Revisiting the Terrorism Essay by Chirusha de Mel

Revisiting the Terrorism Essay

In the original version of my terrorism essay I argued that the definition of terrorism is ambiguous, and has shifted in recent years. I defined terrorism as the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, by using political strategy.  In addition, I argued further, if there was a stable meaning of terrorism, conflicts would arise. I also stated that it is important to use the term ‘terrorism’ carefully, in order to avoid categorizing certain groups according to where they are located. As an ambiguous term, terrorism could be defined to different groups and governments.  In addition, I still believe it is a complex term that continues to expand and become more complicated within the different international political issues because of how the world is globally interconnected.  After going over specific cases this semester, I would argue that the cases we have learnt reconfirmed my argument on the ambiguity of the definition of terrorism, and how there is a blurred line between terrorists and freedom fighters.

In the article, John Brown, Terrorist? By Nicole Etchenson. Etchenson argues that John Brown flourished as a guerrilla leader in the 1860s by attempting to put an end to slavery, however some scholars may argue that John Brown should be considered as a terrorist due to the attacks on innocent civilians. I argue that terrorism was not defined until the1960s. John Brown should not be considered as a terrorist, he fought for the rights of African Americans, and while fighting he never instilled fear among those he had attacked.  In addition, terrorism is partly defined as instilling fear among individuals, and as time progresses the term terrorism becomes more ambiguous. To further argue my point, Lutz and Lutz, 

“terrorism is a term that has come to have an extremely negative connotation that makes it difficult to be connected to a good cause. The association of terrorism with evil began in the 1960s and clearly became more connected in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombings, the 9/11 attacks, the school takeover in Beslan in Russia, and other major attacks that have killed large numbers of people. It is worth noting, however, that terrorism did not always have such a negative connotation.”[1]

The attacks at Pottawatomie Creek was vicious, making John Brown’s actions unjustified in many eyes, however this does not detract from his constructive acts to end slavery.  During the 1960s individuals began to consider John Brown as a terrorist. At that time period John Brown was fighting to gain freedom for the African Americans, and did not aim to harm innocent civilians. This portrays John Brown as an abolitionist fighting for the rights of African Americans. I would argue that his intentions were simply to free the slaves. If John Brown did not fight for the rights of African Americans, it would have been another activist.  Even though he used terroristic tactics, I believe that it was needed during that specific time period.

Furthermore, the second case on PLO, some scholars may argue that the PLO is a terrorist group, however it is important to understand their motives and the cause behind it. However, PLO did use violence and intimidation, but one could argue that it was for the Palestine cause not for their individual benefits. PLO is not an actual state; they are an organization which characterized them as non-terrorist organization. The PLO used guerilla warfare tactics to fight against the Israeli in order to demoralize them. According to Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? The Origins of the Palestine Liberation Organization by Ashley Fritchl, “initiated attacks from the borders of Lebanon, Jordan and Syria, entering through the Gaza Strip and West Bank, and from inside Israel as well. The Israelis fought back, and gave them a choice after defeat, go back to their homes or get help relocating to another area. This never was accomplished, but the Israelis did refuse Palestine from returning to their land, and instead used it to contain Jewish immigrants.” This aggravated the PLO organization to be more resistant to the Jewish expansion.

In conclusion, terrorist range across a spectrum of organizations, beliefs, and circumstances. Terrorism consists of certain acts and plans to spread pressure, panic, and destruction towards the innocent civilians. However, John Brown and PLO set a great example on why individuals commit these acts to achieve their political goal.  

Work Cited

Etchenson. John Brown, Terrorist? 2009.

Fritchl, Ashley. "Washington State University." Fall 2015 Terrorists or Freedom Fighters The Origins of the Palestine Liberation Organization Comments. N.p., n.d. Web.