Discover

'Freedom fighter' is a relativistic term for those engaged in rebellion against an established government or regime that they consider to be oppressive. The terms ''"freedom"'' and "rebellion" are often confusing, as often both sides in armed conflict claim to represent the popular cause of ''"freedom"''. While external intervening parties, even oppressors, almost always claim to be "liberators", ''freedom fighters'' can become ''oppressors'' in the eyes of civilians.
Though the literal meaning of the words could include ''anyone who fights for the cause of freedom,'' common use is restricted to those who are actively involved in an armed rebellion, rather than those who campaign for freedom by peaceful non-disruptive means (though they may use the title in its literal sense).
Usage of the terms "terrorists" and "freedom fighters" is almost always controversial and reflective of opposing points of view. There is no universally agreed-upon definition for either term and many organizations that have been accused of committing acts of terrorism lay claim to being freedom fighters. Others maintain that "freedom fighter" is a whitewashed term for "terrorist" or (conversely) that "terrorist" is simply a negative propagandistic term that is applied to freedom fighters.

Contents

Terminology

Media reporting

See also

External links

Terminology

Just like its counterpart "terrorist", "freedom fighter" is a loaded term. People who describe themselves (or are described by their sponsors) as "freedom fighters" tend to be called assassins, rebels, or terrorists by their foes. This leads to the aphorism "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". During the Cold War, the term ''freedom fighter'' was widely used by the United States and other Western Bloc countries to describe rebels in countries controlled by communist states or otherwise under the influence of the Soviet Union, including rebels in Hungary, the anti-communist Contras in Nicaragua, UNITA in Angola and the multi-factional mujahideen in Afghanistan.
The term ''freedom fighter'', while indicating favor of some political group, often does not reflect any actual political position of those fighting — central to this is a dispute over the meaning of ''freedom'' itself and whether a group in question can be said to actually fight for the purpose of establishing ''freedom''. Of all political labels apart from the term "terrorist" (applied to an enemy), ''freedom fighter'' is perhaps the most blunt term for "friend" — some think that it signals an unwillingness to abandon moral support regardless of methods, an unbreakable alliance between players, perhaps even proxies in an unconventional war.

Media reporting

Certain media agencies, notably the BBC and Reuters, except in attributed quotes, avoid the phrase "terrorist" or "freedom fighter", in favour of neutral terms such as "militant", "guerrilla", "assassin", paramilitary or militia to avoid the editorialising implicit in the use of such words.
^[1]
An exception to the rule can be found in the actions of BBC in the 1970s and 1980s. When BBC was reporting on the Troubles in Northern Ireland, it referred to the Provisional Irish Republican Army as terrorists, while referred to members of loyalist armed groups such as the Ulster Defence Association and Ulster Volunteer Force, as "paramilitaries." They continued to use neutral terminology of other "insurgent" conflicts around the world.

See also

★ Assassin

★ Doublespeak

★ Irregular military

★ Terrorism

External links

★ News Coverage of Freedom Fighters and Rebels

★ Freedom Fighters of India