Who decides which faction are the Rebels?

For instance, Libyans began protesting peacefully in the streets, seeking to end 40 years of brutal repression and corruption. They were met with a hail of bullets, and when they returned fire, they became “The Rebels.” Why not “Freedom Fighters”? What legitimacy does the Qaddafi regeime have under any rational rule of law?

Likewise, there is a civil war going on now in the Ivory Coast. In that one, they held a presidential election, and the incumbent President Gbagbo lost. But he refused to follow the rule of law, and cede power to the winner, Alassane Ouattara. When the majority of the Côte d’Ivoire’s people rose up to say no fair, they became “The Rebels.” But Mr. Gbagbo’s claim to leadership being illegitimate, why aren’t his supporters the Rebels?

Of course, in war, the winner writes the history and it looks as if the legitimately elected President is about to win. As soon as he does, I can guess the history will change, and the Gbagbo forces will be “The rebels we defeated in 2011.”

But the whole thing begs the question, when is someone a rebel, when are they a freedom fighter, and when are they fighting for the legitimate interest of the rule of law. What do you think?