B”H



B”H

Terrorists or Freedom Fighters: What is the Difference?

Jeremiah Rozman

There have been many historical and contemporary instances where certain groups or organizations of people have fought or are fighting against a greater power than they are. Some of these groups are nationalist, some religious, some a mixture of both. Some are fighting for their very survival. Sometimes these groups fight with great valor and diligence for their freedom. While many groups have historically employed force to achieve their ends, making them indistinguishable from one another in the eyes of the world, is there, in fact, a distinction between groups that employ brutal acts of terror and groups that could be categorized as valorous freedom fighters striving to free their people from oppression?

In this essay I will discuss the differences between terrorism and freedom fighting. The distinction, as I understand it, has to do with their goals and with their methods. They may both be taking on a greater power, but their goals may be very different. The most prevalent case of confusion between terrorism and freedom fighting is in the Middle East, more precisely, in Israel. The Palestinians are fighting brutally against civilians, for the most part. While the world (or most of it) was quick to recognize and condemn the acts of September 11 as terrorism, rather than a legitimate act of freedom fighting, why has the world been less able to recognize Palestinian massacres of Israeli civilians as being in the same category? Why is world opinion more likely to perceive these acts as a case of freedom fighting?

If one were to say that the confusion stems from the world’s perception that the Palestinians are a nationalist group with legitimate complaints and reasons for their violence, allow me to ask what Americans would think if Native Americans suddenly blew up a shopping mall and killed hundreds of innocent civilians? I don’t think the response would be like the response toward the Israeli situation. If one legitimizes some nationalist groups’ aspirations, why not all? Why not let every group, cult or even individual with a nationalist aspiration have their state or country if they are willing to fight for it?

In my view, the Palestinians are not nationalists in the generally accepted sense of the word. Their actual goal is genocide, the destruction of the Jewish people, and they will stop at nothing, even the creation of a Palestinian state, to achieve this goal. It is this goal that makes the Palestinians terrorists rather than freedom fighters. Let us look at a contrasting case set in the same place and in the relatively recent past. I will discuss the nationalist aspirations of several groups of Jews who fought the British occupation of what is now Israel during and immediately after WWII. The Irgun and Lemi were underground freedom fighters who fought against the British with the immediate and specific goal of opening ports that had been blockaded by the British, in order to provide a refuge for the handful of Jews who were able to escape Nazi-controlled Europe. Of course, the underground had a larger goal which was nationalist, that being the establishment of an independent Jewish state, which required kicking the British out. Even if the immediate goal was not nationalist, the eventual result was the creation of a nation. It is important to note that while these underground groups used violent tactics, they directed them against military, rather than civilian targets. While the British certainly regarded these groups as terrorists, they, in fact, were not. They were freedom fighters.

Let us now compare these Jewish groups which were called by some “terrorist” with the Palestinians who are called by some “freedom fighters”. Through this comparison, we will derive the true differences between terrorism and freedom fighting. The following is a list of the objectives and tactics used by the Irgun and Lemi, as opposed to those used by the Palestinians against Israel today. While the Jews were fighting to rescue their fellow Jews caught in the Nazi hell of Europe, the Palestinians aren’t fighting to rescue anyone or save any lives. While the Jews were fighting to create one single, tiny Jewish state, where they could live according to their own religion after centuries of oppression and exile, the Muslims have plenty of Moslem states (though, ironically, they are all more oppressive than Israel is). The most important difference has to do with tactics. While the Jews were always cautious about civilian lives and attempted to strike only military targets, the Palestinians today strike mostly civilian targets and are completely callous toward civilian lives, even using ambulances to launch their attacks. In light of these facts, we can conclude with certainty that the Palestinians should be regarded as terrorists while the Irgun and Lemi should be regarded as valorous freedom fighters.

To conclude, the main difference between terrorists and freedom fighters is one of goals and tactics. Terrorists do not care about the loss of civilian lives. These groups are based on obscure political or religious motivations, often including genocide. Terrorists and freedom fighters only appear to be similar on the surface, but in reality, they are very different.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download