I will argue that the lack of a universal definition of terrorism will lead to a rise in the radicalisation of not only Islamic factions but also right-wing and left-wing terror actors. ‘If terrorism is a chess game, the world would be in a perpetual stalemate, the only way to win the battle and the war is to have one unified definition of terrorism’ (Atiya 2018).

In a world full of turmoil and decay, where freedom of speech is held hostage by those in power, where religion is used as a means for colonising a people, the only result that follows is the acceleration of radicalisation, and the only ones to blame are those nations that fund and support terrorist actions. No, I am not talking about only Muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iran, I am talking about the state of Israel and leading nations’ support for it.

The problem with the war on terrorism is the lack of a universal definition, while some states subscribe to their own political or religious definitions, some states encompass terrorism under one umbrella, these states seem to be those who have been colonised, who have suffered ethnic cleansing, apartheid and systematic termination of culture, identity, ethnicity and religion.

What is the definition of Terrorism? Why is it ok for some states to commit it openly and some are labelled with the term?

For some, the term means freedom to others, persecution or repression. Terrorism is a global problem that has no borders and is indiscriminate. Many wars have changed how the world has progressed; in the 21st century, the word terrorism has been utilised by state and non-state actors alike for political and non-political agendas. Some scholars, organisations and experts have chosen to work with open-ended definitions, while others delineate several different types of purposes (Schmid 2021). Over the years, the explorations have attempted to encompass elements that typify what terrorism is. Depending on whose perspective justifies a definition, the saying, ‘one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’ (Boaz 2010), is not a contradictory concept.

The word terrorism has so many meanings that its use in deterring terrorism is useless to some and challenging for all, it is vital to have a universal definition of terrorism that invests in the interest of all humankind and not just, government political agendas.

• Bruce Hoffman, the author of Inside Terrorism, suggests that terrorism is political in aim and motives. It is violence or use of violence, not just reserved for intended victims or targets, but beyond it (Hoffman 2018).
• Alex Schmid, the author of the Definition Problem, suggests terrorism is a psychological and anxiety-inspired method of repeated violence employed by states and individuals and groups for idiosyncratic, criminal, and political aims (Schmid 2004).
• David Rapaport, the author of The Four Waves of Terrorism, suggests that terrorism uses violence to provoke consciousness, evoke feelings of both sympathy and revulsion (Rapaport 1977).

The most common theme that cannot be argued is whether terrorism is an act of violence perpetrated to kill, maim and/or fracture a person, property, place, organisation or state. Furthermore, terrorism use is far-reaching and can be political, religious and ideological in motives, a psychological, physical and spiritual form of terrorism. This is what we are seeing unfold before our eyes in Gaza, where Israel is terrorising the Palestinian people in order to take over their land. Israel is slowly exterminating the Palestinian people, something I named the P.E.L.E (Palestinian Extinction Level Event).

Here below are some states’ definitions of terrorism and then I will put Israel’s definition which is ambiguous and targeted to a specific race, religion and often gender.

According to the US Department of Defence (DOD), terrorism is defined as

• The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies to pursue goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological (Seger & Silke 2003).

According to the Australian Parliament House (APH), terrorism is defined as an act or threat that is intended to:

• advance a political, ideological or religious cause; and
• coerce or intimidate an Australian or foreign government or the public (or section of the people), including foreign people.
• causes serious physical harm to a person or severe damage to property, causes death or endangers a person’s life;
• creates a serious risk to the health and safety of the public (APH 2021).

According to Joseph Wouk, Russia’s definition is:

• Russian law only designates organisations as terrorists when they “intentionally conduct acts of terror in Russian territory, or against Russian interests abroad (Wouk 2017).

According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), the Saudi Arabian definition is:

• Any act carried out by an offender in furtherance of an individual or collective project, directly or indirectly, intended to disturb the public order of the state, or to shake the security of society, or the stability of the state, or to expose its national unity to danger, or to suspend the basic law of governance or some of its articles, or to insult the reputation of the state or its position, or to inflict damage upon one of its public utilities or its natural resources, or to attempt to force a governmental authority to carry out or prevent it from carrying out an action, or to threaten to carry out acts that lead to the named purposes or incite [these acts]. (Falk 2019).

According to The Diplomat, China defines terrorism as:

• Any thought, speech, or activity that, by means of violence, sabotage, or threat, aims to generate social panic, influence national policy-making, create ethnic hatred, subvert state power, or split the state (Zhou 2015).

Israel Definition of terrorism:

Israeli statutes, courts, and administrative law define ‘terrorism’ according to the character of the act itself (centring on violence), in theory, at least, the legal definition of ‘terrorism’ is independent of contrextual factors such as the identity of the perpetrator(s), the consequences of the act or the situation in which it occurs.” ‘Israeli politicians in their public stances, the Israeli media, and certainly most Israelis, tend to see context as the defining aspect of an act of terrorism’ (LeVine 1995). The power of definition rests with the Knesset, and is delegated to the civilian and military courts, furthermore, the definition of terrorism in Israel is not defined by ‘THE ACT ITSELF, but WHO THE PERPETRATOR(S) IS’ (Atiya 2022).

If Israelis commit an act of terrorism, they are covered under the umbrella of ‘an act of violence’ The word terrorism is reserved only for Palestinians, Muslims or Arabs in general, regardless if the act is a common criminal act (Theft, or Abuse), a resistance (throwing stones or walking in the wrong zone) or a more serious act (murder, kidnapping or Sexual violence).

Why is the lack of a universal definition of terrorism a tool for enabling further radicalisation?

A majority of the time people become radicalised through different steps, it doesn’t just happen out of thin air. Psychology plays a significant role in terrorism as mentioned in Moghaddam’s (2005) The Staircase to Terrorism, as he discusses there are five levels of acceleration. It starts with the saying ‘One person’s freedom fighter is another person’s terrorist’, all humankind has opinions on life and how to live, when it comes to terrorism there are some that justify acts of violence as a way of fighting against a system, democracy or society and some who justify acts of violence to implement their religious, societal or political agendas on others.

The ground floor is where most of society resides being empathetic and feeling injustices and inequality.

The first floor is where individuals search for solutions to the injustices, however, that is as far as they go.

The second floor is where anger builds up and frustration of injustice influences them into seeking out others that feel the same.

The third floor is where sympathisers become members and start acting on their feelings, they see their causes as righteous and justified.

The fourth floor is where these individuals have accepted that the world is ‘Us versus Them’.

The fifth and final floor is where individuals are integrated into the terrorist environment.

When we see the injustices happening in Gaza and the West Bank, we either choose to ignore the mass slaughter of innocent Palestinians or stand up and feel empathy and compassion for the victims.

We then have a divided society, and from there, individuals seek to find solutions and find like-minded members of society and start actively rebelling against the wrongdoers, in a campaign that is an ‘us versus them’ divide. This is where we will see those who protest and hold rallies for their perceived injustices and speak their truth, for the majority of the world participants, this is where they stay in this niche.  For others that surpass this step, the inaction of the world’s leaders (US, UK, EU, UN) to come to the aid of others (Palestinians), means that they will jump to the fifth and final floor; Re-Action to a lack of inaction by societies, States and Governments.

If The United States of America (the almighty US) continues to overlook the terrorist acts and crimes against humanity that is being perpetrated by Israel on the Palestinian people, they will be responsible for the escalation of radicalisation of the next-gen. The lies and double standards we see today are being displayed openly:

Israel is the victim of an unprovoked terrorist attack (this is untrue the provocation is the 78 years of occupation and targeted killings of the Palestinian people in both Gaza and the West Bank).

Israel has the right to defend itself (Palestinians DONT have the right to defend themselves against their oppressors, and what Palestinians call Self-defence is called terrorism by the US and Israel).

Hamas is to blame (either partially or fully) for all civilian deaths on both sides since they began these hostilities and forced Israel’s hand while hiding behind civilians. (Wrong. It is Israel who use the Palestinian civilians as human shields, by calling all Palestinians ‘Hamas’ Israel is shielding itself from being held accountable for the mass slaughter of innocent civilians).

When Israel kills and maims hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, the US remains silent and shuts its mouth, yet when an Israeli is killed or maimed the US can’t shut up about how devastated they are. When Hamas or other Islamic factions fire rockets at Israeli infrastructures, they are terrorists.

When Israel fire rockets on Palestinian critical infrastructures they are justified and complemented by the US. When Israel fired Rockets at an Iranian consulate on Syrian Sovereign soil it was a justified act, when the Iranians responded, its an act of terrorism.

When Hamas allegedly committed acts of sexual violence against Israelis, they are monsters, when Israel IDF soldiers systematically perpetrate sexual violence against Palestinians, it is justified and encouraged by the Knesset and the US Gov body.

It is ok for the Israeli’s to bellow ‘from the river to the sea’ as a National statement, yet when Palestinians make the same statement it is seen as an international threat to commit genocide.

Until the world can see that the US is holding Israel to account for the terrorist acts, war crimes and crimes against humanity they have committed we will keep seeing the world rebel. like I said earlier the majority of the world audience will remain on the third or fourth floor, we will see other individuals rise and take action in the form of terrorism, simply becoming radicalised by the US inaction and double standards. Until Israel has been held accountable for its illegal acts of terror, murder and mayhem and until a statement of Condemnation has been called against Israel, we will only see more rebellion and therefore more radicalisation and we will remain in a perpetual stalemate, never a road to peace but a road to further persecution. War is a money making machine, it creates wealth for the military complex, governments and politicians. Peace doesn’t cost anything but the willingness of all parties to create a safe society where all people are treated equally, and where tolerance of religion is paramount, the only way for any nation to peacefully co-exist is when there is a separation of Church and State, no state that is ruled by religious political motivations will ever achieve full peace as society has become so multi-cultural that any state that uses religion as its backbone will always be discriminatory against at least part of its population, therefore a causation of war.