Since 7 October 2023 there has been a growth of the use of the allegation of terrorism for propaganda purposes.

When one stands back and considers who is, or are, the principal users of this allegation, it is apparent that the State of Israel, organs of that state, or just its defenders, have fallen into the habit of labelling anyone who they see as supporting the Palestinian cause as terrorists.

Thus, we hear that any resistors of settlements within the West Bank or anyone associated in any way with the Palestinian Government in Gaza, i.e. any functionary or supporter of Hamas, is a terrorist. That suggestion needs to be considered critically.

Let’s start with the dictionary definition of “terrorism”. Collins describes a terrorist as “a person who uses violence, especially murder and bombing, in order to achieve political aims”. Such a definition is immediately controversial. Is it confined to “a person”? Both State and non-state actors have been cast as terrorists. There is a lack of consistency and clarity. This is apparent from another controversy: the adage that, “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.

On the issue of whether there can be state-sponsored terrorism, it may come down to usage. Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has no doubt. On 29 August last he said: “Israel’s reckless attacks on Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iran are the clearest sign of a terrorist state mentality defying international order."

What then of a legal definition? In 1996, the UN General Assembly established an Ad Hoc Committee with a mandate to draft a comprehensive international convention on terrorism. The Committee is recorded as recognising objections about “the necessity to distinguish between acts of terrorism and the legitimate struggle of people in the exercise of their right to self-determination by people under foreign occupation, and colonial or alien domination”.

Essentially, the Committee failed to produce a definition that achieved general acceptance. The matter was, in the event, picked up by the UN Security Council, which similarly contributed to the debate but without coming up with an accepted definition. Eventually, academic legal writers appear to have identified a “widespread consensus on a generally acceptable definition of terrorism” (Cassese, International Criminal Law, 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press, 2008). According to Cassese:

International law defines and regulates international terrorism. International terrorism as a discrete international crime perpetrated in time of peace exhibits the following requisites: [i] it is an action normally criminalised in national legal schemes; [ii] it is transnational in character….; [iii] it is carried out for the purpose of coercing a state or an international organisation to do or refrain from doing something; [iv] it uses for this purpose two possible modalities: either spreading terror among civilians or attacking public or eminent private institutions or their representatives; [v] it is not motivated by personal gain but by ideological or political aspirations.

As against that definition, it is now appropriate to consider some current possibilities; first, actions by Palestinians or their supporters.

Palestinian terrorism?

An example given by Israeli National Security Minister Ben-Gvir on 31 August addressed the Global Sumud Flotilla seeking to bring aid to Gaza. Ben-Gvir designated such activists, including the Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, as persons to be detained in Israel’s Kitziot and Damon prisons, used to hold terrorists. Effectively, the activists were designated as terrorists.

When al-Jazeera journalists working in Gaza — when they were able to do so — were killed by IDF snipers, they were smeared as “terrorists” working for Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Anyone who resists Israel’s uncontentious illegal occupation in the West Bank is, of course, a “terrorist”.

Anyone who remains in Gaza today is necessarily a “terrorist”.

And finally, in mid-August, the group Palestine Action was proscribed by the UK Government as a terrorist organisation. People wearing a Palestinian Action T-shirt have been arrested as terrorists.

Those examples targeting Palestinians or their supporters are sufficient for our purposes. We turn next to action by Israel, Israeli functionaries, and supporters.

Israeli terrorism?

In Gaza, it is reported that about 300 residential units are destroyed each day by the IDF’s explosive-laden robots.

In Southern Lebanon, a Lebanese farmer who resisted an Israeli bulldozer in June 2023 had his home bombed by the IDF after 7 October 2023.

In late August, in Gaza City, the only paediatric hospital still functioning is Al-Rantisi Children’s Hospital. Other medical facilities have come under attack by the Israeli military and been forced to shut down. Children and babies are, however, unable to get proper treatment at Al-Rantisi due to massive overcrowding, severe shortage of medical supplies and a widening famine as a result of the Israeli blockade. There have been some 185 starvation deaths of children in August alone.

Are those three actions examples of terrorism?

Which of the above two sets of actions best come within the definition of terrorism provided above?

The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.