Other nations find 'terrorist' label useful

In the case of both Israel and India, governments can point to subsequent action taken by the other side and say that the new tack has produced results. Mr. Arafat's Palestinian Authority has moved more convincingly against members of Hamas and other militant Islamic groups. At the same time, Israel is attempting to hold on to the higher ground it has won in the new global anti-terrorist atmosphere: It is characterizing last week's seizure of a weapons shipment that it says was destined for the Palestinian Authority as proof that Arafat's organization remains wedded to violence.

Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf has arrested members of Islamic organizations opposed to Indian control over Kashmir - groups suspected of involvement in two recent terrorist attacks, one in India-controlled Kashmir and the other in New Delhi.

Following the Dec. 13 attack on India's Parliament, the US added the names of two Pakistani Islamic groups that India accuses of terrorism - Laskar-i-Tayyaba and Jaish-e-Mohammad - to its list of foreign terrorist organizations. That move not only helped India dovetail its tougher stance on terrorism with Washington's war, but it also placed additional pressure on Gen. Musharraf to confront elements for which he had previously expressed sympathy as "freedom fighters."

This week, Musharraf told visiting British Prime Minister Tony Blair that Pakistan opposes terrorism "in all its forms" and said he would soon address his nation on the topic. The trick for him will be condemning terrorism while not looking to Pakistanis as if he is softening on Kashmir.

Beyond these two high-profile conflicts, a broad application of the US antiterrorism doctrine could mean trouble for a list of dissident and minority groups around the world. Analysts point to the renewed fervor with which Russia refers to Chechen separatists as terrorists, while others see China adopting a similar stance towards troublesome minorities.

"Others are going to follow our lead, but we should be prepared for cases where people will seek to apply the standards of terrorism in circumstances where it doesn't really apply," says Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington.

"The Chinese have made it clear they intend to capitalize on our definition of terrorism to fortify their crackdowns on a variety of minorities including Falun Gong, Christians, and Muslims in their western provinces," he adds.

With the world undoubtedly continuing to keep a close eye on America's war on terrorism, it will become more important for countries to take up the question of what terrorism is - and is not, says Mr. Phillips of the Council on Foreign Relations.

"What's lacking is a clear definition of what constitutes terrorism," he says. While international agreement won't be easy, he says developing a "benchmark" will be important for long-term international cooperation.

And crucial in that defining process will be a US that avoids accusations of applying a double standard, says Mr. Gaffney - by acting consistently with allies, new friends, and enemies alike.

Page: 1 | 2