TERRORISM AND WORLD PEACE
who is a 'freedom fighter', and who is a 'terrorist'?
Terrorism is a word used so often and so loosely
that it has lost clear meaning. The term is sometimes merely used
because someone disagrees with the cause of the fight.
Many argue that one man's terrorist is simply
another man's freedom
fighter. If killing civilians is the key, then the atomic bombs
dropped on Japan are the worst act of terrorism in history. What
of the USA supply of arms and training for the Contras, a group
determined to overthrow a democratically elected government in Nicaragua
in the 1980s? Click here
to read more about this debate.
The problem is many western nations have conducted
military actions deliberately aimed at harming civilians, but claimed
the greater good justified the means (as do ‘terrorists’!). In defining
"terrorism," as with all definitions, a bit of common
sense has to be applied.
how do we define terrorism?
Terrorism is rarely defined by rigorous criteria,
but more often used as a term to condemn acts that are not favorable
to a nation’s own interests. As has often been raised at the United
Nations, a viable, long-term strategy will need to distinguish between
terrorism and legitimate acts of resistance. The tragic irony is
that terrorists such as Osama bin Laden were hailed as 'freedom
fighters' in the 1980s by the very same governments and politicians
that, at that time, labeled national liberation and social justice
leaders such as Nelson Mandela as 'terrorists'.
Perhaps a simple definition of terrorism is violent
acts by non-government groups or individuals that deliberately aim
for civilian deaths. This then excludes Britian's deliberate killing
of thousands of German civilians in the Dresden fire bombings, and
also excludes the USA targeting Japanese civilians with atomic bombs.
Click here
to read more about defining
terrorism.
some possible strategies to reduce terrorism
Solve social, economic, and environmental problems
A 2001 United Nations report on terrorism insists
it is the responsibility of all governments to act on the underlying
causes of terrorism: "were all states to do this in an unbiased
way, the incidence of terrorist acts would dramatically decline".
Poverty, famine, mass movements of refugees, and brutal and repressive
regimes (that have often been shored up by Western military aid)
increase frustration and desperation. While, of course, no 'root
cause' can ever possibly justify acts such as September 11, ignoring
causal factors will increase future terrorism.
United Nations action
The UN is in a unique position to develop preventative
strategies that can focus on causes, not merely the symptoms. The
world needs a new international security strategy that redefines
security as more than military power: as economic security, sustainable
development, social justice, and human rights. Wide support is needed
for international agreements that ban or restrict atomic, chemical
and biological weapons.
Bring terrorists to justice
Lawful procedure will always be better in the
long run, than merely responding in kind which causes immense human
suffering. The International Criminal Court could be a powerful
institution to bring to justice those who commit crimes against
humanity.
All acts of terrorism should be condemned
There needs to be condemnation of all acts, methods,
and practices of terrorism by democratic nations, not merely those
that are against national interests. |
