Terrorism in Global World - Essay Example

Terrorism in Global World #2What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of using coercion and force as an instrument of counterterrorism policy? Explain giving suitable examples. Introduction As a result of the high cases of terrorism witnessed in the world, nations have resulted to the use of coercion as a counterterrorism strategy. Today, security officials in the US tend to engage in coercive interrogation of terrorism suspects. Coercion entails the use of mental or physical force with the 1ultimate aim of extracting information from the suspects. In some instances, the use of coercion has been justified on grounds that people’s lives have to be saved. Coercion can involve some severe cases of torture, which may infringe the rights of the suspects. This paper seeks to examine some of the advantages of coercion as an instrument of counterterrorism policy. The paper will draw from examples where coercion has been applied to extract information regarding terrorism. Advantages and Disadvantages of Torture as an instrument of Counterterrorism policy As a counterterrorism policy instrument, coercion has some significant advantages that accompany it. Coercion plays the role of deterrence and preventing any likelihood of terrorists to engage in criminal activities. For example, the United States counterterrorism strategy and policy advocates for the intimidation of suspects through the use of coercion and force. In its counterterrorism policy, the United States advocates for the capturing of suspects and holding them prisoners (Bolz et al., 2005). Besides, the US advocates for the application of forceful means to get information from terrorists. Such coercion works since no terrorist dares engage in terrorist activities due to the harsh conditions attributed with coercion. Most governments perceive the use of coercion as an effective way of fighting terrorism. There may be a tendency to rely on threats of punishment as a way of countering the likelihood of terrorist attacks. For example, such acts as kidnapping terrorists with a view to extract information play an essential role of punishment. Through such strategies, the terrorist will provide information, which can help in the prevention of a terrorist attack. Strategies such as cover and overt paramilitary and military action play an essential role in pre-empting and preventing terrorist groups (Crank & Patricia 2005, p. 26). Coercion can also be effective when gathering information from countries and people believed to be harboring terrorists. Through coercion, people who harbor terrorists fear the consequences of being caught. As a result, they tend to refrain from harboring dangerous terrorist groups that may pose a danger to the world. For example, the United States applies trade sanctions on countries believed to host terrorists. As a result, it has become efficient to control the spread of terrorist. This stems from the fact that such countries may fear the military attacks from the United States. Thus, coercion can be regarded as an effective way of intimidating acquaintances and people who may think of hosting terrorist groups. In most instances, people who host the terrorists tend to produce them as a result of coercion (Crank & Patricia 2005, p. 29). The use of coercion in combating2 terrorism also plays the role of ensuring internal cohesion in the country practicing it. Through the use of coercion, it has become easy to threaten the enemy and protect the citizens. For example, the counterterrorism policy of the United Kingdom allows for the prevention of the possibility of any criminal attacks. Coercion has allowed citizens to gain trust in the counterterrorism strategies of their governments. As a result, fighting terrorism and possible terrorist attacks have become an easy task (Crenshaw 2010, p. 40). The use of coercion in interrogation of terrorist suspects can also be credited because it plays an essential role in saving lives. This may not be the case where extrajudicial killing is executed as a means of preventing terrorist attacks. The use of force in fighting terrorism can be regarded as effective since the use of 3diplomatic methods has considerably failed. Diplomacy has not proven to be a viable way of fighting terrorism that exists in the world of today. This stems from the fact that terrorists tend to opposes reasonable ideologies aimed at stopping their activities. For example, it has become extremely difficult to negotiate with terrorists; besides, governments do not consider negotiations an option (Crenshaw 2010, p. 42). The use of coercion as a policy of counterterrorism enables governments to institute various stages of action and reaction to the terrorist attacks. This provides an opportunity to reach at compromises without either of the sides involved engaging in war (Frey 2004, p. 50). As such, coercion can be termed as one of the ways in which countries can shape their grand strategies to counter terrorism effectively. Thus, if applied appropriately, the use of coercive strategies enables the government to gather essential information from terrorists without having to engage in fights. Despite the numerous benefits accrued by coercion, there are several demerits attributed to the use of terror in obtaining information from terrorists. First, use of terror, especially in the United States, has received critic on the basis that it violates the national values as well as laws of the United States. Coercion damages the reputation of the country using it all over the world. For example, critics believe that the use of force and coercion by the U.S inhibits individual rights and freedom (Geltzer 2009, p. 13). To a considerable extent, coercion serves as a way of encouraging terrorists and enemies of the state to recruit themselves. Coercion has failed since it has limited capacity of governments to gather usable and reliable information, which can be used to combat the war on terrorism. There is a high likelihood that the individuals interrogated through coercion will not give effective and accurate 4information. The proponents of civil liberties have argued that the use of force and coercion interferes with the privacy of persons. This is against human rights since all people have the right to privacy, which should be upheld at all times (Geltzer 2009, p. 15). The possibility of the interrogated individuals giving false information stems from the fact that they want to save themselves from the torture. For example, terrorists may want to protect themselves from the consequences of pain associated with terror. As a result, they may give false information regarding terrorist attacks. Reliance on such information may mislead the investigators; therefore, the planned terrorist activity may occur. Besides, the use of force of force on terrorists may not be successful since they take an oath not to reveal information about the activities of the groups to which they belong (Howard & Sawyer, 2004). The use of force and coercion to obtain information about terrorism has received widespread criticism because of the inhumane nature of this method. For example, torture that accompanies coercion inflicts pain in the victims and may lead to mental suffering, death, or even failure of the organs. The use of such methods as electric shock, cutting the fingernails of the suspects, and injuring their private parts can lead to lifelong injuries. It is unethical to obtain information from terrorist suspects using these means, especially because they cannot be regarded as criminals (Howard & Sawyer, 2004). Another disadvantage of coercion and force stems from the fact that the use of this method gives room for excessive powers by the authorities. As a result, the police and other law enforcement agencies may tend to misuse this strategy to obtain information from non-terrorist suspects. For example, the method might become so entrenched in the society until it becomes a routine. Consequently, it will be used in almost all crimes including those which do not have a terrorism aspect. The use of coercion and force can also be associated with military attacks on areas believed to harbor terrorist groups. Consequently, this leads to numerous deaths of people, especially when the military uses force to search for terrorists. For example, the U.K as well as the U.S has resorted to the use of force in fighting terrorism. This has caused the deaths of many innocent 5women as well as children. The use of force also leads to the destruction of infrastructure of the countries believed to carry out terrorist activities. The situations may even become worse, especially when the homes are destroyed since people are left homeless and they may be forced to become refugees in their own country. For instance, the war on terror in Afghanistan has led to homelessness (Alexander 2004, p. 40). In some instances, governments may result to the use of measures such as killings in areas perceived to be harboring terrorists. Such a strategy can lead to considerable harm and may worsen the situation rather than end terrorism. For example, the decision of the United States to engage Afghanistan in war has not yielded many positive benefits in the fight against terrorism. Instead, the wars have caused massive deaths of 6innocent people who cannot be blamed for terrorism. Terrorist groups have intensified their attacks as a way of revenging (Alexander 2004, p. 43). Conclusion In conclusion, the war on terror has intensified, and this has led to the widespread use of coercion and force as counterterrorism policies. The use of force can be credited because it serves to intimidate those who may be planning terrorist attacks and their allies. Moreover, coercion can be regarded as the only way of dealing with terrorists since they may fail to comply when diplomacy is used. However, the use of force and coercion can be discredited since it can lead to numerous deaths of innocent people. Coercion has also received criticism on the basis that it interferes with the rights of people. Works Cited: Alexander, Yonah. Counterterrorism Strategies: Successes and Failures of Six Nations. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books, Inc. 2006. Bolz, Frank, Dudonis, Kenneth & Schulz, David. The counterterrorism handbook. New York: Taylor & Francis. 2005. Crenshaw, Martha. The Consequences of Counterterrorism. London: Russell Sage Foundation. 2010. Crank, John & Patricia, Gregor. Counterterrorism after 9/11. New York: Anderson. 2005. Frey, Bruno. Dealing With Terrorism. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing. 2004. Geltzer, Joshua. US Counter-Terrorism Strategy and Al-Qaeda: Signalling and the Terrorist World-View. New York: Taylor & Francis. 2009. Howard, Russell & Sawyer, Reid. Defeating terrorism. Guilford, CT: McGraw Hill/Dushkin. 2004. Read More