Phoney war

Max Hastings says it’s about time our leaders stopped playing political games and accepted that ‘international terror’ cannot be defeated by conventional military means

If the leaders of the Western world want to do our security a favour, they could adopt a New Year resolution to economise on the use of the word ‘terrorist’ in their rhetoric. This proposal is based not upon indulgence towards al-Qa’eda or the IRA, but upon the need to think clear-headedly about how best to protect our societies.

Through the ages, Britain has faced enemies of many creeds and nationalities. Today, a mind-boggling weight of verbiage is addressed to the perils posed not by Spaniards or Frenchmen, Germans or Russians, but instead by ‘terrorism’. The danger is real enough, but the definition encourages lazy thinking. ‘Terrorist’ is a woefully inadequate identification. Like ‘infantryman’ or ‘cavalryman’, it merely describes a method of engaging in combat.

‘Terrorist’ is a seductively pejorative label, because it reflects abhorrence.