The United States and International Community Counterterrorism Response to Al Qaida - Term Paper Example

The United States and International Community Counterterrorism Response to Al Qaida Introduction The terrorist groups continue to exploit terror and violence in their endeavour to further their narrow-minded political ambitions. Most of the terrorist groups envision the United States of America in collaboration with her allies and partners as the source of their political tribulations. The most violent groups and prominent in their activities of terror is Al Qaeda, an Islamist oriented group whose origin and administrative quarters are in Afghanistan. This group not only threatens to execute its activities of terror on America and her partners, but also in the Muslim countries that have a view or belief that varies from their practices and actions. Thus, it is an international threat to both the foreign and local governments that wage war on terror. This factor forces the United States, alongside the international community, to take measures of executing counters to these acts of terror. The countries constitute legal establishments and law enforcement strategies to continue the fight against terrorism. The Al Qaeda Group Al-Qaeda is a militant Islamism organisation founded under the stewardship and overview of Osama bin Laden and Abdullah Yusuf Azzam in the town of Peshawar, based in Pakistan. Its established dates back to the Soviet War in Afghanistan, between august 1988 and late 1989, with is objective of formulation being to assist defeat the Russians (Chaliand & Blin, 2007, p. 67). Over the years, Al Qaeda grew, and today it boasts of the status of a fully pledged multinational army that is stateless. Subsequent to the Soviet War in Afghanistan, the group dispersed; nonetheless, it continued to present its displeasure and opposition to what the leaders of the group considered corrupt and foreign Islamic regimes such as the presence of United Sates in Islamic lands. During its formation, the group had a base in Sudan, but eventually resettled in Afghanistan in 1990, under the patronage of the Taliban militia. The Al Qaeda group merged and established partnerships with several other militant Islamist organizations after its reestablishment that held views and practices similar to its visions (Gerges, 2009, p. 98). Such organizations that it merged with include the Islamic Jihad and the Islamic group of Egypt and the leaders of the group then declared holy war against the United Sates and her allies. After forming partnerships, the Al-Qaida started establishing its camps throughout the world, recruiting Muslim people into the group and training as well as equipping them with skills for fighting and carrying out the terror activities. The success of the Al-Qaida group emanates from the strength it contained in its leadership since inception as it constituted of leaders endowed remarkably in knowledge and intellectuality (Hauner, 2009, p 145). The group after merging brought several aspects of strength, including an extraordinary Saudi wealth; hence, financing its operations accordingly, the expertise of lifetime Egyptian militants, which gave the group strong military skill and presence and a philosophical and intellectual foundation for jihad, as it consisted of educated Muslim leaders, with the ability to interpret the Islamic laws accordingly. Since its inception as a jihadist militant group, Al Qaeda accredits itself for several acts of terror, with the first being the bombing of at Gold Mihor hotel in Aden where it killed two people in December 1992. The scale of its ambitions became clear with the audacious attack conducted against the World Trading Centre in New York, in February 1992, killing six people and injuring over 1000 others. In November 1997, the group massacred 62 people at Luxor in Egypt with gun fire, with the culmination of the jihad war coming in February 1998, when Osama bin Laden declared all the American Citizens as targets of the Al Qaeda and called all Muslims to perform their ‘duty’ of fostering the war (Riedel, 2010, p. 111). This initiated massive terror activities including august 1998, in which a twin bombing of the United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 223 people. The worst attack followed in September 2001, when the terrorist group hijacked planes and rammed them into buildings in the United States, killing about 2, 974 people. This initiated the United States of America to advance her response tactics to terrorism from the group. As is observable, most of the tactics of the group include conducting bombing, by setting the bombs in buildings or executing suicide bombs. The groups also uses gun fire and ground combat action, as well as, hijacking planes and people to conduct their acts of terror. Overview of State Counterterrorism Response The United States began the war against terror before the declaration of terror as a threat to world peace. The United States continues to foster its efforts of liberating the oppressed and eliminating the terror groups within and outside her borders. The country, after the declarations by the Al Qaeda group in the early 1990, started preparing her counter measures. Initially, the counter measures imitated by the United States of America entailed combating the group from its base. The government began by conducting strikes at the base camps of the militia group in endeavour to disperse them and eliminate the group. This measure saw the first military action, which entailed the US military conducting several strikes against the camps of Al Qaeda in Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998 less than a month after the 1998 bombings (Borgeson & Valeri, 2009, p 78). This retaliatory measure was swift and to the point, painting the reality of the war against terror to the Al Qaeda group. Since then, the country continues to institute several actions that focus on engaging the war on terrorism. The country initiated further military action against the Al Qaeda group in 2001, in which it aimed to banish the Taliban dominance in Afghanistan. However, their efforts to capture the leader, Osama bin Laden failed as he escaped during the battle. However, this weakened their operations significantly, dispersing their base and creating some disorganization in the group. Further, in line with the military action against terror, another response that the US engaged is the formulation of antiterrorism police and military units in their push to win the war against terror. The country established units of well-trained and equipped military men aimed at specializing in the war against terror. These military units operate within the country and outside the country when called to act by providing support towards the fight against Al Qaeda (Aldrich, 2009, p. 125). At the national level, these units conduct activities such as thorough searches and surveillance in the country, seeking and gathering intelligence on the activities of Al Qaeda and their intended plans of terror. Moreover, the counterterrorism units in the police and military sections of US also facilitate measures of acting on the intelligence gathered and thwarting the plans of any terror group planning attack. These provide short-term responses to countering terrorism by preventing the attacks. Another measure that the government of United States initiated is the creation and enacting of antiterrorism laws within the country. These laws and regulations forbid the activities of terror within the country, allowing for thorough interrogation measures and intelligence gathering measures. Moreover, the laws also define the punitive action against those found to be facilitating the Al Qaeda, as well as, other terror groups within the border of US (Law, 2009, p. 321). The laws also pose ban against communicating, entry and travel intentions of suspected terrorist into the country. These bans disrupt the international travel intentions of the terror groups, cutting their terror activities. These laws on antiterrorism also incorporate international regulations and cooperation with other countries that hold a similar view. The international community, under the stewardship of the United States also incorporated formation of international Security Council regulations against the terror groups (Hammond, 2008, p. 222). Moreover, they also formed collaborative military action units with the intention of combating the war on terror fostered by Al Qaeda and other terror groups. Moreover, the US also features activities and programs that champion for human rights and dignity, which focus on combating the war on terror. These programs include, countering the causes of terrorism. According to the findings of these programs, the cause of terror is political instability, poverty and other social issues in the countries where the terror groups reside. Therefore, America takes the responsibility by initiating programs that foster democracy, financial and moral support to help grow the countries that suffer invasion by terror groups (Nacos, 2008, p. 76). Through this response, the country reduces the basis and support for terror activities; thus, combating the terror groups accordingly. This constitutes long-term responses of the war against terror. Additionally, this response also features a comprehensive approach towards eliminating the threats of terror. Through the empowering programs, the US cuts determines the intentions of terrorist, developing capabilities and plans that deny the terrorists access to the expertise, resources, materials and other enabling capabilities that support activities of terror. Such programs include regulatory statutes on weapons and state sponsoring of the terror groups. For instance, the United States opposes the relations of Iran to the Hizballah Islamist militia group, which is an affiliate of Al Qaeda group. Thus, through such responses, the United States of America conduct her response measures against terror groups both within and outside her borders. Critical Assessment of State Counterterrorism Response The various strategies of countering terrorism initiated by the United States continue to elicit mixed reactions as to their effectiveness. Despite the progress on the war against terror activities, the country faces further challenges from the implementation of its laws and programs of countering terror. The law enforcement strategies of the US in countering terror are producing results, though, not to the satisfaction as they envisioned. For instance, although the policy on slamming travel ban on the suspected terrorist is working within the borders of the country, the measure is not effective in some of her international partners (Crelinsten, 2009, p. 112). Since the terrorist are citizens of other countries, they pose as civilians with varied identity cards, allowing them to enter into such countries and conduct their terror activities on American properties such as embassies among others. Thus, the travel ban, although effective to some extent, it is not producing the results as desired. Further, still on the law enforcement strategies, the terror groups are adopting new and improvised measures of conducting their activity. For instance, they engage people such as students or native Muslim people who are citizens of the United States and train them on terror activity. Thus, the unsuspecting law enforcement cannot suspect American terrorists, based in the country, who are citizens of the country. Thus, these legal approaches to countering terrorism also face several such challenges. Another factor observable in the response measures to terrorism is the problems associated with their implementation. For instance, in some situations, catastrophic errors result when there is erroneous activity of the law enforcement strategies. In such cases, for instance, a travel ban on an international figure may have diplomatic implications. These diplomatic wars affect the relationships between the country of origin and the United States (Friedman, Harper & Preble, 2010, p 134). Moreover, there are several cases of human rights abuses, where the law enforcement strategies encounter claims of infringing on the lives of the people they come to liberate. For instance, in the areas where the United States inducted its response measure of using military action to combat terrorism, there are various reports that indicate a multitude of human rights abuses. The locals accuse the military of scenarios such as rape, stealing and discriminative murders, where the military kill innocent and unarmed civilians (Sidel, 2010, p 298). Additionally, there are reports such as the processes involved in interrogating suspects for intelligence. The law enforcement strategies encounter uncooperative suspects or some who are innocent suspects; thus, they employ torturing measures to gather information, leading to abuse of the civil rights of such people. Further, some of the international strategies that incorporate political aspects also bring challenges to the success of the response measures adopted to counter terrorism. The political aspects of using the war against terror in campaigning for political seats in the country such as the presidency complicate the measures (Shi, 2011, p 157). The politicians politicize the process, painting the government as unsuccessful and law enforcement strategies as unsuccessful in combating terrorism. This arouses internal conflicts within the country and international political systems start contributing to the debates, impeding the war against terrorism. These observations and happenings pose challenges to the procedures of engaging the responses to terrorism for the United States. Conclusion: Strengths, Weaknesses and Suggestions for the response initiative The responses have several factors that back and foster their progress in fighting against terror. The presence of the United States military forces in countries where the terrorist groups reside receives significant support from the locals. For instance, in Afghanistan and Iraq, during and after the capture of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the locals presented such support to the American military that enabled the capture of the global leaders of terrorist groups (Gibler & Miller, 2012, p. 1209). Thus, this support from such countries that host the terror groups is strength to the responses against terror. Another contributing factor to the strength of the responses is the international community support and cooperation. The global society joined the United States in ensuring world peace; thus, they adopt and implement some of the responses of United States to terror. Thus, such international support is strength to the responses to terrorism. However, there are several challenges that pose as weaknesses of the responses presented by the country. To begin with, the negative criticism of the response measures indicates the weaknesses of the measures. The responses constitute several human right violation incidences, causing people to oppose implementation of such responses (Hoffman, 2012, p. 449). Moreover, the responses despite their wide implementation are unable to eliminate the terror threats. This is because the face of terror groups is also changing dynamically; this factor makes terror an evolving factor, causing some of the responses initiated to become obsolete and ineffective. Thus, the dynamic aspect of terrorism changes the terms of war, causing weaknesses in the responses implemented to combat terrorism. It is essential for the government of United States to adapt to the changing aspect of terrorism and terror groups, to study the trends accordingly; thus, they can incorporate effective responses to terrorism. The responses should include the participation of the citizens in providing information about suspicious cases. Technology is a factor for consideration, in which the responses should invest heavily. Technology is the future of security; thus, the responses should adopt technologically effective structures to counter terrorism. Investing in the aviation, maritime and border security capabilities is also an area that the responses should expand and contribute significantly in the fight against terrorism. Bibliography Aldrich, RJ 2009, ‘US-European Intelligence Co-operation on Counter-Terrorism: Low Politics and Compulsion’, British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 11, 1, pp. 122-139, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Borgeson, K., & Valeri, R 2009, Terrorism in America. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett. Chaliand, G., & Blin, A 2007, The history of terrorism: from antiquity to al Qaeda. Berkeley, University of California Press. Crelinsten, R. D 2009, Counterterrorism. Cambridge, Polity Press. Friedman, B. H., Harper, J., & Preble, C. A 2010, Terrorizing ourselves: why U.S. counterterrorism policy is failing and how to fix it. Washington, D.C., Cato Institute. Gerges, F. A 2009, The far enemy: why Jihad went global. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Gibler, D, & Miller, S 2012, ‘Comparing the Foreighn Aid Policies of Presidents Bush and Obama’, Social Science Querterly (Wiley-Blackwell), 93, 5, pp. 1202-1217, Academic Seacrh Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Hauner, P. 2009, The voice of Al Qaeda An analysis of its propaganda and media strategies. München, GRIN Verlag. Hammond, A 2008, ‘Two countries divided by a common threat? International perceptions of US and UK counter-terrorism and homeland security responses to the post-September 2001 threat environment’, Place Branding & Public Diplomacy, 4, 3, pp. 218-239, Business Sources Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Hoffman, GA 2012, ‘The War on Terror as a Metaphor for Imaggination Regulation: A Critical View of a Distorted Debate’, The Journal of Gender, Race & Justcice, 15, p. 449, LexisNexis, Academic: Law Reviews, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Law, R. D 2009, Terrorism: a history. Cambridge, Polity Press. Nacos, B. L 2008, Terrorism and counterterrorism: understanding threats and responses in the post-9/11 world. New York, Pearson Longman. Riedel, B. O 2010, The search for al Qaeda its leadership, ideology, and future. Washington, D.C., Brookings Institution Press. http://public.eblib.com/EBLPublic/PublicView.do?ptiID=513999. Sidel, M 2010, ‘Counter-Terrorism and the Regulation of Civil Society in the USA’, Developent & Change, 41, 2, pp. 293-312, Business Sources Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Shi, S 2011, ‘The Changing Scope of Human Rights in the context of Counter-Terrorism in Singapore: A comparative perspective’, Jindal Global Law Review, 2, p. 157, LexisNexis, Academic: Law Reviews, EBSCOhost, viewed 28 March 2014. Read More