Global Terrorism Threat - Research Paper Example

Introduction Terrorism has become one of the greatest issues globally due to expansion in a number of terror groups. The world is currently witnessing the war waged by ISIS group in Iraq and Syria that have already taken a number of big cities in both countries. Such group is brooding future terrorist groups that could be a huge threat to international countries and more to western countries such as the U.S. and the UK. It is because the ISIS is run by extremist groups that have so far been a threat to the people in Syria and Iraq. The UK and other countries should consider serious and effective measures to counter terror groups top avoid cases such September 2001 terror attack in the United States. Conversely, so much have been talked about ways in which the states are handling the terror suspects. For example, while some people are supporting the idea of detention of terrorist without trial, others are against the idea. They argue that detention of a person without trial is a violation of human rights. International terrorism has been the greatest challenge to every state trying to deal with it. The biggest challenge is however the balance between terrorism and human rights. This paper explains some issues brought forward against states with regard terrorist detention. It also presents steps taken by the states such as the U.S. to stop terrorist. Terrorism Many people disagree on the definition of terrorism meaning that there is more than one definition of terrorism. According to White (4), terrorism is an act that has to be analysed, measured, and weighed. In addition, the definition of terrorism is presented by different people based on their political and social realities and so there are many definitions. However, there is one that many scholars are using to explain the picture of terrorism. White (4) point out “that terrorism is an act or threatened act of violence against innocent people for political purposes.” This one definition used by scholars to bring out the picture of terrorism. Measures taken by the U.S. to stop terrorist Department of homeland security have taken quite a number of measures to counter terrorist, this includes, anti-terrorism and counter-terrorism programs. Anti-terrorism is steps taken by state to reduce the threat posed by terrorist. On the other hand, counter-terrorism is offensive measures taken to disrupt, preempt and respond to terrorism. Other measures include terrorism consequence management; the state prepares for consequences of terrorist incidences (Kraft and Marks, n.p). Counter-terrorism measures taken by the U.S. assisted in reducing the number of terrorist acts in the United States soil prior the terror attack on September 2011. According to Kraft and Marks (n.p), the legal measures taken by the U.S. against the terrorism and the states that support terror group covered three areas; first, the counter-terrorism measures mainly dealt with the countries that sponsored terrorists. This was done by imposing sanctions on them. The U.S. also enacted laws that assisted the U.S. citizens file lawsuits against the states that supported international terror groups. The measures saw a number of states reduce the support of international terrorist in 1990s. The international terror groups reduced their dependency on states, and this saw the third stage of which the congress and executive arm proposed and enacted laws that focused on specific non-states sponsors of terrorist. Terror attack in the U.S. on 9/11 was the turning point, the U.S. government created more effective organizations to deal with the issue of terrorism. They also became stringent in enforcement of laws about terrorism act. However, what has the U.S. done to improve their security measures in order to avoid the repeat of 9/11? The question is addressed on the next paragraph. According to a report from Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. has done more to defend the United States against any threats from any terror threats. They are working together with all communities across the U.S., public and private organizations to improve on security measures and assure the American that their rights are met. However, the U.S. DHS is not only using the set measures to prevent attacks, but they are also making improvements daily. It is because terrorism is an act that changes its tactics every day and any failure by the security department to mark those changes will be a disaster to any country under threat. Additionally, Department of Homeland Security, DHS, is working together with local community, local law enforcement officers and other people within the local and state to improve security. It is because, as explained by DHS; the threat can as simple as an improvised bomb or as bad as a biological weapon. In a sense, DHS says that security measures must be undertaken by every citizen in the United States. They also point out that security starts at home. Other preventive measures undertake by the U.S. to prevent attacks include building of homeland security enterprise; this include the provision of funds to DHS and training of law enforcers to recognize suspicious activities relating to terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security also works on other measures that prevent terror groups or suspects from entering the United States. The methods taken include advance passenger information, visa security programs, secure flight, explosive screening, and passenger vetting. For example, about advance passenger information, the DHS has averted many security threats by preventing suspected terrorist from entering the United States. This is done by providing the Department of Homeland Security with the list of passengers heading to the U.S. in advance under what is call Passenger Name Record. Biological, nuclear and radiological threats to the U.S. are under watch from the Department of Homeland Security. This has been done by deployment of sophisticated equipment on entry ports that are likely to smuggle point for biochemical or radioactive components. The equipment can detect and inform the authorities of any imminent threats to national security. Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib Guantanamo Bay is one of the prison centres that raised so much outrage across the world. Many people were calling for full closure of the prison identified as the centres where prisoners were kept without trial. They were also tortured to reveal what they did in relation to terrorism acts. According to Ivey (355), the first wave of prisoners was sent to Guantanamo Bay on January 2002. This was after the U.S. and its Allies launched military action in Afghanistan after the Taliban refused to hand over the Al Qaeda leaders responsible for the terror attack on Pentagon. According to the author, close to 10,000 prisoners were captured and detained by the U.S. military. On the date mentioned above, close to 700 prisoners from various nationals thought to be the prime suspects and instigators of terrorism acts against the U.S. were sent to Guantanamo Bay. In Guantanamo Bay, prisoners were kept in various prison centres based on their intelligence value and compliance. For example, the prison had camp 4, 5, 6, and 7. The prisoners who were kept in camp 4 were less dangerous than the ones in Camp 5, camp 6 were more dangerous than camp 5. Camp 7 was identified as the top secret prison camp that kept prisoners thought to be more dangerous than any other detainees in the camp (Ivey 357). The world leaders include the U.S. President Barack Obama was calling for the closure of the prison because of public outcry. The calls globally by the leaders, and non-governmental organizations and human rights activist for closure of Guantanamo Bay was because many cases of abuse of human rights were committed in the prison. The calls resulted from two human rights abuses; torture and detention without trial. According to Ivey (358), the U.S. Justice of Department issued a memorandum that authorized torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Quite a number of torturing techniques were employed in the prison against the detainees. For example, according to testimonies presented by detainees, torture techniques such as food denial, exposure to extreme heat and cold and isolation of prisoners in cold places for more than 30 days. Other torture techniques used against the prisoners according to the CIA was waterboarding. The author point out that the CIA admitted in 2008 to have used to torture prisoners. However, based on the three bodies of international laws, the United Nation Convention against Torture, the Customary Law of War and the Geneva Conventions, no person or prisoner of war should be subjected to torture regardless of their guilt. The United Nation Convention against Torture point out that torture should not be administered on any detainees or any other person whether a country is under threat of war. The Geneva Convention prohibits all cases of inhuman treatment of person or prisoners of war. The customary law also prohibits torture of a person deemed as prison of war (Ivey 359). However, the Bush administration argued that the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay cannot undergo the normal trial process. They explained that Guantanamo Bay was beyond the U.S. jurisdiction. This meant that prisoners detained in Guantanamo Bay would remain there for a long time without being tried in a court of Law. Abu Ghraib It was taken over by the U.S. after the fall of Saddam Hussein; the prison housed prisoners captured by the U.S. soldiers on patrol, mainly women, and young people. They were categorized into common criminals, prisoners suspected to have committed crime against coalition and the high-valued prisoners or insurgency. The prison personnel committed quite a number of abuses. The prison was headed by General Karpinski a former business consultant and army reservist who had previously served during the Gulf war. Various abuses were committed in Abu Ghraib. According to Hersh, various abuses were committed during the time of General Karpinski. This included pouring of phosphoric liquid to the prisoners, beating of prisoners with broomsticks, pouring cold water to detainees, threatening prisoners with military dog and sodomising of prisoners with objects such as broomsticks. The team found clear evidence formed to investigate the alleged torture of Iraqi citizens. The evidence includes photographs and videos; those were among other testimonies provided by the detainees. According to Hersh, the prisoners on Abu Ghraib prison were subjected to inhuman situation like homosexual acts and detainees posing naked in front of other people. This is no different from what happen in Algeria during French-Algerian war. One of the prisoners, Allege, who was among the captured prisoners during the war points out that they were subjected to harsh conditions. According to his report, prisoners were shocked with electricity during interrogation. They were also revoked of their clothing for days and sometimes weeks (Gift 13). However, based on the report by Grim, some of the U.S. political leaders saw torture as a way of reducing cases of terror attacks. Dick Cheney, former vice president of the U.S., explained that torture is a way forward that helps in apprehending the terrorist suspects. In response to his comments about torture, former U.S. interrogator who has been on military for 14 years shot down Cheney support of torture. Alexander Mathew had conducted close to 300 interrogations during his time in Iraq. He made a successful interrogation that led to capture of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Alexander explained what he learned during the interrogation of prisoners in Iraq. The captured prisoners explained that they were fighting the alliance and the U.S. forces in Iraq because of what they did to Muslim prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. Alexander says that torture and abuse should not be used as means of obtaining information from the suspects. It is because the United States will be regarded as hypocrites according to Alexander and in this case; the Al Qaeda wants to prove the U.S. is hypocritical by attacking them frequently (Grim). Western countries made various changes on laws about fights against the terrorist groups and nations abetting terrorist. More and more strict laws were enacted and put into force after the attack on the U.S. by the Al Qaeda on September 2001. The laws gave powers the states and law enforcers to prosecute terrorist. It also gave way for intelligence to spy on suspected terror groups. The laws enacted by a number of states were seen as important in fighting terrorism, this was driven by the results of September 2001 terror attack on the United States (Golder and Williams, 44). However, the impact of counter-terrorism laws on basic human rights such as the right to freedom of expression or right to silence has been provocative. Many people argue that the laws enacted to help in fighting terrorist are violating human rights. Some politicians point out that terror suspects are detained without being taken to court of law. Additionally, the laws are said to operate in a way that is quite different the normal legal systems. There is a view that human rights are disregarded by the laws formed to fight terrorist. Analysts argue that despite the view by the western countries that human rights should not be violated, things change when it comes to issues of national security. Laws addressing human rights are revoked or modified. Here are some of the laws enacted by the many western countries after the terror attack in the United States. The U.S. congress enacted and put into law the U.S.PATRIOT act, six weeks after the attack on U.S. September 2001. The passing of such laws was done in haste with less consideration on the effects of human rights. For example, based on the laws, the law enforcers such as the police are given more power to make surveillance and interrogate suspected terrorist. However, according to Golder and Williams (49), the international human rights in critical times such as fighting terrorism can be disparaged. For example, based on the Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on Human Rights and the Fight Against Terrorism (Guidelines) adopted by the council of Europe on July 2002, it is necessary for a state to take any measures to protect human rights. It states that a country under threat must take all measures to protect the rights of its citizens against any threat by a terrorist. Works Cited Department of Homeland Security. Preventing Terrorism and Enhancing Security. Progress Report, 2011. 2014. Print. Gift, Kristine. Algiers, Abu Ghraib, and the Persistence of Torture. Coe College. (n.d). Print Golder Ben and Williams George. “Balancing National Security and Human Rights: Assessing the Legal Response of Common Law Nations to the Threat of Terrorism.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 8.1 (2006): 43 - 62. Print. Grim, Ryan. “Former Interrogator Rebukes Cheney for Torture Speech (VIDEO).” Huff Post Politics 25 May 2011. Print. Hersh, M. Seymour. “Torture at Abu Ghraib.” The New Yorker 10 May 2004. Print. Ivey, Matthew. “A Framework for Closing Guantánamo Bay.” Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 12.32 (2009): 353-376.Print Kraft, Michael and Marks, Edward. U.S. Government Counterterrorism: A Guide to Who Does What. Washington, D.C: CRC Press, 2012. Print. White, Jonathan. Terrorism and Homeland Security. Ohio: Cengage Learning, 2013. Print. Read More