A terrorist and a freedom fighter are two different things.  Their missions differ in scope and goals.  For example, the former uses violence and fear against civilians; the latter is a person who battles against tyranny.  But based on their political partisanship, politicians unfairly label selected terrorist groups as freedom fighters and authentic freedom fighters as terrorists.

Terrorism is international.  Infamous terrorist groups like ISIS, Al Qaeda and Boko-Haram carry out their violent operations on a global scale. The Taliban, Al-Nusra Front, and al-Shabaab operate in local or regional geographic areas.  But big or small, terrorists are terrorists; it makes no difference.  Their common objective is to wreak havoc, in that sense the higher the impact of an attack the greater the result. 

In the last few decades, terror attacks around the world have been exponentially on the rise.  Some of them include September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States by Al-Qaeda that resulted in  nearly 3000 deaths and enormous material losses.  Subsequently, a series of terrorist attacks killed 137 people in France.  The list goes on and on.

The impact of terror attacks is also catastrophic in many ways.  The most affected areas are tourism and the economy plus the destruction of lives and properties, leading to xenophobia and market uncertainty. 

On the other hand, Freedom Fighters are the good guys.  They take up arms to fight against oppressive regimes.  Most of the time, their cause is just and they enjoy the support of the population.  Historically, some freedom fighters who were martyred include Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso, Charlemagne of Haiti and the great Patrice Lumumba of Congo.

But the reward is sometimes great for those who were successful in their quest for freedom.  They became leaders of their respective countries or they were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.  Some of those well-known Nobel laureates include Mahatma Gandhi of India, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela of South Africa and Dalai Lama of Tibet who until today holds a symbolic leadership role of his country in exile.  Those men used passive means in their pursuit of freedom. 

Yet it is conflicting when western leaders collude with terrorists as their proxies against a common enemy.  Those guys were given a blank check to commit terror on the enemy of the West.  For example, in the Syrian war, ISIS that was allegedly created by the United States was along with Al-Nusra under the protective umbrella of the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia, etc.  It was simply an alliance of convenience to reach a political goal.  By the way, it’s worth mentioning that Russia and Iran are the only countries truly fighting terrorism in Syria.  . 

For instance, Trump administration called Al-Nusra moderate when it is, in fact, a terrorist group hidden under the wings of Al-Qaeda.  One can easily understand that a lot is at stake in Syria. America and Al-Nusra have a similar objective in Syria. 

Like most western powers, the goal of ISIS and others was to topple the government of Bashar Al-Assad and to balkanize Syria altogether.  If it was the case, the American gas pipeline would finally reach Europe through Syria or through ISIS Syrian-controlled territory. 

In other words, groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis are not terrorists; they are true freedom fighters who are fighting to free their people from oppression and their lands from brutal occupation.  Their armed revolution is no different from the 1791 Haitian revolution that later proclaimed Haiti independent. Unlike terrorists, the goal of freedom fighters is freedom and justice.

Let’s call it as it is: a terrorist is not a freedom fighter; a freedom fighter is not a terrorist.  They are very dissimilar.  As terrorists destroy and kill, freedom fighters battle tyrants for political and social changes.  It’s time for biased politicians and the media to label terrorists as such and freedom fighters for what they really are, and not for what fits some neoconservatives’ political interests.