A Plea for a Consistent Definition of Terrorism

It is interesting that the US would add the Iranian “Revolutionary Guard Corps” (RGC, Iranian Unit to Be Labeled ‘Terrorist’, Washington Post) since branding a national group like the RGC as terrorist goes against the definition in U.S. law (U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)(2)): “the term ‘terrorism’ means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.” The restriction of the designation to exclude national groups had placed acts of American allies such as Saddam Hussein’s gassing of the Kurds and the Israeli destruction of Palestinian homes outside the definition of terrorism. That the RGC is a national rather than sub-national group doesn’t seem to bother the Bush administration and I don’t think the RGC is any more a clandestine agency that Saddam’s troops or the Israeli Defense Forces. Clearly the administration is motivated by its desire to go after the RGC’s financial network. Perhaps it’s time to amend Title 22 to include all politically motivated acts of violence against noncombatants, even by our allies.

Here’s my nominee for a definition of political terrorism: “the term ‘terrorism’ means premeditated violence perpetrated against noncombatant civilian targets in order to create a climate of terror to advance their political aims.” It makes no distinction between state terrorism and non-state terrorism.

Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, Ph.D.

Minaret of Freedom Institute

minaret.org

ImadadDean