Violence and Politics

Abstract

Examination of the role and structure of Loyalist violence has been particularly concerned with the problem of how violence functions as ‘pro-state’ terror. That is, terror which aspires to defend and preserve the authority and legitimacy of the state. Existing in competition with state security agencies, pro-state terrorism tends to arise when those agencies are seen as unable to resist the forces of anti-state terrorism (in this case militant republicanism), and while anti-state terror networks do not compete with state agencies in terms of logistical and public support because of their obvious opposition, pro-state terror groups do (Bruce 1992b: 74). This happens because the prostate group is not only exposing the inability of state agencies to contain or overcome anti-state terror, thus undermining the public perception that such agencies are able to operate effectively against state enemies, but because recruitment for pro-state terror groups invariably comes from the same communities that serve state agencies (ibid.: 76). In a pro-state terrorism environment, recruitment for pro-state terror groups is an additional problem for state agencies to deal with because the very process of recruitment is reflective of state agencies being seen as ineffective in defending communities against the attacks of anti-state groups. In that instance, by representing themselves as an important component in the realm of defence, pro-state terror groups are thereby able to gain some credibility and legitimacy from their actions and widen their base of support as a result (ibid.: 86).