A Brief Note On The Act Of Terrorism

1688 Words May 24th, 2016 7 Pages
An act of terrorism. In itself, is neither moral, nor immoral - no act in itself ever is. Morality of an act is determined by the intentions of its perpetrators and by the circumstances under which it takes place. 'Killing ' is a morally neutral act, it is the intention of the killer and the circumstances under which the act takes place, that make it a crime of 'murder ' subject to a heavy punishment, an 'unfortunate accident ', or an 'act of valour ' rewarded by a medal.

In the course of wars or matters of internal policy involving destruction of people and property there are inevitable innocent victims. But established governments, while regretting this fact, justify it on the grounds of military or political necessity. These justifications are asserted by the governments themselves, and, up to now, there were no independent, impartial and objective super-national courts, where such justifications could be put to test of factual validity, logical consistency, and conformity to the fundamental principle of justice – equality under the law.
As the only difference between terrorism and war is the fact of the perpetrator being or not being an established government, it is possible for terrorists to become established governments.
If the terrorists’ objective is to establish a national state or to expel a foreign (colonial or similar) power occupying their country, and they succeed, they become not terrorists, but an established government.

The last century saw numerous…
Open Document