One Man's Terrorist...
In this case British Home Secretary Dr John Reid's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter.
The problem is: how does one differentiate between a true terrorist group and an armed resistance movement attempting to secure self determination under the provisions of the UN Charter? It's a delicate balance indeed. Perhaps it would be more useful to examine the objectives of the groups in question as well as their actions and doctrine.
It's also interesting to note the underlying political motivations of Dr Reid's naming of the Baluchistan Liberation Army and Teyrebaz Azadiye Kurdistan as organisations to be banned. Good relations with Pakistan and Turkey are no doubt also on the British government's mind.
In 1999, Blair and Clinton effectively supported the Kosovo Liberation Army, which could be seen by some as a terrorist group: same goes for the EU's continued relations with Fatah. So there's an element of hypocrisy too.
It's interesting to see the Government of Balochistan website's response. After swiftly condemning terrorism - fascinatingly, the organisation is based in Jerusalem and purports to have friendly relations with Israel - the author goes on to draw some comparisons and make some suggestions:
BLA are freedom fighters who are involved in a "Guerilla Military Action" against the Iranian and Pakistani forces. They are fighting the "Baloch War of Independence" by attacking military forces, blowing up supply lines, destroying infrastructure, and damaging anything and everything that will incapacitate the Iranian and Pakistani government and its armed forces, and taking every measure to avoid civilian casualties. BLA is a resistance force, just like the Forces Fran�aises de l'Int�rieur (French Resistance Army) during World War II.
BLA is taking every measure to avoid any collateral damage. If your government may send a fact-finding mission to Iran and Pakistan to find out the activities of BLA, we are sure that they will declare them a non-terrorist organization. But, by banning BLA without investigating the ground realities is a decision made in haste.
Like the KLA, the BLA and its supporters seek to harness the power of the Internet in promoting their cause. Even the names are similar. It's a fine line.
Original Guardian report below.
Reid uses new laws to ban two Islamist groups for 'glorifying terrorism'
Alan Travis, home affairs editor
Two UK-based Islamist militant groups, al-Ghurabaa and the Saved Sect, were yesterday named as the first extremist groups to be banned in Britain under new anti-terror laws.
The two groups are believed to be splinter organisations of al-Muhajiroun, which was dissolved in 2004 by its founder, the radical Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed, who later fled to Lebanon and is now banned from returning to Britain.
The groups are the first to be targeted by the home secretary, John Reid, under anti-terror legislation outlawing extremist organisations who "glorify terrorism". Until now the home secretary's powers of proscription have been used only against organisations directly involved in terrorism.
Al-Ghurabaa and the Saved Sect first came to public attention when they were named as organisers of the protest marches outside the Danish embassy in February over publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad.
Al-Muhajiroun was named by Tony Blair alongside Hizb ut-Tahrir last August as the two most prominent Islamist organisations in Britain likely to be covered by a ban on extremist groups.
A Home Office spokeswoman said that although Hizb ut-Tahrir was not named on the order published yesterday, it "remained a group of real concern" and its activities were being kept under close review: "Not all final proscription decisions have been taken," she said.
The home secretary also named two further foreign terrorist organisations to be banned - the Baluchistan Liberation Army and Teyrebaz Azadiye Kurdistan. He also laid a formal order proscribing two alternative named groups for the already banned Kurdish terrorist group the PKK.
"Proscribing these groups - which are either engaged in terrorism or which glorify terrorist acts - sends a strong signal that the UK is not prepared to tolerate those who support terrorism here or anywhere," Mr Reid said. "I am determined to act against those who, while not directly involved in committing acts of terrorism, provide support for and make statements that glorify, celebrate and exalt the atrocities of terrorist groups."
Mr Reid said the wider criteria in the Terrorism Act 2006 would create a more hostile environment in which terrorists would find it more difficult to operate.
The Home Office said yesterday that al-Ghurabaa's website was registered at the same address and shared the same contact number as al-Muhajiroun. Both organisations were formed with the aim of "creating a worldwide Islamic state and encouraging Muslims to support the mujahideen who undertake violent jihad".
The security services believe the Saved Sect's website operates in tandem with al-Ghurabaa's website to disseminate an Islamist message under the umbrella of the sect Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jammaa'ah.
Anjem Choudray, who has described himself as al-Ghurabaa's spokesman, suggested the ban would not stop its supporters organising: "I think the Muslim community here are willing to sacrifice everything they have to please Allah. They will do it differently, they may not do it under any organisation."
He claimed that al-Ghurabaa, or the Strangers, was a purely political group: "We have been functioning here for the last 10 or 15 years and nobody has ever been arrested for any terrorism-related offences. What this will do is it will militarise many people, because if you stop people propagating their thoughts and ideas, then you will push them underground and after that you have no control over them."
