supply weapons to the Cuban troops that are said to have resulted to the intensification of a bloody war that left many people dead. If this act cannot be classified under the terrorism category, then, I do not understand what term terrorism would mean. The Cuban move, according to my stand is a clear indication of an act of terrorism. The U. S, also, helps its allies so as to get the access of their political power. It is important to note that with political power in control, then, you have the access of all the opportunities that presents themselves in these allies’ countries. Both the soviets union and the U. S have had similar objectives and goals, such as gaining political power so as they can control the businesses that exist in these nations. They also want to remain at the top when it comes to superiorities matters, for example, the U. S is considered as the strongest nation in the world.
During that era, the Soviet Union supported more than 20, 000 Cuban troops, therefore, assuring the preeminence of the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola. It is important to note that the revolutionary had the strongest knots to Moscow of the three movements that were competing for authority after Portugal’s pulling out, hence making it easier to win and achieve their objectives. The U. S has been doing the same thing as the Soviets Union so as to meet their objectives- political power control (Shubin, 2014).
Literature review has it that the Soviet Union sponsoring the Cuban operations in Ethiopia was even more comprehensive since the Soviets Union provided overall power and authority. The Soviet Union was expected to provide material, and the shipping of more than 13000 Cuban troops that were combating against Somali forces. Experts recognize the fact that were it not for the soviet union aid in these African operations, Cuba’s widespread and expensive activities would have been next to impossible. It is, therefore, clear that these acts of state-sponsored terrorism have been used by nations that you least expected, such as the U. S and the Soviet Union (Gawido, 1978).
It is important to note that, unlike the regular or the outrageous killer, the terrorist is not after performing a purely egocentric goals, but he or she is not driven by the wish to line his or her own personal needs or grievance, but terrorist is essentially an altruist who believes that he or she is helping a good cause intended to attain a greater superior for a wider electorate whether genuine or probable which a terrorist and his association claim to characterize. The criminal as depicted by Konrad Kellen, by comparison, serves no grounds at all, just his own individual embellishment and material satisfaction. According to him, a terrorist without a cause is certainly not a terrorist, but it is important to note that the control or the recognition of a cause is not a satisfactory principle for tagging someone as a terrorist. Many persons, of course, quay all sorts of fundamental and tremendous viewpoints and opinions, and many of them belong to the fundamental or even unlawful or forbidden political organizations, however, if they do not use aggression in the pursuance of their faith, they cannot be considered terrorists. The terrorist is essentially a brutal thinker, ready to use and certainly committed to using force in the achievement of his or her goals. Both the Soviet Unions and the U. S have been practicing these acts, state sponsored terrorisms, with the objectives of retaining their power superiority and to have total control of the readily available opportunities that crop up in these nations. According to my perspective, these acts, state-sponsored terrorism, are here to stay, and they will always be used by the strongest nations so as to minimize the likelihood of falling down. Many radicals in developing countries, especially in Africa, have been depicted as being acts of terrorisms, but we are now living in an era, whereby, we should just jump into conclusions, but first make through research on the kind of behavior displayed, so as to end up with the best conclusion concerning the matter (Gawido, 1978).
Our writers will create one from scratch for
Gawido, A. (1978). The prospects in the Horn of Africa: A Somali’s perception. na: na.
Gleijeses, P. (2009). The Cuban drumbeat: Castro’s worldview: Cuban foreign policy in a hostile
Worldview: Cuban foreign policy in a hostile world. London: Seagull Books
Shubin, G. V. (2014). Cuito Cuanavale: Frontline accounts by Soviets soldiers. Auckland Park,
South Africa: Janana media.