Informative Reading

Read the text and say what the main idea expressed by the author is.

One Democracy’s Terrorist is Another Democracy’s Freedom-Fighter (by Ronald Rouhier)

One of the cornerstones in the fight against international terrorism is that every country should automatically accept the definition of the title of this opinion.

The United States government allows political asylum for persons who have a well-founded fear of persecution should they be returned to their home governments. A few members in the IRA have found their way into the American judicial system and have applied for asylum on the grounds that the British government will subject them to further persecution. That belief is in a fight for a united Ireland free of British rule.

The British government has maintained that these are members of an internationally recognized terrorist group, which were prosecuted for criminal acts and should be returned to serve their sentences which they were convicted for under a democratic system.

Professor Wilkinson also stressed the need for “tough measures to penalize state sponsors who give terrorist movements safe haven, explosives, cash and moral and democratic support.” Does the United States when they give temporary visas to representatives of well-established terrorist organization to raise “humanitarian or fundraising” support for the terrorist cause not acknowledge some legitimacy for the cause.

The US government could rightfully claim a separation of powers when the courts uphold a request for asylum from a suspected terrorist, but not when the US leaders take a direct involvement in granting visas to allow known terrorists to raise funding.

The British government under John Major was vocal that the United States government should not allow any meeting between the US government and the leadership of Sinn Fein under Jerry Adams lest it give a tacit recognition. This was done by the US President when he overturned the State Department visa denial and through executive authority allowed a “reformed terrorist” to visit the White House with the head of state.

The US government in their actions under the Clinton administration showed that the US did give in one perspective “cash, moral and diplomatic support” for a terrorist movement. It would appear that “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” is more valid than “one democracy’s terrorist is another democracy’s terrorist.”

Talking Point

Discuss the following questions in groups. Share your ideas with the class.

1. Do you agree with the opinion that the statement, “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” has become a cliché, but is also one of the most difficult obstacles in coping with terrorism?

2. Why is it so difficult to coordinate international collaboration in the struggle against terrorism?

3. Are government terrorism and resistance terrorism part of the same phenomenon? Can we separate “terrorism” from “revolutionary violence,” ”national liberation,” etc.?

4. Discuss as a class what issues in the definition of terrorism remain unresolved.

Writing

Write a short essay, commenting on the statement “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Find your own examples to prove your viewpoint.