National Security and Counter-Terrorism Issues - Report Example

National Security and Counter Terrorism Issues Name Institution Tutor Due Date Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 United States’ devised strategies on global war on terrorism 4 New US counter-terrorism strategy to focus on homeland security 4 Increased resources and collaboration in Afghanistan and Pakistan war 6 Improvement of intelligence and information sharing structures 9 Conclusion 11 References 12 Executive Summary In the wake of the 9/11 al-Qaeda attacks on the United States, the United States government declared a global war on terrorism. The parameters and nature of the fight, nevertheless, remains frustratingly unclear. The United States administration , both Obama and Bush administration has postulated an array of enemies, including rogues states such as Afghanistan and Pakistan, terrorist organizations of regional, national and global scope and terrorism itself. Of particular concern has been conflation of al-Qaeda as an undifferentiated radical threat. As from January 2008, the United States has been formulating strategies on global war on terrorism and has declared objectives, which entail destruction of al-Qaeda and other transnational terrorist organizations, transformation of Pakistan and Afghanistan into prosperous peaceful states. The US has also declared elimination of terrorism as a way of termination of terrorist attacks and potential enemies globally. Accordingly, the United States global war on terrorism is being calibrated to match the US security interests and the World at large. The specific measures that United States is putting in place include de-conflation of terrorist attacks, substitution of plausible preclusion for preventive war as the core vehicle for dealing with rogue nations seeking weapons of mass destruction, refocus of global war on particularly the al-Qaeda together with its allies and homeland security. This papers looks at the devised strategies on United States global war on terrorism and how these strategies are bound to be successful or unsuccessful. Introduction The global war on terrorism also referred as the war on terrorism is a global military campaign led by the United Kingdom and the United States with support of other North Atlantic treaty organizations. Initially, the war was waged against the al-Qaeda group and other militant organizations with the aim of eradicating them. From January 2008 the United States have been significantly rethinking strategies on global war on terrorism. The nation has highly focused counter-terrorism on homeland security, and focused on collaborating with Afghanistan and Pakistan militaries to fight al-Qaeda to ensure regional as well as global security. In addition United States has focused on the improvement of information and intelligence levels to enable sharing of information on terrorist attacks at federal, regional, local and tribal government levels. United States’ devised strategies on global war on terrorism New US counter-terrorism strategy to focus on homeland security The United States views al-Qaeda and its associates as a major security threat and pays more attention to the native terrorists radicalized by al-Qaeda ideology, in accordance to the novel national strategy for counter terrorism that was released by the United States government in 2010. This strategy is the initial counter-terrorism strategy that presents a key are of emphasis in United States in counter terrorism efforts. The nation will be mindful that its country is threatened, and its best offense is not based on deploying huge armies overseas but delivering target, surgical pressure to groups which threaten United States. There are two reasons why this new strategy emphasizes the risk of homeland security. The first reason is that terrorism threat facing the US has not reduced in spite of the demise of Osama bin Laden.1 The decentralization of the al-Qaeda network has made it harder for the United States counter terrorism efforts to get an efficient target. Sustained pressures against the al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan have compelled the group to initiate more terrorist invasions from inside the U.S. Secondly, Obama is anticipated to seek re-election in 2012 and thus must ensure safety of American citizens .This new strategy by the Obama administration shows a considerable reduction trend in comparison to the counter terrorism strategy of the Bush administration in 2006.2 President Obama has focused Bush administration’s global war on terror on Pakistan and Afghanistan since he came into power. The nation will further move attention to the prevention of domestic terrorist threats together with the withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan. The counter terrorism image of the novel strategy is touches on a range of subjects, entailing the US, Arabian Peninsula, South Asia, Central Asia, Southeast Asia and East Africa. Nevertheless, United States has stressed on the avoidance of the utilization of a huge scale armies coupled with a huge dependence on cooperation amid intelligence forces and Special Forces, and the utilization of unmanned aerial vehicles to initiate low cost and high precision anti terrorism attack. This minimization trend is as a result of diversities in the concepts and the financial and economic pressure presently in the U.S. In a broader perspective, it is evident that the US presently has a more significant international strategic goal than the battle against terrorism. The objective of the US in the last decade may be defined as the battle against terrorism, but the nation is not willing to utilize similar definition for its objective for the decades ahead.3 Even though the battle against terrorism has assisted the nation to expand its worldwide strategic layout, the ongoing fight has undermined its power and numerous of its activities performed under the cover of battling against terrorism have resulted to displeasure from around the globe. The global financial crisis over latest years has further weakened the soft and hard power of the U.S. United States masses. Politicians are deeply conscious that the nation’s top agenda to revitalize the economy and to deal with the challenges more efficiently. In addition, this novel strategy does not comment on its policies linked to the battle against terrorism. To the nation, the battle against terrorism has yet to come to an end. When Osama was alive, the battle against terrorism was a fight between a person and a country, and after the death of Osama, the war became a fight between a nation and a form of ideology. Increased resources and collaboration in Afghanistan and Pakistan war When the United States initiated military operations in Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks, its aims were to interrupt the utilization of Afghanistan as the terrorist base of operations, and to invade the military capacity of the Taliban regime. The United States led operations swiftly accomplished these aims through eradicating Taliban from political power. Toward the termination of the Bush government in September 2008, reconsidered use more resources in the global war on terrorism.4 Bush stated that 3, 500 additional U.S. marine would be deployed to Afghanistan and together with additional troops offered by NATO allies they would represent a quiet surge. These troops would be utilized to offer security for Afghan citizens, safeguard Afghanistan’s democratic institutions and infrastructure, and ensure access to services such as health care and education. United States efforts would also entail assisting Afghan people to further develop security forces and direct involvement of Afghan tribes. The strategy would also be aimed helping Pakistan defeat al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters hiding in the remote border regions of their nation. 5 The Obama administration has designated its intention of directing more leadership attention and time to the Afghanistan war. This strategy would assist forge a hard earned peace in Afghanistan. Obama has initiated a comprehensive policy review and approved the deployment of around 17,000 additional United States forces to Afghanistan. The process of the policy review had included consultations with Pakistan and Afghanistan governments, and key partners and allies, and also with numerous international organizations6. As stated by Obama stated, the primary aim of the United State was the creation of a novel comprehensive strategy for Pakistan and Afghanistan and the close linkage of the U.S. strategy for these two neighboring nations was new. 7 The U.S. core goal would be to dismantle, disrupt and defeat al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to hinder their return to either nation in future. Key lines of activity towards terrorist attacks were to entail reversing the Gains of Taliban, promoting a highly accountable and capable Afghan government, training and growing Afghan national security forces, deployment of civilian support technical skills to support economic growth and governance and endorsing a reconciliation procedure. In order to strengthen its global war on terrorism, the United States has made consideration on improving cooperation with Pakistan military. The United States forces are coaching Pakistan forces helicopter assault and night flying techniques that could be helpful in military operations within the border regions.8 The global war on terrorism has offered the most present opportunity for the establishment of a lasting and close relationship between US and Pakistan. In spite of the Pakistan’s military collaboration, Pakistan is still highly criticized for accommodating anti-Taliban forces in the nation. Additionally, with Pakistan being an undesirable addition to the nuclear regime, a vital partner in the terrorism war, and with a volatile social and political environment, The US faces a wide range of foreign policy challenges when working with Pakistan.9 The United States choices toward Pakistan must also be incorporated with wider regional policies as the interactions amid the regional actors and international role of South Asia experiences rapid changes. In addition to this complexity is the friction resulting from deviations of the two allies on the operational features of the conduct of global war on terrorism. For example, Pakistan has regularly rejected requests by United States to permit its war troops into tribal regions inside Pakistan or to permit US personnel to directly deal with local tribal leaders. This along with Pakistan’s measured and cautious approach towards fighting militancy, especially in North West Frontier province and federally administered tribal areas, has received sharp criticisms from several influential quarters in the United States.10 In the perspective of the United States, the new strategy of war on Afghanistan is aimed at ensuring safety of both Afghanistan and the area, entailing denying secure haven to terrorists, so as to establish a steady regional security balance and safeguarding United States national interest. However, there is a high likelihood that this strategy will not succeed due to lack of cooperation from Afghanistan. This is because for the Afghan citizens, war is the only most recent immediate cause of insecurity and instability in 30 years of dislocation and conflict. Their everyday lives are shaped by hardships of providing for families within settings with highly limited economic opportunity and development, intimidation in numerous regions from the insurgent groups, and frustration with limited capability and at times corruption of formal government structures.11 Improvement of intelligence and information sharing structures The united States believes that its success in avoiding future terrorist invasions id dependent on its capability to collect, analyze and share intelligence and information regarding groups who want to invade the nation, the tactics they utilize and the targets that they aim to attack. Through it is national strategy for combating terrorism; the nation recognizes that the battle on terrorism is a different form of war, which needs a paradigm shift and application of every element of its national influence and power. The intelligence and information sharing schemes that once enhanced the victory of the cold war now needs greater resilience and flexibility to deal with the threats facing United States from a transnational radical movement determined to destroy U.S citizens, their liberties and their way of life. From January 2008, the United States administration has worked with the federal, local, tribal and state governments as well as foreign partners and private sector to transform its processes, procedures, policies and workplace cultures so as to reinforce sharing of information.12 The nation deems exchange of information as a rule, not an exception, in its efforts to fight the terrorist invasion, considerable improvements have taken place within individual disciplines and agencies, but there is still more to be executed. Improvement of information sharing in post 9/11 would need an environment that supports information sharing across all levels of disciplines, security domains and government.13 The strategy of improve information sharing is being developed with the perceptive that terrorism in formation, homeland security information and law enforcement information associated with terrorism can be obtained from numerous sources , all government levels, private sector organizations and foreign sources. The department of homeland security is executing this in alignment with vision of Congress and the president has established a robust environment of information sharing. These efforts involves offering training programs for local law enforcement to assist them recognize indicators of terrorist act , together with other partners at the department of justice on the international suspicious activity reporting initiative, which has developed a standardized scheme for reporting wary activity so that this information may be evaluated against national trends and also shared across jurisdiction. 14 Conclusion The United States have greatly devised its strategies on global war on terror. The nation has focused counter-terrorism measures on homeland security to ensure safety of its homeland against terrorist attacks from al-Qaeda. The country has also directed more resources in Afghanistan so as to provide security for Afghan nationals, safeguard Afghan’s infrastructure together with democratic institutions and to help Afghanistan forces to further promote security forces. United States is also supporting Pakistan to fight Taliban and al-Qaeda fighter who are hiding in the remote border areas of the country. It is important to note that the safety of the people globally is highly fundamental therefore the nations that are against terrorism should be backed up to ensure that peace and serenity prevails. References Watson, P., (2008). Pakistan connection seen in Taliban’s new Tactics, Los Angeles Times. Aziz, S., (2008). Pakistan-US relations: Building strategic partnership in 21st century. Retrieved on October 26, 2011 from Bush, G., (2008). National strategy for combating terrorism, Washington, D.C.: The White House. Dale, C., (2011). Remarks by the president on a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, March 27, 2009, Retrieved on October 26, 2011 from . CSR, (2010). Afghanistan: Post war governance, security, and U.S. policy Dale, C., (2011). President Barack Obama on the Afghanistan-Pakistan annual review, December 16, 2010, Retrieved on October 26, 2011 from statement president Afghanistan-Pakistan annul review. Clarke, J., & Zalman, A., (2009). The global war on terror: A narrative in need of a rewrite. Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 23, No.2. Armed Press Services, (2009). More U.S. forces headed to Afghanistan: Unit to change role. People’s Daily. (2011). New US counter-terrorism strategy focuses more on homeland security. Wall Street Journal (2011). DHS Warns of the greatest threat since 9/11: Homegrown Violent Extremism. February 9, 2011. Homeland Security Council. (2008). Overview of America’s National Strategy for Homeland Security. Washington DC. National Strategy for Homeland Security Read More