olitical fence, radical linguist Noam Chomsky cites an ancient remark that the only difference between a pirate and an emperor was the number of ships under command, and thus argues that "terrorism" is simply a propaganda term applied to leftist guerillas.3
Other writers have pointed out that terrorism is not limited to leftists, or to movements opposed to governments in power. Besides neofascist terrorism in countries such as Italy, there is also "state terror," such as death squad activity, notably in rightist Latin countries such as El Salvador.4
Let us suggest that we can, indeed, define terrorism as something more specific than simply a violent movement whose politics we disapprove of. A starting point for a politically unbiased definition is an ancient Chinese saying: "Kill one, frighten ten thousand."5 The purpose of political terror is not to remove the actual victim as a threat, as in a targeted assassination, or to reduce the "other side's" military capacity, as in normal military action, but simply to terrorize large numbers of people. By this definition, "political terror" would include strategic bombing of cities, which might indeed justly be regarded as a sort of terrorism (even its military utility is in doubt). For our purpose, however, we can define terrorism as irregular violent action intended to terrorize in pursuit of a political motive.
By this definition, we can make some subtle but important distinctions. Murder by a Salvadoran death squad is "state sponsored" terrorism. Murder by Salvadoran army troops in uniform is not terrorism in our definition, but straightforward official oppression. A bombing by the IRA Provos of a tavern or civilian bus, typical Provo targets, is unquestionably an act of terrorism.6 A Provo attack on a British army patrol is not in and of itself a terrorist act, but a guerilla military action even though the Provos, whose victims are largely civilian...