Posted by
mgraves on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 10:55:19 PM
There is a discussion, on The Corner (at NRO) as to whether or not Nidal Hasan committed an act of terrorism.
The relevant jurisdiction is the United States Code (USC) and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The UCMJ does not have a statute related to terrorism. The USC has three potentially relevant Titles (excluding Titles related to specific types of terrorism, i.e. Agro-terrorism): Title 6 (Domestic Security), Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedure), and Title 22 (Foreign Relations and Intercourse).
Title 6
describes terrorism as:
(A)
The term “act of terrorism”
means any act that the Secretary determines meets the requirements
under subparagraph (B), as such requirements are further defined and
specified by the Secretary.
(B)
Requirements.— An act meets the requirements of this subparagraph if the act—
(i)
is unlawful;
(ii)
causes harm to a person, property, or entity, in
the United States, or in the case of a domestic United States air
carrier or a United States-flag vessel (or a vessel based principally
in the United States on which United States income tax is paid and
whose insurance coverage is subject to regulation in the United
States), in or outside the United States; and
(iii)
uses or attempts to use instrumentalities,
weapons or other methods designed or intended to cause mass
destruction, injury or other loss to citizens or institutions of the
United States.
Title 18 describes domestic terrorism as:
the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A)
involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B)
appear to be intended—
(i)
to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii)
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii)
to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C)
occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
Title 22 discusses the State Department's reporting requirements concerning terrorism, and according to the State Department web site defines terrorism as:
Title 22 of the United States Code, Section 2656f(d). That statute contains the following definitions:
- The term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
- The term "international terrorism" means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country.
- The term "terrorist group" means any group practicing,
or that has significant subgroups that practice, international
terrorism.
The US Government has employed this definition of terrorism for statistical and analytical purposes since 1983.
Domestic terrorism is probably a more widespread phenomenon
than international terrorism. Because international terrorism has a
direct impact on US interests, it is the primary focus of this report.
However, the report also describes, but does not provide statistics on,
significant developments in domestic terrorism.
/*/ For purposes of this definition, the
term "noncombatant" is interpreted to include, in addition to
civilians, military personnel who at the time of the incident are
unarmed or not on duty. For example, in past reports we have listed as
terrorist incidents the murders of the following US military personnel:
Col. James Rowe, killed in Manila in April 1989; Capt. William Nordeen,
US defense attache killed in Athens in June 1988; the two servicemen
killed in the Labelle discotheque bombing in West Berlin in April 1986;
and the four off-duty US Embassy Marine guards killed in a cafe in El
Salvador in June 1985. We also consider as acts of terrorism attacks on
military installations or on armed military personnel when a state of
military hostilities does not exist at the site, such as bombings
against US bases in Europe, the Philippines, or elsewhere.
Legally speaking, non-combatant targets are not necessary for an act of murder to be an act of terrorism. It is the motive which sets apart terrorism from other crimes, under the law. A previous essay
What is terrorism? discusses terrorism in terms of what it is not, especially guerrilla warfare. Guerrilla warfare my be distinguished from terrorism by three methods, according to terrorism expert Martha Crenshaw:
1) Guerrilla warfare uses legitimate military tactics;
2) Guerrilla warfare strikes legitimate military targets; and
3) Guerrilla warfare has a chance of success.
Even if the military personnel at Ft Hood were legitimate targets, gunning them down while they stand in line is not a legitimate military target. I prefer not to re-hash my discussion of terrorism, so I will be lazy and direct anyone with additional questions to the linked post.
In conclusion, Nidal Hasan committed an act of terrorism. If the United States were fighting a country, then Hasan would have committed an act of sabotage/espionage/treason/act of war, but because the U.S. is engaged against a non-symmetrical enemy, Hasan could not, legally speaking, renounce his citizenship and declare his allegiance to a foreign enemy.