The Terrible Terror List

DISCLAIMER: This article is not an endorsement of any group or individual on the UK terror list. Nor am I calling for any of these to be removed from the list, and nor am I encouraging my readers to support such groups. This is simply a commentary on the hypocrisies and inconsistencies behind the making of the list.

Now that MI5 are off my back, let’s get started.

For me to assess how much of a failure the UK’s (along with other Western countries’) terror list is, we need a starting point – their own definition of terrorism. According to the Terrorism Act 2000, terrorism is the use of violence as a means of influencing the government or intimidating the public; in other words, using violence and intimidation for political goals.

Firstly, let’s get the most controversial part out of the way. With the above definition in mind, a question arises: how on earth is the IDF not on the terror list? Some may say that it would be wrong to include the army of a sovereign state (even if that state is illegal), but this would be a hypocritical argument. While I am no supporter of the Iranian regime, which assisted the slaughter of our Muslim brothers in Syria, it must be stated that their Revolutionary Guard Corps has been designated as a terror group by the Canadian government. Is it one rule for Israel and another for Iran? Do the allies of the West enjoy the right to kill whoever they please? And if this is the case, which it does seem to be, can we not consider the entire West to be a safe haven for terrorists? Indeed, this was how Afghanistan was described just because some Khariji groups were hiding in their caves. If the West has any moral consistency in their “War on Terror”, they will find a way to invade their own countries and devastate their own populations, as there is no bigger supporter of terrorism.

The majority of you, being Muslims, will be fully aware of why the IDF belongs on the terror list. But for those of you who are still somehow unsure or ignorant, here is some help for you. A week after the start of the Gaza genocide in 2023, Israel ordered the evacuation of 1.1 million people from the north to the south of the open-air concentration camp. This was no evacuation – it was an exile, the very same type that they complain of in their own history. It was not just an exile, it was a massacre, with planes dropping bombs on innocent people as they tried to escape. Bombing innocent people in order to move them from a place they wished to take over. Is this not satisfactory in matching the earlier definition? I can list so many more examples of the IDF using violence against innocents for political goals, but this is a blog, not a dissertation. The IDF consistently commits acts which come under the official definition of terrorism, so they should be on the terror list. It’s as simple as that for anyone with moral consistency.

Moving onto another group which belongs on the list: the Rapid Support Forces of Sudan. Alhamdulillah, I am writing this article at a time of victory – in the last 10 days of Ramadan, Allah gave victory to the Sudanese army with the liberation of Khartoum. Our happiness over this can’t allow us to forget the atrocities of the RSF, especially with the war still raging. Before even mentioning their crimes, it is clear that they fight for an ideology completely incompatible with Islam. They fight for the cause of Arab supremacy in Sudan, and a Sudan ruled by them would be one of secularism – no Muslim should be on their side. The crimes committed by this group are nothing short of filth, arguably more disgusting than those of the IDF – take into account that the crimes in Sudan are being committed by Muslims against other Muslims. The RSF are known to turn up to villages and unleash their brutality with full force – killing as many of our brothers as they can, raping as many of our sisters as they can. This rape is not just a result of RSF members being comparable to rabid dogs; rather, according to UN experts, they use it intentionally as a “tool to punish and terrorise communities”. So what’s going on in Westminster? Either they are not seeing what’s happening in Sudan, or they are simply happy to ignore it. Normally, I like to assume the best in people, but the British government does not deserve such treatment, so I will take the latter possibility as the more likely one. If groups like the RSF are not on the terror list, then the list has no credibility whatsoever.

A question we need to ask is this: why did the government create a terror list? The optimistic ones among us may reach good conclusions about them. Perhaps they actually care about who’s wrong and who’s right. Maybe they actually are interested in justice for people harmed by such groups. I hate to burst anyone’s bubble, but none of that is true.

The truth is that Western governments – yes, the ones who portray themselves as anti-terrorism crusaders – will only designate groups as terrorists when it suits them to do so. And when the opposite is true, they’ll happily remove groups from the list, even if their inclusion was an accurate one. Let’s look at Syria as an example, specifically their new leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa. First of all, do not misinterpret this as an attack on the Syrians who liberated their country from the tyrant Assad – this was a great victory for the ummah. However, it did show the sheer hypocrisy of the West in their terrorist designations. Whether or not al-Sharaa has changed is something that needs time for us to see, but his past is undoubtedly a troubled one, with links to al-Qaeda and ISIS. So, despite our happiness with Assad’s demise, we would have understood if the West chose to still portray al-Sharaa as a terrorist. This would have at least demonstrated some level of consistency in their decisions. But this was not the case. When a terrorist does something that the West approves of, they are no longer a terrorist. So when al-Sharaa got rid of Assad, the US dropped the $10 million bounty which they had on the former’s head. This is not about whether al-Sharaa is a terrorist, it is about the hypocrisy. Did al-Sharaa suddenly stop being a terrorist when he defeated the West’s other enemy? If so, why was he ever considered a terrorist in the first place? This is proof that the terror list of each Western country is based on nothing but interests. Osama bin Laden himself was considered an anti-communist hero in the West, until he turned out to be an adversary of the West himself later on. Whoever is reading this article, whether you’re Muslim or not, do not be surprised if ISIS – the filthiest of all terror groups – is one day taken off the list, if this is what suits British interests.

In summary, it’s clear that the British government, as well as their allies in the West, have no actual moral consistency in their terror lists and designations. If you do not work for Western interests, you are a terrorist. If you do work for Western interests, you are not a terrorist.

The message here is not for us to rebel. The terror list is indeed full of injustice, but a Muslim needs to respond to injustice with wisdom rather than raw emotion and stupidity. Getting yourself arrested will serve no purpose. The only action we can take here, for now, is to simply keep ourselves educated. When there is conflict in the Muslim world, know who is truly fighting for Islam. And know who is engaging in corruption and oppression. We do not need a list put together by clueless, spineless politicians to help us with this. Furthermore, when these politicians try to educate you on a conflict, or a group taking part in said conflict, take it with a pinch of salt and do your own research. Allah says in the Quran “O believers, if an evildoer brings you any news, verify it so you do not harm people unknowingly, becoming regretful for what you have done” (49:6). Sometimes, for your own safety, you will have to keep your conclusions secret, but even then, you have done something good – those who are aware of the truth are better than those who remain ignorant.