State sponsorship on a scale that involves the supply of missiles capable of bringing down an aircraft at 30,000 feet would seem to deserve a name more closely related to conventional warfare.

Richard Barrett

Said : Richard Barrett, a specialist in global counter-terrorism operations, in his analysis titled "Are the pro-Russian rebels terrorists?" published under today's CNN Opinion column.

Richard has presented a very meaningful analysis aimed at the question whether  the U.N. secretary-general can admit the demand made by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to label  the two main rebel groups in his country, the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic, as terrorist organizations, especially in the wake of the rocket attack that downed Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. Poroshenko also told the world that everyone must chose between the terrorists and the civilized world.

According to Richard : "Although any country can declare those two rebel groups terrorist in accordance with their national legislation, and so make it illegal for any of their nationals to provide them with support, the U.N. secretary-general cannot, and nor can any other part of the United Nations, except possibly the Security Council."

Richard argues that there is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism. He writes that the debate on what terrorism means has been going on at the United Nations for at least 20 years. But it gets "stuck in major disagreement over what may be considered legitimate when people are fighting for their right to self-determination."

In his analysis, Richard has tried to make the understanding of Russia's role, in the Ukrainian case, more distinct given the kind of support the rebels - terrorists or separatists - are receiving from Moscow. He has brilliantly taken up this key issue as described below :

Photo: A Buk (SA-11) missile system similar to the one
US intelligence says was used to shoot down MH17 "by mistake". (Wikimedia)

"Another issue that arises in the Ukrainian case is that if the rebels are terrorists, what does that make Russia?"

"State-sponsored terrorism has been less of an issue since the rise of al Qaeda, which seems to have done perfectly well without it. And while there are murky relationships between illegal armed groups and governments in parts of Africa and South Asia, state sponsorship on a scale that involves the supply of missiles capable of bringing down an aircraft at 30,000 feet would seem to deserve a name more closely related to conventional warfare."

Richard notes that "we now have a nasty mix in many places around the world of terrorism, armed opposition groups and proxy wars, all dressed up in ambiguity, denial and obfuscation. And while these dirty wars drag on, only one thing remains constant -- the dead bodies strewn around the fields and towns, whether fallen from the sky or just lying where they stood."

Richard Barrett has headed global counter-terrorism operations for the British intelligence service and led the U.N. monitoring team on al Qaeda and the Taliban. He is a senior vice president of the Soufan Group, a New York-based firm that provides security services to governments and the private sector.