The term "terrorist" is used extensively by Israel to describe Palestinian armed groups, organizations, and individuals involved in attacks against Israeli targets, including civilians, soldiers, and infrastructure.
Israel uses the term to frame such acts as unjustified violence aimed at instilling fear and terror among civilians, reinforcing the perception that these individuals or groups are threats to national and civilian security. Major organizations, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, are officially designated as terrorist groups by Israel, the United States, the European Union, and several other countries.
The term "terrorist" gained prominence globally after 9/11, with the U.S.-led "War on Terror" framing violent acts against civilian targets as universally condemnable. Israel adopted this rhetoric to describe Palestinian resistance movements.
Israel claims that groups like Hamas intentionally target civilians through suicide bombings, rocket fire, and kidnappings, distinguishing their actions from those of state-led militaries. This framing underscores Israel’s broader narrative of defending its sovereignty against "terrorist threats."
International media outlets frequently echo the term "terrorist" when reporting on Palestinian violence, often reflecting Western alignment with Israeli narratives.
Palestinians and supporters of their cause argue that the term "terrorist" is weaponized to delegitimize their struggle for self-determination and suppress resistance to occupation.
Many Palestinians consider those labeled as "terrorists" to be freedom fighters resisting decades of military occupation and oppression, a stance rooted in the principles of international law that affirm the right of occupied peoples to resist occupation. Historical parallels are drawn to anti-colonial movements in Algeria, South Africa, and Vietnam, where similar resistance efforts were labeled as terrorism by colonial powers.
Critics argue that Israel's use of "terrorist" ignores state violence against Palestinians, such as airstrikes, military raids, and home demolitions, which are not subjected to equivalent scrutiny or condemnation. They highlight the asymmetry in how violence is framed, with Palestinian acts against Israel termed "terrorism," while Israeli acts against Palestinians are often justified as "self defense."
Under international law, armed resistance against occupation is recognized as legitimate in certain contexts (e.g., the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions). Palestinians argue that resistance to Israeli occupation, including acts against military targets, falls within this framework and should not be conflated with terrorism.
Some figures labeled as terrorists by Israel later transitioned to political leadership, such as Yasser Arafat (PLO) and Nelson Mandela (South Africa), underscoring how the term is often contingent on political outcomes.
The lack of a universally accepted definition of "terrorism" allows states to apply the term selectively, often to delegitimize opposition movements while absolving their own actions.
Critics argue that Israel conflates all forms of Palestinian resistance with terrorism, even when directed at military targets, blurring distinctions that international law attempts to maintain.
The widespread use of the term "terrorist" in media reporting shapes public opinion, often leading to a lack of understanding about the underlying causes of Palestinian resistance.
The label entrenches polarization, making dialogue and peace negotiations more challenging. It reduces the Palestinian struggle to acts of violence, ignoring the broader political, social, and historical context.
Palestinian leaders and activists emphasize their right to resist under international law, framing actions against Israeli occupation as part of a broader anti-colonial struggle. They point to the systemic violence of occupation—checkpoints, blockades, settlements—as forms of state terrorism.
During the British Mandate (1917–1948), Zionist groups like Irgun and Lehi carried out violent attacks, including the 1946 King David Hotel bombing. These groups were labeled as terrorist organizations by the British, yet their leaders later became prominent Israeli politicians, including Menachem Begin. Critics argue that Israel’s condemnation of Palestinian resistance as terrorism ignores its own historical use of violence for statehood.
Organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch criticize the blanket labeling of Palestinians as terrorists, urging acknowledgment of the context of occupation and systemic inequities.
)
Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co operation among States," UNGA Resolution 2625 (XXV), 1970. Recognizes the right of peoples under colonial and foreign domination to self determination.
