A Reflection on the Cost of Counterterrorism for Civilian Protection in Armed Conflict

Terrorism has wrought extraordinary harm and has rightfully earned a broad consensus on its objectionable nature. Yet terrorism lacks an agreed international definition. The insidious but effective rhetoric surrounding terrorism garners outrage that derails any questioning of whether the terrorist category itself is legitimate. This chapter examines how the umbrella of “counterterrorism” has regrettably legitimized a range of State actions to justify the exclusion of the protective norms of international humanitarian and human rights law. Terrorism-related legal frameworks and State practices have encroached upon the legal category of civilian. Masculinity tropes and validations overlay the internalized acceptance of who is (and who is not) a civilian, with distinct consequences for men as civilians in situations of armed conflict. The situation ongoing in northeast Syria highlights the extreme costs for the boy-child in situations where “terrorism” determines the legal rights of men and boys.