Defining Terrorism: The Dichotomy of Double Standards
There are certian facets and characteristics that are attached to the way we are taught to interpret terrorism. White turbans, long ankle-lengthened thobes, bushy beards, black long-sleeved Abayas, and head-coverings (Hijabs), just to name a few, are an instant siren of danger that burrows fear in the alert heart of the West. The sight alone, can bring about uncomfortable stares, voiced prejudice, insults, and denied entry to specific places or countries for many. These people who most likely never engaged in any terrorist activities are placed under the loupe, dissected due to their looks that fit widely generalized stereotypes, that are affirmed by Western leaders and the media.
People from the Global South: Arabs, Latinos, South Asians, and Africans are brutally inspected in long queues to meticulously discard potential ties to any of the Western-recognized terrorist groups. Incidents like 9/11, have ingrained a violent hateful image of Islam, distorting the perception of Arabs and Muslims branding them as terrorists around the world.
Rosemary Pennington explained in the first chapter of On Islam: Muslims and the Media, how a majority of the American population is overtaken by a haze of fear, where they believe that Muslims are out there to kill them. Just by mentioning the words “Islam” or “Muslims” a cluster of people would recoil back in fear, signs of nervousness and aggravation clear in their gaze as they murmur their way out of learning or understanding what Islam and Muslims are.
Every now and then, an individual or a group of people are labeled and branded as terrorists. Whether there is proof or not, the accusation still stands, especially when the country pointing its finger has grown accustomed to thrashing around baseless claims that are unchallenged by the public.
So, what does terrorism really mean?
Terrorism can be defined as the use of violence to disseminate fear in a population, it is disruption of any kind and it is often paired with political ideologies. Usually, innocent victims are impacted by fear and terrorist attacks are persecuted under criminal law. The early mentions of the term can be traced back to the French Revolution, but it is conceded that terrorism has been around from the very beginning. Although the term has changed and evolved, terrorism has branched from its actual meaning and has become a term used lightly to control and assert dominance in many ways. This emphasizes the otherness in a group of people who don't necessarily possess a white complexion.
Recently, discourses pertaining to Hamas being a terrorist group have circulated in media outlets, and many have called for the elimination and destruction of the group — no matter the cost. That label has been used openly by the Israeli government numerous times to justify the killing of men, women, and children. Some of the most jarring statements by the Israeli government since the 7th of October revolve around cleansing the land of future terrorists or the “children of darkness” (Tweet deleted by Benjamin Netanyahu). There are also claims implicating journalists and doctors as part of alleged terrorist groups aiming to compromise the security of the apartheid state.
They have gone far and beyond to sway public opinion into believing that targeting schools, hospitals, aid, and journalists, has been part of their preventative measures, to secure their safety. Justifying the killing of Hamza Al Dahdouh and Mustafa Thuria on the 7th of January of this year, under the pretense that they were part of terrorists groups in Gaza. This justification was rejected by Al Jazeera, as the allegations were yet again presented with no tangible proof. That is a clear form of witness tampering and erauser of the truth, which eludes the public into believing all Gazans are terrorists making their elimination acceptable.
This rhetoric contributes to the dehumanization of Arabs, Muslims, and Palestinians, minimizing the struggle of land theft, displacement, collective punishments, and ethnic cleansing. Reducing Palestinians to nothing but a radical group that constantly pokes at Israel, the victim, that has the right to defend itself. In protecting its borders, Israel kills and murders relentlessly, and countries like the UK, USA, and Germany stand by complicit to the atrocities unfolding in the occupied territories of Palestine.
It's been 101 days since the 7th of October, a death toll exceeding 24,000 Palestinians, with an estimate of 250 killings per day, making it the bloodiest major conflict in recent years. Despite that Hamas is accused by Western media of being anti-semite or a radical Jew-hating group that instigated conflict and started it all.
There has been an abundance of evidence provided to the international community, no short list of calls for restraint and a ceasefire, and most recently the ICJ case by South Africa that illustrated Israel’s war crimes and genocidal acts against Gaza. Yet the actions of Israel are not classified as terrorism, whereas the acts of a group or a guerilla fighting to liberate its barricaded and besieged people are painted in the grimmest of lights.
This contrast in narratives that depict one side as good and the other as evil, depending on the economic gains, religions, or race, is harmful and it creates a dichotomy based on a dystopian world, where apartheid states like Israel are free to terrorize with no regard to the indigenous people. The framing of the issue also fails to depict the severity of the situation, mainly ignoring that Hamas was not created in a vacuum and disregarding almost 76 years of Palestinian oppression.
A prime example of the paradox is the allegations that the Israeli government is fighting Hamas, the “human animals”, where they fault Hamas for the misery and anguish people in Gaza have suffered from. This however is questionable given that more than 10,000 children have been killed so far.
Similarly, a few years back a sentiment was echoed, by President George W Bush, regarding the operations carried out in Iraq and their purpose of targeting evil, not Islam. There are many examples throughout history that showcase guerilla groups fighting their oppressors. From Vietnam to South Africa, the revolting forces against an unyielding regime were also depicted as terrorists, and they were subjected to alienation.
This however changes depending on geography and ethnicity. There is more leniency and sympathy granted to terrorist organizations that are not from the global south. This brings up the question of what determines which is a terrorist group and which is not. For example, organizations like the Ku Klux Klan in the USA, are not recognized as terrorist groups, despite the violence it has displayed since its establishment in December of 1865. They have a long history of killing, raping, intimidation, etc., and yet the complexion of their skin guarantees a pass.
This paradigm is also applicable to any hate crimes individually carried out by White men or women, where these individuals are sheltered under the claim of suffering from a mental illness and going through a psychotic break. Just a few months ago a landlord committed a hate crime in Chicago Illinois, heinously murdering a five-year-old Muslim boy. None of the headlines anywhere claimed or alleged that the 71-year-old man, Joseph Czuba was a terrorist, which is further proof that the color of our skin, religion, and our ethnicities can determine the trajectory of how media paints us.
When it comes to depicting different sides, people have to be more critical in understanding the words used and how they are being employed. People neglect the power words hold and the impact they might have on some communities. Apprehending the importance of framing is crucial to changing these exacerbated perceptions, which could perhaps one day lead to accountability.
