G w bush preferential treatment military9/20/2023 ![]() the constant risk of Western military interdiction (2010, p. suspicion from the indigenous population. Failed states like Somalia present “incomprehensible clan conflicts. The Combating Terrorism Center at West Point negates the often-held view that failed states are the best environments for terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda. Although realists consider the threat from terrorism to be worldwide and existential, many-even allies-require a more liberal approach as they consider terrorism to be regional and manageable, calling for individual responses to causes of radicalism in each state (Meyer, 2009, 648).īut hidden within the liberal side of the debate is the further complication of prioritizing which states within particular regions provide the best return per unit of counterterrorism effort. The threat posed by contemporary terrorism is complicated first by the fact that it is conducted by a subnational organization, and second by its international characteristics. Disagreements beyond this functional definition tend to concern themselves simply with whether or not one identifies with the perpetrators or the victims of the act. Describing terrorism by its functions enables him to prevent the appearance of taking sides in what is often a heated debate. By its intrinsic nature terrorism is violent, psychological, conducted by a subnational organization, and political (p. At one instance, it is a tool of state oppression, at another it is a tool of liberation.īruce Hoffman, in Inside Terrorism (2005), explains terrorism in terms of its goals. ![]() Throughout history, terrorism has been used to silence collaborators or compel obedience, all in the name of facilitating nationalist aspirations. The single greatest problem with defining terrorism, however, is its ability to evolve. The paper will end, however, by discussing how the use of raw power by the Bush administration may have in fact set up the Obama administration’s strategy for success.ĭefining Terrorism and the Threat it PosesĪcademics describe the reasons for the lack of a universal definition of terrorism, while policy elites attempt to work out a coherent response to acts that cause fear and revulsion. The argument will proceed by 1) discussing the problems of defining terrorism and the threat it poses, 2) discussing the major elements of a counterterrorism strategy, and 3) discussing the costs and benefits of building an international coalition. ![]() This paper will argue that due to the pervasiveness and strengths of globalization (read interdependencies) and the rise of nonstate actors as both threat and tool of foreign policy, contemporary counterterrorism strategies are most effective when they subscribe to the liberal principles of collective self-defense. 2)-a predominantly multilateral combination of hard and soft power. with the concerted efforts of allies, partners, and multilateral institutions” (Obama, 2011, p. It resolved to stop our dependence on alliances and international institutions and utilize American power to shape the international system by promoting democracy even if by force via a predominantly unilateral military approach.Īlternately, the Obama administration opted for a more liberal approach by “harness every tool of American power. efforts at combating a sophisticated actor from outside the state system than it did to prevent the attacks of multiple U.S. Bush administration saw terrorism as an existential threat and opted for the realist approach because the international system did more to hamper U.S. In other words, a state must make a decision to balance the hard facts of realism with the potential of a more liberal foreign policy. How a state manages those opportunities and obligations depends on its definition of the threat, its understanding of the players involved, and its assumptions about capabilities and responses both at home and abroad. In a world of economic and security interdependencies it was the better choice.Ĭreating a counterterrorism strategy for any state is a complex undertaking, filled with hidden opportunities and perilous obligations alike. The Obama administration reversed the policies of its predecessor, and established a counterterrorism strategy that appears to exactly mirror the European model. How a state responds to that threat relies on basic assumptions made regarding the threat, capabilities of themselves and their allies, and the willingness of the international community to acquiesce to perceived aggression. ![]() Definitions of terrorism, despite a lack of universality, center on the political theater meant to coerce or intimidate civilians or noncombatants. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |