Former right-wing Israel prime minister Menachem Begin was once a leader in a "terrorist" group (the Irgun) that fought against the British in Palestine to create the Jewish state of Israel. Below he explains why -- to his dual ethical standard -- murders by Jewish groups cannot be termed "terrorism," but only the necessary acts of Jewish "freedom" fighters. His observations of course have profoundly ironic poignancy when applied to the current Israeli/Palestinian conflict -- especially the brutal suicide bombings by militant groups like Hamas. Begin's one-sided blindness goes far in explaining the vicious loop of the current Israeli-Palestinian violence:

"Our enemies called us terrorists. People who were neither friends nor enemies, like the correspondents of the New York Herald-Tribune, also used this Latin name, either under the influence of British propaganda or out of habit ...

The British Press and the British troops continued to call us by the name ["terrorist"] which, in their Generals' opinion, suggested bravery on our part and fear on theirs. They called us 'terrorists' to the end. No doubt there was a psychological explanation for this. And yet, we were not terrorists ... It all depends on who uses the term ...

The historical and linguistic origins of the political term 'terror' prove that it cannot be applied to a revolutionary war of liberation ... A revolution, or a revolutionary war, does not aim at instilling fear. Its object is to overthrow a regime and to set up a new regime in its place. In a revolutionary war both sides use force. Tyranny is armed. Otherwise it would be liquidated overnight. Fighters for freedom must arm; otherwise they would be crushed overnight. Certainly the use of force also wakens fear. Tyrannous rulers begin to fear for their positions, or their lives, or both. And consequently they try to sow fear among those they rule. But the instilling of fear is not the aim in itself. The sole aim on the one side is the overthrow of armed tyranny; on the other side it is the perpetuation of that tyranny.

The underground fighters of the Irgun arose to overthrow and replace a regime. We used physical force because we were faced by physical force. But physical force was neither our aim nor our creed. We believed in the supremacy of moral forces. It was our enemy who mocked at them. That is why, notwithstanding the enemy's tremendous preponderance in physical strength, he it was who was defeated, not we. That is the law of history ... What has a struggle for the dignity of man, against oppression and subjegation, to do with 'terrorism?' Our purpose, in fact, was precisely the reverse of 'terrorism.' The whole essence of our struggle was the determination to free our people of its chief affliction -- fear." [BEGIN, M., 1977, p. 59-61

***********************

"We had to hate -- as any nation worthy of the name must and always will hate -- the foreigner rule, unjust and unjustifiable per se, foreign rule in the land of our ancestors, in our own country . We had to hate the barring of the gates of our own country to our own brethren, trampled and bleeding and crying out for help in a world morally deaf.

And, naturally, we had to hate all those who, equipped with modern arms and with the ancient machinery of the gallows, barred the way of our people to physical salvation, denied them the means of individual defence, frustrated their efforts for national independence, and ruthlessly withstood their attempts to regain their national honour and restore their self-respect.

Who will condemn the hatred of evil that springs from the love of what is good and just? Such hatred has been the driving force of progress in the world's history -- 'not peace but a sword' in the cause of mankind's advancement. And in our case, such hate has been nothing more and nothing less than a manifestation of that highest human feeling: love. For if you Love freedom, you must hate Slavery; if you love your people, you cannot but hate the enemies that compass their destruction: if you love your country, you cannot but hate those who seek to annex it. Simply put: if you love your mother, would you not hate the man who sought to kill her: would you not hate him and fight him at the cost, if needs be, of your own life?

This is a fundamental human question in the violent and stormy world to today. Let every decent man search his soul and decently answer ...

Truth compels [the author] to ask himself in the presence of his readers, Gentile readers and hostile readers, this testing question: If ever again your people should find themselves in a position like that in which they were when you had to 'go underground,' to fight, to become a hunted 'rebel' -- in such circumstances would you again do what you did then?

The answer is definitely: 'Yes.'"

[BEGIN, MENACHEM, 1977, p. xxvi-xxvii]

From:
-- The Revolt, by Menachem Begin. Revised Edition. Nash Publishing, New York, 1977
.