LettersAre the Taliban terrorists? No, but not for the reasons you think

Name: Malala voices fear for ‘Afghan sisters’ as women and girls face uncertainty under Taliban rule
Uploaded: 2021-08-23T16:35:08.000Z
Duration: 4 min 33 s
Description: Malala voices fear for ‘Afghan sisters’ as women and girls face uncertainty under Taliban rule

Once they became an insurgent group that consistently controlled territory, the Taliban were a de facto state and no longer fit the definition of ‘terrorists’

Misuse of the word terrorist muddies the water around heinous acts of war committed against children, civilian women and other non-combatants

2-MIN READ2-MIN

A Taliban fighter walks past a beauty salon with images of women defaced using spray paint in Kabul on August 18. Photo: AFP

Letters

Published: 12:35am, 24 Aug 2021Updated: 12:35am, 24 Aug 2021

It is depressing to watch the disaster unfolding in Afghanistan, both as an American and an expert on violence against women. The mismanaged US withdrawal leaves us with serious, legitimate fears over what will happen to the many Afghan civilians who struggled for the rights of the country’s girls and women.

Violent reprisals against activists are morally repugnant. So, why not call them terrorists?

The Oxford dictionary defines terrorism as “unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims”. Because states can create laws, this generally means non-state actors who are using violence and threats against civilians.

This definition clarifies why terrorism should be deplored: civilians are non-combatants and should never be targeted in war by anyone. The problem is we don’t talk about it like this any more.

Whenever a bomb goes off anywhere in the world, this is called “terrorism” in the media as long as the perpetrator is a non-state actor. Distinctions are not made between military and civilian targets.

04:33

Malala voices fear for ‘Afghan sisters’ as women and girls face uncertainty under Taliban rule

The loss of the civilian target distinction is costly in the long run. The meaning of “terrorist” simply becomes “small enemy” – small because they are a non-state actor, enemy because the attack is against whichever side I favour.