etween the 1970s and 80s, several studies were focused on arriving at a widely agreed upon definition of terrorism, however, the efforts were largely futile (Silke, 2004). Recognising the arduous nature of the task, Laqueur (1977) summarily suggested that the quest for an all-embracing definition of terrorism be abandoned. While, terrorism-focused studies seems to be on a decline, due in part to the limited number of experts in the field, and consequently, the volume of available literature, the number of conceptual papers focused on the definitional problem of terrorism has also been negligible. For instance Silke investigated articles published within a 10-year period (1990 – 1999), and found that only eight of the 490 articles used for the study were dedicated to resolving the definitional quagmire (Silke, 2004). Additionally, Weinberg, Pedahzur and Hirsch-Hoefler (2004) also remarked that only a few of the researchers in their study placed premium on the definition muddle (p. 782-783). While, Silke (2004) had warned that the war-weariness exhibited by researchers regarding the terrorism definition challenge, needed to be surmounted (p. 208), others like Grob-Frizgibbon (2005) had indicated that arriving at a generally acceptable definition remained critical, especially in the post 9/11 environment. In addition, resolving the debate holds great benefits across the different layers of society. For instance, it would amount to a significant breakthrough in the theoretical advancement of the field of terrorism studies, and by extension positive outcomes for policy formation and legislation (Richards, 2014); aid in the understanding of the various shades and expressions of terrorism (Schmid, 2004a); curb terrorism (Schmid; 2004b); rein in the excesses of state apparatus in counterterrorism campaigns (Golder & Wi>