لطفا منتظر باشید ...
Towards a
Definition of Terrorism
Ayatullah Shaykh Muhammad 'Ali Taskhiri
Vol V No. 1 (Muharram 1408 AH/1987 CE)
* Terrorism is a term that has been much bandied about in
recent times in the world media. This paper was presented by the author,
who is Director of the International Relations Department of the I.P.O.,
at the International Conference on Terrorism called by the Organization
of the Islamic Conference, Geneva, from June 22-26, 1987. It is an
attempt to define terrorism and to put it in a broad
perspective.Resolution 20/5-P (1.5) of the Fifth Islamic
Summit supported the idea of an international conference to be convened
under the aegis of the United Nations in order to discuss the subject of
international terrorism and to differentiate it from the struggle of
peoples for their acknowledged national causes and the liberation of their
territories.
This means that we should, at this meeting, take into consideration the
following steps:
(i) To refer, first of all, to Islamic sources in order to set the
major criteria, to identify the principles according to which the humanity
aims and actions is to be assessed, and to make such principles the basis
of our judgement in the various cases.
(ii) To examine genuine human nature unblemished by any considerations
of narrow interests, in order to identify human rules that can be put
forth at the international level as a general human criterion For this
purpose, the results of our studies must cover the various fields of the
international scene and constitute a general action framework.
(iii) From these Islamic and human principles, we deduce a general
comprehensive and exclusive definition, i.e. encompassing all the real
attributes of terrorism and excluding the alleged criteria of terrorism
which cannot be treated as such by lofty principles.
(iv) Then, we should apply the criteria set forth to all the national
and international instances of alleged terrorism. We should examine each
of them closely in the light of the results, then put forward an
appropriate and precise judgement which is free from any ambiguity or
connivance and to confer on each act its true adjective.
In the light of this introduction, we shall confine our study to the
following points:
First Point:
It goes without saying that every international bloc, every State or
indeed every community has enemies and opponents that seek to eliminate
it, and, as the conflict becomes violent, each party tries to undermine
the reputation of the other by attributing to it repulsive epithets, such
as "anarchist", "criminal", "outlaw", "inhuman", "terrorist", and the
like.
We may even find that each of the two parties indulges in such
allegations in order to carry out a plan which involves the deprival of
the other party of its rights on the pretext of collaborating with the
enemy or plotting against lawful interests.
To materialize this process, each party uses its international
influence in order to win other parties over to its side either in action
or in terms of support in international fora. The issue thus assumes a
public character and the victory in a case is a matter of pressure,
influence and the power of persuasion rather than a matter of sound
logic.
Accordingly, feelings are influenced and sentiments are exploited for
the implementation of such plans motivated by self-interest, under the
banner of "anti-terrorism" for instance. To be sure, terrorism is humanly
reprehensible (if we disregard its motives and objectives), and no one in
his senses would accept any threat to human dignity, freedom, property,
honour, security, work, etc. This feeling is instinctive, genuine and
incontestable.
Second Point:
If we consider the meaning of the word "terrorism" on the one hand, and
its fallout and traces left on human life on the other, we note that
terrorism may be carried out on different levels. There is a terrorism
which threatens security, honour, property and the like; there is a
cultural terrorism which tears human identity apart, and leads to the
abyss of perdition and aimlessness; there is an information terrorism
which deprives man of his freedom to breathe in an unpolluted atmosphere.
We can cite other types of terrorism such as economic terrorism,
scientific terrorism, diplomatic terrorism, military terrorism, etc.
There exists, however, a division based on the type of perpetrators,
which must be taken into account. It is the division into official and
unofficial terrorism. Official terrorism - which is the more dangerous -
consists of all acts that are supported by an internationally recognized
quarter or State, whether by the army of that State or individual elements
or in the form of an operation for the benefit of the said quarter.
Opposing this type of terrorism is unofficial terrorism.
Third Point:
We may focus, in any act or conduct, on two determining factors:
1. The motives of the perpetrator.
2. The human acceptability of the act itself.
These are not inseparable aspects. The personal motives of the
perpetrator may look humane to him but not so to the public. Conversely,
the perpetrator may have no human purpose in mind or may indeed have a
purpose that he perceives to be inhumane but is considered from the public
point of view to be a humane act.
Therefore, viewpoints may differ in the judgement whether such an act
is good or evil (usuli jurisprudents have done a great deal of
valuable research on the rational basis of differentiating between good
and evil deeds, but this is not the place to go into it). What must be
stated here is that neither of the factors, taken separately, is
sufficient to determine the acceptability or the reprehensibility of an
act or to judge such an act positively or negatively. A positive
assessment in regard to both factors must be carried out in order to judge
and act.
Consequently, we have to ensure objectivity in our investigation in
order to find a criterion for identifying the acceptability and humanity
of an act from the standpoints of both Islam and mankind in general.
As regards the Islamic standpoint, we have to refer to the principles,
concepts and judgements which relate to the question of terrorism - in its
literal sense - to give a general definition of condemnable terrorism,
i.e. the terrorism that is rejected by Islam as contrary to the process of
the human being's perfection determined by God Almighty for mankind
through human nature and prescribed through revelation.
When referring to Islamic teachings, we find that Islam is very rich in
this field, and we notice that Islamic jurists have delved into the
various aspects that relate to the subject.
We have the judgements on al-baghy, i.e. armed revolt by a group
against a just and legitimate government, intimidation of the general
public, and pursuit of divisive political goals that damage national
unity.
We also have the judgements on al-harabah, which is defined as
"the use of weapons, on land or sea, by day or night, to intimidate
people, in a city or elsewhere, by a male or female, strong or weak." God
Almighty declares in the Qur'an:
This is the recompense of those who fight against God and
His Messenger, and spread corruption in the land. they shall be put to
death, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate
sides, or be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in
this world; and in the next awaits them a mighty chastisement
(5:33)As may be noticed, the verse mentions the subject
and the purpose, namely war against society and spreading of corruption in
the land. It has also mentioned the severe punishment to be dealt out to
the perpetrators, which points to Islam's concern for the subject.
There are also the laws about theft and murder which can be mentioned
in this regard. Likewise, we come across in Islamic texts terms which
relate to the matter at hand, such as homicide (al-fatk), deceit
(al-ghilah), and seditious conspiracy (al-'i'timar).
There are also texts which stipulate utmost respect for covenants and
treaties even if it is discovered later that they favour the other party.
As long as he adheres to their provisions, these must be observed.
Furthermore, we have the requirements of the Islamic ethical system
which consists of concepts unknown to positive law yet are deeply-rooted
in this system. Lying may, for instance, reach the degree of a major sin
and so may calumny. We thus find that Islam seeks earnestly to protect all
kinds of true human freedoms, and to defend the dignity of the individual
and society, as well as the cohesion of society and integrity of the
family, considering any attack on them to be an atrocious crime liable to
the sternest punishment which may go as far as execution, crucifixion and
the like.
Islam upholds the principle of personal responsibility and considers
any attack on innocent people as a major crime. It focuses on the defence
of the weak, the humble and the oppressed and enjoins jihad for
their protection:
And why should you not fight for the cause of Allah, and
for the helpless old men and women.... (4:75)The Muslim
is required to always stand up for the oppressed until they get their
rights. Imam 'Ali (A) gave this advice to his two sons:
Be opponents of the oppressor and defenders of the
oppressed.He also said:
To me the lowly are noble until I get their rights for them,
and the powerful are weak until I get such rights from
them.Perhaps the mention in the Holy Qur'an of the blessing
of security "And hath made them safe from fear" (106:4) is the best
proof of the importance it attaches to security.
However, it would take too long to elaborate on all the related
matters. Nevertheless we wish to state that the first criterion for
identifying humaneness is the intention of the perpetrator and the general
acceptability of his act is Din with all its spirit, laws and
concepts.
Turning our attention to the second framework, namely the general human
framework, we can accept those principles that are unanimously respected
by mankind as represented by its official organs, its popular
organizations, its conscience and sentiments, as another set of criteria
to determine the presence of humaneness or its opposite in the
intention of the perpetrator, and of the above-mentioned general
acceptability (although we believe the two criteria to be mostly
overlapping).
As an example of the foregoing, we may notice the present unanimity of
mankind in considering the following as inhuman:
prostitution and the disintegration of family relationships;
narcotics and the disintegration of individual's rational
personality;
colonialism and the undermining of peoples' dignity and plundering
of their resources;
racism and the disintegration of human brotherhood;
violation of all recognized rights and the breaking of covenants:
bombardment of populated areas, use of chemical weapons. attacks on
civil aviation, national railways, commercial and tourist vessels, and
similar methods which are universally condemned in war. There is
no divergence whatsoever as regards the anti-human nature of the above
instances. Therefore, these and similar violations suggest the acceptable
criteria which should form the basis of our definition, and any act to
eliminate and oppose them is a human act which must be supported if itself
not accompanied by violation of other human values.
Fourth Point: Definition of Terrorism
In the light of the above, we can arrive at a comprehensive definition
of terrorist acts, a definition which is unanimously acceptable and on
which we can base our positions. Yet before putting forth our suggested
definition, we may recall that we should note therein the following
elements:
intimidation and violation of security of any kind;
presence of inhuman intention and motive;
unacceptability of the end and purpose and the act itself by
humanity. Accordingly, our definition may be as follows:
Terrorism is an act carried out to achieve an inhuman and corrupt
(mufsid) objective, and involving threat to security of any kind,
and violation of rights acknowledged by religion and mankind.For the
sake of clarity, we may add the following points:
1. We have used the term 'human' instead of 'international' for the
sake of wider consensus, official or otherwise, so as to emphasize the
general human character of the statement.
2. We have introduced the epithet 'corrupt' (mufsid) to connote
the attribute accompanying inhuman objectives, i.e. the spreading of
corruption in the land, and to include the imperative to avoid such
objectives.
3. We have referred to various types of terrorism with the phrase;
"security of any kind".
4. We have mentioned the two criteria, i.e. religious and human, first
to be consistent with our belief and then to generalize the
criterion.
5. As may be noticed, the fact that an operation is violent does not
constitute a condition for considering it a case of terrorism. In the
light of the above definition, we shall be able to ascertain the nature of
one act or another and determine whether it is a case of terrorism. We
shall confirm that the definition does not apply to the following:
a. acts of national resistance exercised against occupying
forces, colonizers and usurpers;
b. resistance of peoples against cliques imposed on them by
the force of arms;
c. rejection of dictatorships and other forms of despotism
and efforts to undermine their institutions;
d. resistance against racial discrimination and attacks on
the latter's strongholds;
e. retaliation against any aggression if there is no other
alternative.Similarly, the definition does not apply to any
democratic action unaccompanied by terrorism even if it does not have a
humane objective. Nor does it apply to individual destructive acts if they
have no social effects.
The above definition, however, does apply to the following:
a. acts of piracy on land, air and sea;
b. all colonialist operations including wars and military
expeditions;
c. all dictatorial acts against peoples and all forms of
protection of dictatorships, not to mention their imposition on
nations;
d. all military methods contrary to human practice, such as
the use of chemical weapons, the shelling of civilian populated areas,
the blowing up of homes, the displacement of civilians, etc.;
e. all types of pollution of geographical, cultural and
informational environment. Indeed, intellectual terrorism may be one of
the most dangerous types of terrorism;
f. all moves that undermine adversely affect the condition
of international or national economy, adversely affect the condition of
the poor and the deprived, deepen up nations with the shackles of
socio-economic gaps, and chain up nations with the shackles of
exorbitant debts;
g. all conspiratorial acts aimed at crushing the
determination of nations for liberation and independence, and imposing
disgraceful pacts on them.The list of examples that fit in
with the suggested definition is almost endless.
Fifth Point:
Although many meetings have been held and many attempts made to combat
terrorism, they have generally failed because of the following
reasons:
- They were not based on international human considerations but were
aimed primarily at achieving narrow interests.
- They did not deal with the circumstances that generate terrorism, nor
did they seek the real motives of terrorism. It is indeed comical that the
United States of America, which is the mother of international terrorism,
and the author of all the circumstances of oppression and subjection of
peoples, by strengthening dictatorial regimes and supporting occupation of
territories and savage attacks on civilian areas, etc. should seek to
convene symposia on combating "terrorism", i.e. any act that conflicts
with its imperialist interests.
Killing a person in a forest is an unforgivable
sin,
But the massacre of a peaceful nation is a
debatable question.At any rate, the real cure of
terrorism - acts of individual terrorism in particular - consists, in our
view, in removing the conditions that have brought it about.
Islam, in its treatment of all cases of deviation, strongly stresses
this aspect. It seeks first to reform the social atmosphere and eliminate
all inducements to crime. It also emphasizes self-restraint through
education of the innermost soul and through giving the latter a unique
human mould that causes it to spontaneously shun any transgression of
prescribed human norms and rules by the Shari'ah. In addition, Islam does
not omit to lay down a comprehensive, realistic and flexible code of
sanctions that deals with facts according to their social effects.
Going back to our current reality, we must seek the prevalence of a
just system and prevent aggression and encroachment upon other peoples'
rights. Under such circumstances when a person allows himself to be
induced to commit terrorism or aggression, the whole mankind will stand up
against him. If, however, we fail to fulfil this standard, all our
treatments will be local and palliative; though they may alleviate pain,
they will not eradicate the cause of the disease.
Index of articles from Al-Tawhid
