The Morality of Terrorism

At Sinn Féin's 1983 Ard Fheis, Gerry Adams boldly declared that ‘armed struggle is a morally correct form of resistance in the six counties’ (An Phoblacht/Republican News, 17 November 1983). Despite the confident tone of this declaration, its truth is hardly self-evident. I have been concerned to critically evaluate this and related republican claims about the Provisional IRA's armed struggle. But doing so raises broader questions about the use of force to achieve political ends. When is a resort to violence in the pursuit of political goals morally justified?

Two clear and consistent answers are ‘never’ and ‘always’. The ‘total pacifist’ asserts the former, claiming that violence is nevermorally justified, even in the pursuit of worthy political goals. The proponent of ‘total realpolitik’ asserts the latter, maintaining that violence is morally justified whenever it will be or has been effective in achieving the desired political goal (Govier 2002, pp. 84–5). Such positions can be clear and consistent because they lie on the endpoints of a continuumof views about themorality of political violence. Those who crave clarity and simplicity will be attracted by such positions.

Most people, quite reasonably, will find both answers too extreme to be acceptable, and will instead find themselves drawn to an intermediate position according to which a resort to political violence is ‘sometimes’ morally justified.