There is a difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter, or a guerrilla. A terrorist deliberately targets civilians; a guerrilla attacks the military and government apparatus of its perceived oppressor. Yasser Arafat, regardless of his Nobel Peace Prize, is a terrorist because of his long history of attacking civilians. These attacks have included the assassinations of the entire 1972 Israeli Olympic team and numerous airline hijackings. In contrast, the Sandanistas were guerrillas as they were fighting government troops, not civilians.
I make this distinction between the two groups because the vigour of the American government in its “War on Terrorism” has seen said distinction wiped away for political expediency. But just remember: kill civilians = terrorist; kill military personal = guerrilla. OK, let us begin.
The recent sweep of both houses of Congress by the Republican Party in America (I admit I did not see that coming) means that President Bush will be able to extend his “War on Terrorism.” In fact, it seems that the invasion of Iraq is a “when” not an “if” (sometime in mid-winter is my guess, but I figured Dubya didn’t have the wherewithal to actually invade Iraq). But Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has bigger plans. As reported in the October 27, 2002 Los Angeles Times, Rumsfeld has authourized the creation of a new force, “Proactive, Pre-emptive Operations Group (P2OG),” which has orders to “stimulate reactions” among terrorist groups, provoking them into action which would expose them to “counterattack” by U.S. forces.
In other words, Rumsfeld’s new P2OG will attack civilians in order to force terrorist groups to respond to said attacks, thereby exposing themselves to the American military. The American government is murdering civilians, and you all know what that means–terrorist.
Over in Russia, President Vladimir Putin has jumped hard on the American bandwagon to fight terrorism. When a Moscow theatre was recently seized by Chechen rebels, Putin responded by gassing the theatre, killing 118 of the hostages. He killed 118 civilians, people who might not have died had he negotiated with the Chechens. Putin responded to critics by stating he is fighting terrorists and he will not negotiate with them. For the record, 80,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Putin’s crackdown on Chechnya.
While I understand the loss of civilian life is a natural outgrowth of modern warfare, there are no more pitched battles on the fields of Agincourt or Waterloo. Now we see governments use the deliberate murder of civilians as a legitimate tool to further their own political goals.
Most educated people would agree that terrorism, that is the deliberate targeting of civilians in order to further a political cause, is wrong. Also, it does not work. Every suicide bomb in Jerusalem or Tel-Aviv does not make the Israeli people more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. It actually has the opposite effect, pushing more and more people, who might otherwise support the Palestinian cause, into the hands of the hawkish Israeli politicians like Benjamin Netanyahu.
I also think most educated people are able to tell the difference between a guerrilla and a terrorist. The guerrilla envisions an end to his fight, either his death or his enemy’s defeat. A terrorist does not. Even when the terrorist hangs up his Kalishnikov, his enemies still see him as a terrorist and do not trust him. Don’t ask me, ask Yasser Arafat.
Since two members of the United Nations Security Council can justify the deliberate murder of civilians in the current “War on Terrorism,” does that mean that terrorism is being fought with terrorism? In a word,
yes. If Bush, Rumsfeld, Putin and their like are the new world police, who will
police the police? And no, it will not be the Coast Guard.