The Ethical Paradox of Counterterrorism: Values, Means, and Legitimacy in the Global Fight Against Terrorism
Abstract: This article explores the ethical and strategic dilemma of contemporary counterterrorism, analyzing how it is possible to pursue security without compromising fundamental values such as justice, transparency, and truth. In this regard, the central question—“Does counterterrorism have values? If it acts like the enemy, is it not simply the other side of the coin?”—serves as the starting point for an interdisciplinary investigation integrating moral philosophy, political theory, social psychology, and propaganda studies.
Specifically, the analysis considers both global jihadist propaganda, which often operates through subtle political and institutional channels, and the clandestine operations of Western actors, such as intelligence services and covert agents. This comparison highlights how, paradoxically, the use of unjust means may indirectly strengthen the enemy.
Subsequently, the Machiavellian principle that “the end justifies the means” is contrasted with the moral principles of authentic Islam, which fundamentally rejects this logic, emphasizing that immoral means render any end ethically invalid. In light of this, the article concludes that the legitimacy and effectiveness of counterterrorism depend decisively on the coherence between means and ends, as only a morally consistent approach can ensure sustainable security.
Keywords: #counterterrorism #values #ethics #Machiavelli #jihadistpropaganda #spies #007 #socialidentity #cognitive-dissonance #legitimacy #means-ends #Islam #MuslimBrothers #justice #transparency #truth #ElhemBeddouda #ethicasocietas #ethicasocietasjournal #scientificjournal #humanities #socialsciences #ethicasocietasupli
Elhem Beddouda, is a professional educator with a degree in Education and Training Sciences from the University of Parma, where she completed a thesis entitled Islam and Educational Function: Perspectives on Religious Assistance in Prison. She is currently enrolled in the Global Studies for Sustainable Local and International Development and Cooperation program at the same university.
Introduction
Modern counterterrorism operates in contexts characterized by increasing risk and complexity. It is not sufficient to identify the enemy; it is also necessary to question the means chosen to confront it. When the state or other actors violate fundamental ethical principles in the name of security, a paradox emerges: actions aimed at achieving good may replicate the dynamics of the enemy and undermine moral legitimacy. The guiding question—“Does counterterrorism have values? If it acts like the enemy, is it not simply the other side of the coin?”—highlights the need to carefully evaluate the coherence between ends and means.
Fundamental Values in Counterterrorism
Authentically legitimate counterterrorism must be grounded in key values such as justice, transparency, and truth. Justice requires that norms be respected and that individual responsibility be applied proportionally. Transparency implies that decisions are subject to public accountability, while truth requires accurate information, avoiding systematic deception.
These values are not abstract: their violation reduces legitimacy, fosters cognitive dissonance between citizens and institutions, and provides the enemy with narrative opportunities to mobilize support.
The Paradox of “The End Justifies the Means”
The tension between values and concrete action is clearly reflected in the principle that “the end justifies the means,” made famous by Machiavelli in The Prince. According to Machiavelli, state stability may legitimize morally questionable actions, as political success prevails over the ethics of means.
However, this logic presents evident limitations: unjust means compromise the legitimacy of the end, weaken trust and consensus, and create fertile ground for enemy propaganda.
Authentic Islam, through the principles of maqāṣid al-sharīʿa, offers a radically different perspective. The maqāṣid aim to preserve faith, life, intellect, progeny, and property, establishing that any action violating these principles cannot be morally justified.
Unjust means, even when pursued for a positive end, nullify the ethical validity of the outcome. This highlights an intrinsic tension between ethics and strategy: the legitimacy of an action depends not only on results, but on the coherence between means and ends.
Jihadist Propaganda and Subtle Strategies
Global jihadist propaganda does not operate only in specific geographical contexts but spreads through complex political and media channels. Movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood, while claiming political or social legitimacy, often facilitate the mobilization of extremist groups.
Their strategies exploit the ethical inconsistencies of states and institutions, transforming unjust actions into narratives of perceived injustice and strengthening symbolic legitimacy.
This phenomenon demonstrates how the violation of fundamental values by those combating terrorism can produce indirect advantages for the enemy, making coherence between means and ends not only an ethical imperative but also a strategic necessity.
Western Actors and Covert Operations
The ethical paradox also involves Western actors, including intelligence services and operational agents, who, in the name of national security, have adopted measures such as mass surveillance, extrajudicial operations, and information manipulation.
Although motivated by the protection of society, such practices replicate the dynamics of the enemy, violating principles of justice and transparency. The use of unjust means by legitimate actors demonstrates that coherence between values and means is crucial regardless of the identity of the actor, whether state-based or non-state.
Legitimacy and Social Psychology
Legitimacy does not derive solely from the formal possession of authority, but from the perception that actions are consistent with declared values. Social Identity Theory highlights how violations of ethical principles by institutional actors generate perceived threats to the status of social groups, increasing vulnerability to enemy propaganda.
Similarly, cognitive dissonance between professed values and actual actions produces alienation, distrust, and ultimately weakens internal stability.
The Foucauldian analysis of power shows how symbolic and moral legitimacy are central to the sustainability of any security strategy.
Discussion and Conclusion
The ethical paradox of counterterrorism is twofold: violations of fundamental values compromise the morality of actions and provide indirect advantages to the enemy through propaganda and symbolic narratives.
The Machiavellian principle that “the end justifies the means” may explain certain contingent operational logics, but it produces counterproductive effects if adopted as a dominant paradigm.
In contrast, authentic Islamic doctrine reaffirms that unjust means invalidate any ethical end, emphasizing that the coherence between means and ends is the central criterion for legitimacy, effectiveness, and sustainability in counterterrorism.
Only by respecting justice, truth, and transparency can a genuinely legitimate strategy be developed—one capable of protecting society without replicating the very dynamics of the enemy.
Explanatory Notes
[1] Machiavelli’s work provides the foundation of the principle “the end justifies the means,” useful for analyzing the ethical paradox in counterterrorism.
[2] Al-Attas introduces maqāṣid al-sharīʿa, offering the Islamic perspective on moral legitimacy and the relationship between means and ends.
[3] Ganor analyzes contemporary counterterrorism strategies, highlighting risks of ethical compromise and paradoxes arising from the use of unjust means.
[4] Wiktorowicz explores jihadist strategies and global propaganda, showing how state actions can indirectly strengthen the enemy.
[5] Tajfel & Turner explain how ethical violations by institutions generate cognitive dissonance and vulnerability to enemy propaganda.
[6] Foucault analyzes power and symbolic legitimacy, central for understanding the sustainability of security strategies.
[7] Crenshaw examines the role of propaganda and political factors in terrorist mobilization, linking theory and practice in ethical counterterrorism.
REFERENCES
- Machiavelli, N. (1532). The Prince. Florence: Antonio Blado.
- Al-Attas, S. M. N. (1995). Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC.
- Ganor, B. (2005). The Counter-Terrorism Puzzle: A Guide for Decision Makers. London: Routledge.
- Wiktorowicz, Q. (2005). The Logic of Radical Islamism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
- Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage.
- Crenshaw, M. (2011). Explaining Terrorism: Causes, Processes, and Consequences. London: Routledge.
FIVE LAST CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE SAME AUTHOR
SACRED DISINTERMEDIATION AND RELIGIOUS CONTROL
GEOGRAPHIES OF AMBIVALENCE: THE DOUBLE FACE OF THE SAHARA–SAHEL CORRIDOR
FROM SUPERIORITY TO SUBSTITUTION
THE DRAMA OF LONELINESS IN CONTEMPORARY SOCIETIES
WOMAN, MALE SENSITIVITY, AND DIVINE MERCY
FIVE LATEST CONTRIBUTIONS
GEROSCIENCE: THE NEW FRONTIER OF AGING MEDICINE
SACRED DISINTERMEDIATION AND RELIGIOUS CONTROL
ETHICAL GOVERNANCE OF CRITICAL SYSTEMS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: THE CASE OF BUSHEHR
Ethica Societas is a free, non-profit review published by a social cooperative non-profit organization
Copyright Ethica Societas, Human&Social Science Review © 2026 by Ethica Societas UPLI onlus.
ISSN 2785-602X. Licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0