Talks with Terrorists

What does one do with terrorists? This question is prompted by the impending enjoyment of the hospitality of Her Majesty’s Government by Joshua Nkomo and Robert Mugabe. It goes without saying that neither leader of the Zimbabwe Patriotic Front runs the slightest risk of arrest while in England (unless they so far forget themselves as to bomb whatever hotel room is occupied by Ian Smith, say). It is, incidentally, ironic that Lord Carrington, as Foreign Secretary, had to sign an Order in Council granting temporary immunity from arrest to the same Mr. Smith, as a rebel against the Crown. He might, otherwise, have found himself losing his liberty under a “citizen’s arrest” organized by one of our left-wing Members of Parliament. No such Order in Council was required by either Nkomo or Mugabe.

The question is serious. Ten years ago, in a street of São Paulo, Carlos Marighella (the original “urban guerrilla”) met his death by gunfire in a police ambush. That is one way of dealing with terrorists, and the advantages of a dead terrorist are not negligible. A dead terrorist can no longer terrorize. He does not need to be brought to trial, and the attendant publicity, so useful to terrorist groups, is avoided. Moreover, a dead terrorist cannot serve as a rallying point for his comrades, nor be sprung from jail. Then again, a terrorist killed in action does not revive the eternal debate about the death penalty, or specifically about its appropriateness for those guilty of “political” crimes. For that matter, a dead terrorist cannot commit suicide, as did Ulrike Meinhof, and the authorities are thus spared the embarrassment of a) explaining how firearms found their way into a high-security prison, and b) convincing the public that it really was a suicide.

BC

About the Author

Brian Crozier

Featured Tags

What does one do with terrorists? This question is prompted by the impending enjoyment of the hospitality of Her Majesty’s Government by Joshua Nkomo and Robert Mugabe. It goes without saying that neither leader of the Zimbabwe Patriotic Front runs the slightest risk of arrest while in England (unless they so far forget themselves as to bomb whatever hotel room is occupied by Ian Smith, say). It is, incidentally, ironic that Lord Carrington, as Foreign Secretary, had to sign an Order in Council granting temporary immunity from arrest to the same Mr. Smith, as a rebel against the Crown. He might, otherwise, have found himself losing his liberty under a “citizen’s arrest” organized by one of our left-wing Members of Parliament. No such Order in Council was required by either Nkomo or Mugabe.

The question is serious. Ten years ago, in a street of São Paulo, Carlos Marighella (the original “urban guerrilla”) met his death by gunfire in a police ambush. That is one way of dealing with terrorists, and the advantages of a dead terrorist are not negligible. A dead terrorist can no longer terrorize. He does not need to be brought to trial, and the attendant publicity, so useful to terrorist groups, is avoided. Moreover, a dead terrorist cannot serve as a rallying point for his comrades, nor be sprung from jail. Then again, a terrorist killed in action does not revive the eternal debate about the death penalty, or specifically about its appropriateness for those guilty of “political” crimes. For that matter, a dead terrorist cannot commit suicide, as did Ulrike Meinhof, and the authorities are thus spared the embarrassment of a) explaining how firearms found their way into a high-security prison, and b) convincing the public that it really was a suicide.