In order to have a meaningful conversation, I have always found it helpful to define terms. So why don’t we start there? Two words necessary to define, for the purpose of this conversation are: (1) Terrorist and (2) Apartheid.
This first installment will deal with “Terrorist” and “Terrorism”. We will discuss Apartheid in the third installment.
The following is taken from Wikipedia. I figure that’s about as neutral a definition as we can get for the purpose of this conversation. It reads as follows:
“The international community has never succeeded in developing an accepted comprehensive definition of terrorism. During the 1970s and 1980s, the United Nations attempts to define the term floundered mainly due to differences of opinion between various members about the use of violence in the context of conflicts over national liberation and self-determination. Since 1994, the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism: “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”
Now while we may not necessarily agree on the above definition, at least we know what I mean when I use it. So I’ll use this as a jumping off point.
Hamas is labeled a “terrorist” organization by most Western powers I suppose. But not by all in the Middle East, and certainly NONE in Gaza. I suggest the word “Terrorist” is at best, a relative term. And more often than not, used for political reasons. Dr. Mark Lamont Hill is an American academic, journalist, author, activist, and television personality. During a recent debate on the Israel-Gaza conflict on CNN, he said it more elegantly than I could ever hope to, so I won’t even try. Mark said: “resistance is NOT terrorism”. I believe this to my core!
For example “Nelson Mandela founded MK Sizwe (abbreviated as MK, Zulu for “Spear of the Nation”). It was the armed wing of the African National Congress (ANC). Co-founded by Nelson Mandela in the wake of the Sharpeville massacre. , MK launched its first guerrilla attacks against government installations on 16 December 1961. It was subsequently classified as a terrorist organization by the South African government and the United States. “Madiba” as he was also affectionately known, received the Noble Peace Prize in 1993.”
Then there was “Menachem Begin, who was the head of Irgun. The Irgun was branded a terrorist organization by Britain, the 1946 Zionist Congress and the Jewish Agency. The Irgun believed that any means necessary to establish the Jewish State of Israel , including terrorism, was justifiable. The King David Hotel bombing was an attack carried out on Monday July 22, 1946 by the the Irgun, It killed 91 civilians of various nationalities and wounded 49. Menachem Begin received the Noble peace prize in 1978 for signing a peace treaty with Egypt.
So, here we have two men once labeled “terrorist” who were later awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. One spent many years in prison because he resisted APARTHEID.
The other man supported a system very much like APARTHEID. His Likud party’s 1999 platform among other things stated “The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel’s existence, security and national needs.”
So this is why I say the term “Terrorist” is a RELATIVE term at best. But more importantly this term is used to demonize and discredit those whom we choose to label “Terrorist”. Now don’t misunderstand what I’m saying. THERE ARE TERRORIST! I’m simply saying we should ask ourselves “why are they called “terrorist?” For example, as to this conflict, why do I refer to Hamas as “terrorist” and not Israel? Is it because Israel is a democratically elected government? No! That can’t be it. Because as I write this, Carol Costello of CNN is asking a Palestinian Reporter in Gaza, “Do you see any scenario in which the people of Gaza will rise up and overthrow Hamas”? He reminded her that Hamas was “democratically elected, and what they ARE rising up against is the occupation of Gaza!”
So we have two “democratically” elected governments. Which simply means people voted? We will come back to this idea of “democracy” especially as it relates to the Middle East later. But whatever criteria you choose to use, once that criterion is satisfied then feel free to apply that label of “Terrorist”.
The term as I am using it again is: “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.”
I say bombing the only electrical plant in GAZA, and in the process killing nearly 500 children, is terrorism.
Bombing UN facilities where you know civilians have taken shelter, because you have been told that in at least one case, thirty times by the UN. These UN shelters have been hit NOT ONCE but SIX (6) times in thirty days. I think that fits the definition of “terrorist”.
When a mother tells a reporter as she did in the a Aljezzera piece that she will not allow her three children to sleep in the same room, for fear that if they are hit by Israeli bombs tonight, she will lose all three of her children. So she has to decide “which child will I potentially sacrifice to save the other two? How can she explain this to a six year old who wants to know why she can’t sleep with her mom, because she is terrified of the bombs? How does she tell her “tonight I sacrifice you”! I think that fits the definition of “terrorism”. I say these are “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public”. This is terrorism!
Hamas has launched thousands of missiles into Israel. These missiles are NOT guided missiles in the sense they really know where they will land. Because of the US, Israel has the “Iron Dome” which intercepts somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% or better, of these rockets. But none the less I say these are “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public”. This is terrorism!
So here we have two democratically elected governments committing acts of terrorism, yet only one is labeled “terrorist”. Why?
I think it’s because once you label that entity as a “terrorist” and get others to agree then certain things follow. Most importantly the “terrorist” lacks credibility. You can’t believe a word they say! They are after all, “TERRORIST”!
To be continued.