| What
is the Definition of Terrorism?
"Terrorism is
simply a word, a subjective epithet, not an objective reality
and certainly not an excuse to suspend all the rules of international
law."
-
John V. Whitbeck, The Daily Star
John V. Whitbeck, an international lawyer and commentator
on international affairs, has cautioned people about the "notorious
subjectivity of this word," wherein he says: "For
years, people have recited the truisms that "One man's
terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" and that
"Terrorism, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder."
Speaking
about the potential danger of using this word, Whitbeck says,
"It is no accident that there is no agreed definition
of "terrorism", since the word is so subjective
as to be devoid of any inherent meaning. At the same time,
the word is extremely dangerous, because people tend to believe
that it does have meaning and to use and abuse the word by
applying it to whatever they hate as a way of avoiding rational
thought and discussion, and, frequently, excusing their own
illegal and immoral behavior."
Expanding
on its capability of being used as a manipulative tool, Whitbeck
speaks about the "overwhelming, demonizing and thought-deadening
impact of the word "terrorism", which is, of course,
precisely the charm of the word for its more cynical and unprincipled
users and abusers."
"Most
acts to which the word "terrorism" is applied (at
least in the West)," he continues, "are tactics
of the weak, usually (although not always) against the strong.
Such acts are not a tactic of choice but of last resort. To
cite one example, the Palestinians would certainly prefer
to be able to fight for their freedom by "respectable"
means, using F-16s, Apache attack helicopters and laser-guided
missiles such as those the United States provides to Israel.
If the United States provided such weapons to Palestine as
well, the problem of suicide bombers would be solved. Until
it does, and for so long as the Palestinians can see no hope
for a decent future, no one should be surprised or shocked
that Palestinians use the "delivery systems" available
to them - their own bodies. Genuine hope for something better
than a life worse than death is the only cure for the despair
which inspires such gruesome violence."
Referring
to the danger of abusing the concept of terrorism, Whitbeck
warns, "If the world is to avoid a descent into anarchy,
in which the only rule is "might makes right", every
"retaliation" provokes a "counter-retaliation"
and a genuine "war of civilizations" is ignited,
the world - and particularly the United States - must recognize
that "terrorism" is simply a word, a subjective
epithet, not an objective reality and certainly not an excuse
to suspend all the rules of international law."
Concluding
that the word "terrorism" is "fundamentally
an epithet and a term of abuse, with no intrinsic meaning,"
Whitbeck adds, "Perhaps the only honest and globally
workable definition of "terrorism" is an explicitly
subjective one - "violence which I don't support."
-
abridged from the book: The 'Wahhabi' Myth
'Terrorism': The word itself is dangerous, John V. Whitbeck,
The Daily Star; Fri, 07 Dec 2001.
|