Palestinian resistance

When the coloniser calls resistance terrorism

Spread the love

This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Colonial power branding resistance as terrorism. [AI generated image]

by Sayid Marcos Tenorio  soupalestina

Throughout history, almost every national liberation struggle has been labelled “terrorism” by the powers exercising colonial rule or foreign occupation. This strategy is nothing new.

The British Empire branded IRA fighters in Ireland and EOKA guerrillas in Cyprus as terrorists. France portrayed Algeria’s National Liberation Front (FLN) as a criminal organisation. The same happened to the Mozambique Liberation Front (FRELIMO), the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), the South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) in Namibia, and even Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC).

History, however, vindicated these movements and condemned the colonial regimes that sought to perpetuate their domination.

This pattern reveals a constant: those who occupy a territory seek to strip the occupied people of any legitimacy to resist.

The dehumanisation of resistance is a colonial strategy. By labelling every resistance fighter a “terrorist”, attention is shifted away from illegal occupation, apartheid and the denial of self-determination, and redirected towards the reaction of the occupied people.

This narrative, however, encounters clear limits within international law itself.

From the United Nations Charter to Resolution 1514 (XV) on decolonisation and Resolution 2625 (XXV), which reaffirms the principle of peoples’ self-determination, the understanding has been consolidated that peoples subjected to colonial domination, foreign occupation or racist regimes have the right to struggle for their liberation.

Several subsequent resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly recognised the legitimacy of national liberation movements and acknowledged that such resistance may take the form of armed struggle, provided that it remains subject to the rules of international humanitarian law.

READ: Israel cancels entry permits for US activists supporting Palestinians in West Bank

This is precisely why the international community has never automatically equated national liberation movements with terrorist organisations.

International humanitarian law regulates the manner in which armed conflicts must be conducted and imposes obligations on all belligerents, including resistance movements.

However, it does not eliminate the political and legal right of a people to resist occupation. Confusing these two dimensions serves only the interests of occupying powers, because it transforms a conflict of a political and legal nature into a mere policing matter.

The history of the so-called “State of Israel” itself exposes this contradiction.

Before 1948, Irgun and Lehi were regarded as terrorist organisations by the British government because of attacks such as the bombing of the King David Hotel and the assassination of UN mediator Folke Bernadotte.

Years later, their leaders reached the highest levels of government, and Menachem Begin received the Nobel Peace Prize. This demonstrates that the label “terrorist” often reflects political circumstances more than any permanent legal definition.

In the contemporary context, this debate remains highly relevant. Palestine continues to be recognised by the United Nations as a territory under occupation, while Western Sahara remains on the UN list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, awaiting the fulfilment of its people’s right to self-determination.

In this context, the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), which emerged during the First Intifada, and the Polisario Front, recognised by the United Nations as the representative of the Sahrawi people in the Western Sahara peace process, belong to the historical tradition of national liberation movements.

As with South Africa’s ANC, Algeria’s FLN, Namibia’s SWAPO, Mozambique’s FRELIMO and many other movements, both base their struggle on their peoples’ claim to the right of self-determination in the face of occupation or foreign domination.

This does not mean that every military action carried out by resistance organisations is automatically legitimate under international law.

The rules of international humanitarian law apply to all parties to a conflict and prohibit deliberate attacks against civilians, regardless of the cause being defended.

However, possible violations of these rules do not, in themselves, invalidate the legal legitimacy of the struggle for self-determination, nor do they automatically transform a national liberation movement into a terrorist organisation under international law. These are distinct questions, frequently conflated for political convenience.

There is no colonialism without resistance. There never has been.

The French Resistance against Nazi occupation, Vietnamese guerrillas, Algerian fighters, South Africans who confronted apartheid, African liberation movements, the Polisario Front and the Palestinian resistance all demonstrate that no people will indefinitely accept the loss of their land, sovereignty and dignity.

The real question, therefore, is not why resistance exists.

The question the world should be asking is why military occupations, colonial processes and regimes that deny entire peoples the right to determine their own destiny continue to exist.

As long as there is colonisation, apartheid, illegal annexation and denial of self-determination, there will be armed resistance movements.

And international law, despite political pressure and attempts to criminalise liberation movements, continues to uphold the fundamental principle that the freedom of peoples is not an act of terrorism, but a fundamental right of humanity.

OPINION: Trump says Hamas has agreed to disarm. The negotiations tell a different story

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham admits to blatently lying and engaging in deception to become leader of the UK Labour Party and Prime Minister.
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham admits to blatently lying and engaging in deception to become leader of the UK Labour Party and Prime Minister.
Donald Trump sings and dances, says that it's fun to kill everyone ... unless he gets distracted or falls asleep.
Donald Trump sings and dances, says that it’s fun to kill everyone … unless he gets distracted or falls asleep.
Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up
Orcas discuss rotting brain, front Orca says Sundown Syndrome is a dead givaway and he wishes someone would Lock Him Up

Continue ReadingWhen the coloniser calls resistance terrorism

Labelling the Palestinian resistance: Political propaganda or legal classification?

Spread the love

This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

People, holding flags and banners, gather to demand sanctions against Israel during pro-Palestinian protest and march through the city’s streets in Melbourne, Australia on August 24, 2025. [Recep Sakar – Anadolu Agency]

The dominant narrative in the West portrays the Islamic Resistance Movement – Hamas – as a “terrorist group”, uncritically repeating the rhetoric of Israel and its allies. However, when analysing the issue from the perspective of international law and the history of national liberation movements, it is clear that the “terrorism” label is more a tool of political propaganda than a legal definition.

In light of international law and the United Nations Charter, Hamas should be understood as a Palestinian resistance movement in the face of more than seven decades of Israeli colonisation, ethnic cleansing, and military occupation. This also includes almost two years of uninterrupted confrontation with genocide in the Gaza Strip.

The United Nations (UN) has never declared Hamas a terrorist group. Only a few countries, such as the United States, the European Union, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, have unilaterally adopted this classification. International law, in turn, does not criminalise resistance against occupation.

Since 1967, Israel has maintained its occupation of the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem, in flagrant violation of the UN Charter and Security Council resolutions. According to International Humanitarian Law, peoples subjected to foreign occupation have the legitimate right to resist, including by armed means, against the occupying power.

This principle is supported by Article 51 of the UN Charter, as well as Resolutions No. 2649/1970, 2787/1971, 3070/1973, and 3103/1974, which explicitly recognise the inalienable right of peoples to fight against colonial domination, foreign occupation, and apartheid. Furthermore, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocols of 1977, along with the practice of the International Criminal Court (ICC), distinguish between armed resistance and terrorism.

Ceasefire intransigence: Palestinian prisoners and Israeli reluctance

Therefore, the existence of an armed struggle against occupation does not constitute terrorism, but rather a legitimate exercise of resistance.

Founded in 1987 during the First Intifada, Hamas is not just an armed group; it is also a political, social, and religious movement deeply rooted in Palestinian society.

Its surprising victory in the 2006 legislative elections, which were recognised as free and democratic by international observers, demonstrates its popular representation. It won 76 of the 132 seats, while its main rival, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah, won 43 seats.

Over the decades, Hamas has administered social institutions, hospitals, schools, and assistance programmes, playing a similar role to liberation movements in Algeria (FLN), Vietnam (Viet Minh), or South Africa (ANC), all of which were also labelled terrorists at some point in history. Today, many of these movements are recognised as legitimate builders of their national states.

The classification of Hamas as “terrorist” serves the clear objectives of Israeli policy: To silence the debate on occupation, apartheid, and genocide, diverting attention from the root cause of the conflict; to justify massive attacks against civilians in Gaza, presented as “the fight against terrorism”; to criminalise all forms of Palestinian resistance, whether armed or peaceful – from NGOs to journalists and students.

Judith Butler, an American philosopher from the University of Berkeley, observes that armed resistance under occupation cannot be reduced to terrorism, as this ignores the structural causes of violence: colonialism, supremacism, and military occupation.

Since 2007, Israel has imposed a land, air, and sea blockade on the Gaza Strip, which the UN classifies as collective punishment – a practice prohibited by international law. Millions of Palestinians live without freedom of movement, drinking water, electricity, and medicines. With each Israeli offensive, thousands of civilians are massacred, homes and hospitals are destroyed, and entire neighbourhoods are razed.

The current scenario of indiscriminate attacks on hospitals, schools, and refugee camps is described by international law experts and UN rapporteurs as ongoing genocide, due to the scale of the destruction and the explicit intention to expel or exterminate the original Palestinian population of Gaza.

“Greater Israel”: A huge challenge to Arab national security

In the face of this reality, Hamas’s armed resistance should be understood not as terrorism, but as the exercise of a people’s right to self-defence under occupation and ethnic cleansing. The Palestinian struggle is, in essence, a struggle for physical and cultural survival in the face of a colonial project to eliminate all forms of life in Palestine.

The framing of Hamas as a terrorist group is a political construct of Israel and its Western allies, without a basis in international law. Palestinian resistance, whether armed or not, is recognised as legitimate by the UN, the BRICS countries, and international treaties whenever it is intended to confront foreign occupation and colonial oppression.

Calling Hamas “terrorist” is an attempt to delegitimise the struggle of a people seeking freedom, justice, and self-determination. The truth is that Israel, as the occupying power, systematically violates international law, practices apartheid, and commits war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Hamas is an integral part of the Palestinian resistance and must be understood as a national liberation movement, not as terrorism. Recognising this fact is a fundamental step towards a fair and honest reading of the conflict and for seeking a solution based on historical truth, justice, and the right of peoples to self-determination.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza's hospitals and universities,mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities,mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.
UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel's Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don't do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
UK Labour Party government ministers Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves explain that they are partners complicit in Israel’s Gaza genocide. The UK has provided Israel with arms, military and air force support. They explain that they don’t do gas chambers but do do forced marches, starvation, destroy hospitals, mass-murders of journalists and healthcare workers.
Experiencing issues with this image not appearing. I suspect because it's so critical of Zionist Keir Starmer's support of and complicity in Israel's genocides.
Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpA
Continue ReadingLabelling the Palestinian resistance: Political propaganda or legal classification?