Terrorist or Freedom Fighter?
The United Nations Legal Political committee gathered to discuss the definitions of the terms “terrorist” and “freedom fighters”. It is a pressing matter and extremely relevant at this time.
The delegation of Peru and the Ivory Coast both agreed that it was essential to form a consensus on what defines and sculpts a freedom fighter and a terrorist. They believe that these are two different things. However, other delegates disagreed and stated that freedom fighters are the same as terrorists.
The delegate from the Ivory Coast stated that a terrorist’s acts of violence are solely to instill fear, or to “make a statement”. Freedom fighters are fighting for change and for the greater good, according to the delegation of the Ivory Coast. This delegate also stressed the importance of defining these terms. They believe it will help the United Nations Legal Political take the appropriate action to combat the problem. They claim that if someone is considered a “terrorist” the response might be aggressive compared to the response if they were considered a “freedom fighter”.
Throughout the debate, some delegates questioned if the United Nations stepping in would infringe on the country’s national sovereignty. One delegate suggested getting approval before entering a country to fight terrorists or freedom fighters.
When the delegate from Israel took the stand, he stated that Israel was against terrorism. In response to this statement, Macedonia claimed that Israel is “part of the problem.” Furthermore, the delegate from Peru also raised a question: is Israel biased when defining terrorism due to the problems in Gaza?
The importance of defining terrorists and freedom fighters were highlighted during the debate, especially by the delegates from Peru, the Ivory Coast, Macedonia, and Israel.
The delegation of Peru and the Ivory Coast both agreed that it was essential to form a consensus on what defines and sculpts a freedom fighter and a terrorist. They believe that these are two different things. However, other delegates disagreed and stated that freedom fighters are the same as terrorists.
The delegate from the Ivory Coast stated that a terrorist’s acts of violence are solely to instill fear, or to “make a statement”. Freedom fighters are fighting for change and for the greater good, according to the delegation of the Ivory Coast. This delegate also stressed the importance of defining these terms. They believe it will help the United Nations Legal Political take the appropriate action to combat the problem. They claim that if someone is considered a “terrorist” the response might be aggressive compared to the response if they were considered a “freedom fighter”.
Throughout the debate, some delegates questioned if the United Nations stepping in would infringe on the country’s national sovereignty. One delegate suggested getting approval before entering a country to fight terrorists or freedom fighters.
When the delegate from Israel took the stand, he stated that Israel was against terrorism. In response to this statement, Macedonia claimed that Israel is “part of the problem.” Furthermore, the delegate from Peru also raised a question: is Israel biased when defining terrorism due to the problems in Gaza?
The importance of defining terrorists and freedom fighters were highlighted during the debate, especially by the delegates from Peru, the Ivory Coast, Macedonia, and Israel.