Haig Khatchadourian, "Terrorism and Morality," in May, Applied Ethics, pp.
285-294.

    Khatchadourian contends that all forms of terrorism are morally wrong.
He detects a consequentialist (utilitarian, for example) line of reasoning
in terrorist activities, and he rejects consequentialism in favor of a
rights-based model for justice. Human rights, Khatchadourian maintains, are
violated when terrorist acts take place. Even persons who, like the German
leadership in World War II, may be proven guilty when tried with due
process in the courts have their human rights violated when assassins or
terrorists take justice into their own hands.
    Khatchadourian also turns to traditional just war theory to defend his
claim that terrorism is always wrong. Two principles of just war
theory-discrimination and proportionality-are violated by all forms of
terrorism. The principle of discrimination holds that only non-innocents
(combatants, for example) may be targeted during war. Terrorism is
typically directed at innocents as well as non-innocents and, for this
reason, is wrong. The principle of proportionality holds that the evil
(harm) done by an action during war must be outweighed by the good.
Khatchadourian finds that the weighing of the actual evil and actual harm
is a retrospective activity. This approach, which he regards as
consequentialist, leaves out the violation of the human rights of those
killed. Since the human rights of the victims are omitted, the act is
morally wrong.