Terror Threat Assessment in France - Essay Example

Terror Threat Assessment in the USA Even as the Islamist terrorist threat seems directed predominantly towards the United States, France has also been the recipient of significant Islamic terror. However, the French are renowned in the international community for having developed one of the most effective counter-terrorism efforts in the world. This threat assessment follows Hoffman (2005) as establishing terrorism as a violent act geared toward influencing political change. It seems that much of the terrorist backlash against the French is tied to their colonial history, particularly Algeria. Having colonized Algeria in the 19th century – the country later gained its independence in 1962 – there remained a significant Algerian and Muslim population residing within France’s suburban ghettos (Crumley). During the beginning of the 1990s Islamic Terrorist organizations tapped into this Arab population – roughly 5 million living in France – and established connections between them and Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan (Crumley). While the Islamic organizations are the predominant terrorist impulses within French society, there remains and a consistent threat from a multitude of groups that have been directly tied to France’s North African empire (Greenway 2009) . The most prominent of these terrorist organizations are the Armed Islamic Group (GIA). They are an Algerian terrorist group that has direct connections to Osama Bin Laden, having participated directly beside him in his anti-Jihad during the war against the Soviet Union. After the war ended they settled in France seeking to enact terror on the French government for their support of the Algerian government (Crumley). One of the major incidents regarding this terrorist organization occurred in 1995 when they planted a bomb in a prominent French location and were successful in killing 8 citizens and wounding an astonishing 150. Other incidents include a series of sporadic car bombings throughout the mid-1990s, and an attempted 1998 bombing at the soccer World Cup (Greenway 2009). When considering the extent to which these terrorist threats remain a common occurrence in France, one has to examine the extent to which the French government has enacted strict laws to prevent any such occurrence. After the mid-1990’s attacks the French developed a sophisticated intelligence network designed to monitor future terrorist activity. Perhaps the most significant occurrence, however, was the French enactment of all-encompassing laws regarding terrorism and those connected to it. The French laws indicated that any person shown to have aided terrorism in any minute regard can be arrested and charged with a crime (Crumley). While the United States and the United Kingdom regard such laws as gross violations of civil liberties, the French contest that it is just these countries failure to enact more stringent regulations regarding terrorist activity that has promoted and made them incubators for terrorist activity. Indeed, the stringent French measures have resulted in higher preventative levels, and many specific incidents of terrorist prevention. The French preventative mechanisms also unearthed significant information regarding the infrastructure of terrorists and the organizations that support them, indicating that the terrorists are a largely well-divided organization, as the higher levels of stratification prevents defections and is helpful in creating barrier of secrecy between the various factions of the terrorist organization (Crumley). When considering the safety of the United States vs. that of France, most international researchers note that the French system is undeniably safer. Even as the American Defense Budget dwarfs the French spending, as 4.0% of our GDP (nearly 45 billion in counter-terrorism spending alone) goes towards defense, compared to 2.6% of the French GDP, it seems that the French legal structure and frequent experience with terrorist organizations due to their colonial interests in North Africa, has ultimately made France a much safer place than the United States regarding terrorism (Hellman). Question #1 When considering the question of pandemics in the contemporary world it’s clear that even though society has made great advances in medical technology and communication the challenges and dangers of pandemics are in many ways greater than they have been in the past. There are many reasons for this that can be linked to local and global factors. When considering Africa, the lack of political infrastructure, poor family structures – many groups are polygamous, and lack of contraception, has made aids a rampant problem in many parts of the country. In discussing his visit to Africa, Robert Kaplan even claims that the country is more dangerous now than in the in the 19th century, “Africa may be more dangerous in this regard than in it was in 1862, before antibiotics, when the explorer Sir Richard Burton described the health situation on the continent as ‘deadly, a Golgotha, a Jehanum (Kaplan 6).” The dangers of world travel also pose create situations where pandemics could potentially become global in much faster ways than was previously conceivable. One needs look no further than the rapid spread of Swine Flu within the United States over the past year to understand that pandemics are and remain to be a major concern of the 21st century. It’s often been noted that films capture the underlining tensions and subconscious worries of a culture. When considering the glut of global pandemic films that have been released in the United States, it’s evident that society remains extremely aware and concerned with the threat of global pandemics. One might consider the film I Am Legend (2007) featuring Will Smith, where a viral outbreak affects the entire Western hemisphere and Will Smith is the only survivor in New York City. Even as the film is a highly fictionalized account, the film’s success indicates that it struck a chord with the collective unconscious of America. We continue to remain worried of such an outbreak striking, and with advances in travel, and potential terrorist threats, many people think it’s just a matter of time. Question #6 Adequately differentiating between terrorism and other offensive actions is difficult because it requires defining the term by some agreeable standards. Hoffman (2005) discusses an overarching view of terrorism as, “…any especially abhorrent act of violence that is perceived as directed against society -- whether it involves the activities of anti-government dissidents or governments themselves, organized crime syndicates or common criminals, rioting mobs or persons engaged in militant protest, individual psychotics or lone extortionists.” While this definition is slightly adequate he later refines the definition to refer to actions that area motivated specifically for political gain. So the working definition of terrorism seems to be best defined as -- acts of violence that are carried out with the intention to influence political policy. When distinguishing terrorism from crime then it seems that while terrorism is certainly a criminal act, it is a more specific criminal act. One could define crime as anything that breaks the established laws of a country, and terrorism as a specific act of political violence within that framework. It’s also possible to establish a distinction along intentions, if you consider crime more specifically. It seems that crime is committed for personal gain or anger – wealth, murder – where as terrorism seems to be more selfless, and more as an act of religion or country. Indeed, many terrorists are willing to commit suicide in the process of carrying out their acts. Whether terrorism can be distinguished from ethnic cleansing is a difficult question. It seems past formulations of the terrorism concept, notably in Russia and France have equated it to contemporary definitions of ethnic cleansing. Today the term refers to calculated efforts by minority populations to enact political change through fear and terror; the minority distinction is important as it very possible that the term itself exists in regards to majority condemnation of unwanted acts by the majority. In that sense, the term terrorism is itself a form of verbal warfare. References Crumley, Bruce. “Fighting Terrorism: Lessons from France”. Time Magazine. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,176139,00.html Greenway, H.D.S. “How France Confronts Terrorism”. Boston Globe. 2009 Hellman, Chris. "America Spending More on Security Than Most Know". http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/spending_more_than_most_know/. Hoffman, Bruce. Inside Terrorism. Nytimes.com. 2005. I Am Legend (2007). Film. Kaplan, Robert. The Coming Anarchy. Atlantic Monthly. 1994. Read More