The New Global Terrorism - Book Report/Review Example

A Summarization and Understanding of the Themes in “The New Global Terrorism” Introduction The world on September 11th 2001 stared in disbelieve as terrorist ruined the W. T. C and the Pentagon in New York City and Washington respectively. These actions by the terrorists stimulated fresh and insightful thinking on terrorists and what drives them to their action. It also brought fresh thinking in collegiate instructions; in global affairs and state security. The attack led to a rethink of the organization of security that culminated in revision and reconstruction of conventional coverage of global terrorism. The wake of the September attack and the response to the interests led to an expansion in the topic of global terrorism. Terrorism as a topic offers new issues and realities for the world. The book, “The New Global Terrorism” by Charles Kegley is a collection of essays on terrorism. The book aims to help individuals or the reader grasp the current themes in terrorism and the war on terror (Kegley, 2002). The book has many themes from the essays by the diverse commentators on terrorism issues. However, the main themes that come out include international terrorism, the causes of terrorism, religion and terrorism, counterterrorism, scientific terrorism and reconciliation as a tool for ending terrorism. Terrorism Modern day international terrorism seems hard to comprehend and counteract. It leads to confusion that envelops the violence and concepts produced by its actions. However, a working definition can be reached for international terrorism. Terrorism involves the use of violence or force to compel a government or entity into doing or not doing something. International terrorism involves the use of terror on an international scale to pursue an agenda. This means that the terrorist do not perpetrate the actions on their home countries, but rather on a foreign state (Kegley, 2002). The terrorist’s purpose in this case involves inhibition through violence or force. International terrorism pressurizes the government and its agencies directly or indirectly; directly through actions and overt threats and indirectly though fear in the people. In most cases, international terrorism targets citizens rather than installations though both targets have symbolic value. The killing or kidnapping of people has a higher force multiplier than bombing of airplanes, building or institutions. Terrorist attacks have a characteristic of being choreographed to attract media attention. Mostly, international terrorism targets the people watching and not the victims (Kegley, 2002). Terrorists pursue different objectives and employ different methods to achieve these objectives. Terrorist cannot be defeated in the context of defeating an enemy in the war. Therefore, measures should be put, in place, to prevent as many terrorist activities as possible. Terrorist attacks are varied and unconventional; therefore, counterterrorism should focus on adding and extending available terrorism doctrines (Gage, 2011). It is also difficult to defend against terrorism because the terrorist’s objectives lie outside the defender’s control. Terrorists have the advantage of surprise attacks as witnessed during the September 11th attack. Even if, the defender expects attack, they cannot predict the precise location, timing, type and extent of the attack. Therefore, to defend against terrorist activities, one requires an awareness and understanding of the unconventional terrorist warfare. Knowledge on terrorist tactics, motivation and method of operation are also required. This, in turn, needs reliance on advanced, defensive technology and intelligence operations (Kegley, 2002). Another dynamic of terrorism is the state sponsored terrorism. State sponsored terrorism changes the dimension of terrorism and escalates terrorist’s activities. This results from availability and access of weapons to the terrorists because the state avails this to them. However, state sponsored terrorism can be easily identified compared to small terrorist units. It will be noted that use of force against terrorism leads to increase in terrorist activities. However, defense against terrorism should not fear escalation, but should act in the interest of the citizens (Kegley, 2002). The Causes of Terrorism The September 11th terrorist attacks in U.S and the subsequent attacks in Riyadh, Istanbul, Madrid and Mumbai among other cities intensified concerns on terror threats and led to renewed understanding of the causes of terrorism. Currently, and in history, divergent views have existed on the causes of terrorism. It has been argued that terrorism results from globalization, religious believes, growing population, poverty, urbanization and political differences. These perspectives reflect political, religious and philosophical differences and they affect comprehension of threats and response to terrorism. Terrorism has diverse and complex causes. Terrorism has been executed under the banners of ethnicity, nationalism, ideologies, abortion and religious issues (The United States President, 2011). Terrorism occurring on the context of a political action cannot be excluded from historical contexts or be treated as a common phenomenon. Terrorism has been used as an approach based on political discontent, used in service of different doctrines and believes. This strategy has been used to sustain and legitimize violence. Ideologies associated with revolution, nationalism, defense and religion have all inspired terrorism. Terrorism mainly occurs from elite disaffection. Terrorism has a higher likelihood of occurring with the collusion of elite dissatisfaction and mass passivity. Discontent is not severe or generalized to the extent of provoking terrorist action. Terrorism in itself does not represent mass discontent. It represents dissatisfaction of a fraction of the elite who assume the responsibility of acting on behalf of the majority. This discontentment could be political, economical, social or religious. The discontent, no matter its subjectivity is usually blamed on the government or a superpower. In addition, government actions that waver and show inconsistencies between repression and tolerance seem to encourage terrorism (The United States President, 2011). Religion and Terrorism Terrorism has had some bearing towards religion. Religion motivated terrorism has a predominant religious influence and character. In modern times, and with the decline of monarchy and rise in nationalism, terrorism has been influenced by nihilism, anarchism and revolutionary politics. However, since 1980s, terrorism has been motivated by religion. After the cold war, terrorist acts in the name of religion have presented a security challenge to nations. All the same, religious terrorism could be considered as incidental factor and geopolitics. Many questions regarding the role of religion rose following the September 11th attack. Religious terrorism lacks a military goal, but tries to draw the world into a cosmic war. This is evident from various other terrorist attacks that have been motivated by religion. Religious terrorism provides challenges in security because its enemies become demonized (The United States President, 2011). Radical religious movements emerging from cultures of violence have three common elements. They reject secular institutions and liberal values. These religions also refuse to respect the secular boundaries set around religion. The radical religious movements create forms of religiosity that rebuff modern institutes that provide alternatives to the demanding and vibrant forms of religion. For instance, one of the bombers of the W.T.C in 1993 confessed his realization that he could not compromise Islamic integrity with the vice in the society. Religious terrorism as perpetuated by al-Qaeda and other radical groups, mainly, attack secularism. This results from the failure of social institutions that lack reality. These institutions arise from the collective trust of individuals who devalue symbolic capitalism (Kegley, 2002). Counterterrorism Counterterrorism involves strategies put, in place, to counter terrorism. These include both preventive and retaliatory strategies. Because of the diversity of terrorism, it is usually difficult to compel the terrorist to stop their activities. Therefore, preventive measures provide the best tools for countering terrorism. In preventing terrorism, intelligence provides a vital devise for studying terrorist activities and devising methods of countering these activities. Use of force against terrorists serves to increase their activities. Governments need to devise strategies for approaching terrorism and countering the threats. However, as governments counter terrorism, they need to note that they are not at war with any religion or populations of people, but they strive to end the threats posed by terrorist activities. An efficient counterterrorism strategy is one that has a multinational and multidepartment effort that shadows intelligence, law enforcement and military functions. The fight against terrorism usually involves an integrated, broad and sustainable campaign that harness many tools of a nation’s power especially its military, values, and civilians. The counterterrorism efforts also involve concerted efforts of partners, allies and multilateral institutions. All counterterrorism efforts need complementation from broader capabilities such as development, strategic communication, diplomacy and the private sector. It is the responsibility of the governments from which international terrorist emerge to fight the terrorists from within its boundaries. If left to grow, terrorism could lead to unstable governments as seen with Afghanistan. Counterterrorism apparatus should not fear retaliation from the terrorist, but instead, they should push the terrorists to their limits, in the process crippling them and making them incapable of retaliating. An effective counterterrorism strategy has an ambitious dimension and scope, consummate synchronization and coordination and unswerving determination and dedication. It should also incorporate professionalism to ensure success (Kegley, 2002). Scientific Terrorism Scientific terrorism includes biological weapons and nuclear threats. Science has been exploited for both peaceful and hostile purposes. Biology and nuclear sciences offer the greatest threats to humanity from terrorist. Biotechnology is rapidly becoming a dominant technology in this century. Bioterrorism provides new methods of perpetrating terror attacks without necessarily using bombs or kidnappings. One case of bioterrorism is the 1984 contamination of salad eatery with Salmonella typhimurium. This bacterium attacks the stomach lining leading to cramps and diarrhea. Bioterrorism can also use more deadly biological means like anthrax on populations, which causes massive infections and deaths. Gases can also be used in biological terrorism (The United States President, 2011). The contamination of the salad bars in 1984 led to 750 people falling sick, though it did not lead to any death. This attack portrayed a society vulnerable to biological weapons attack. Biological terrorism is difficult to establish as evident from the contamination, because it took the government one year to confirm that the contamination did not result from natural causes. Terrorists have an easy access to these agents, increasingly threatening global peace and stability. Elaborate detection of biological weapons during their advance stages, that is, before leading to large scale deaths have not been developed. Most nations are not prepared of biological agents arracks. Most lack methods for predicting biological agent usage in urban area, and assessing the areas already exposed to the agents. Early detection and quick response to bioterrorism depend on cooperation between law enforcement agents and public health authorities (Kegley, 2002). Reconciliation as a Tool for Ending Terrorism Governments offer concessions to ideologically heterogeneous terrorist groups. The moderators within the terrorist organizations mostly accept the concessions. However, after accepting the concession, the organization falls in the hands of extremists. Reconciliation offers a highly effective strategy in countering terrorism. It offers an opportunity to the terrorist and the victims to reconcile and resume a harmonious relationship. Concessions and reconciliation in most cases ends the bloody confrontations between the two groups. Following concession, the terrorist organization disintegrates, but may fall in the hands of opportunistic extremists. This group increases chances of militarism and potential violence on a larger scale. By reconciling, the former terrorists can become useful in fighting against terrorism. This increases the chances of governments in eradicating terrorism. Governments put strategies for ending terrorism and armed insurgency. In this century, governments have responded to armed insurgency and terrorism in a varied manner, different from confrontation and war. Governments have been involved in peace negotiations, concessions and military crackdown. However, the fact that the government is willing to reconcile with terrorists shows an open forum for ending terrorism in a non-violent way. Notable concessions have been given by governments throughout the world; granting of partial autonomy to the Basque separatists and the Israeli negotiations with the Palestinians provide few cases in point. The conciliatory approach to terrorism raises questions on the government’s objectives of pursuing counterinsurgency and conciliatory strategies, and the factors that affect the conciliatory efforts (Gage, 2011). Conventional wisdom dictates that governments should not bargain with terrorist. These preferences for repressive and coercive responses rest on rhetorical instead of analytical characteristics of terror issues. However, when considering conciliation as a tool, two models come out; the rational actor and the war model. The models fail to prevent conciliatory advances, but they incorporate them. For policy makers, the preference for repression holds them such that they fail to consider the determining factors of appropriate concessions and negations. Ill considered repressions stand as many risks as ill considered concessions. Conciliatory and repressive responses should be seen as mutually exclusive and complementary to the overall strategy of conciliation. The negative effects of immediate concessions can be overcome by increased repressive and defensive measures. They may also be offset by long term strategies of concession. Tactical factors can also influence the choice of a conciliatory strategy (Gage, 2011). Conclusion Terrorism provides threats to global peace and stability. September 11th terror attack occurred on a scale the world could not imagine. The book, “The New Global Terrorism” provides insights into terrorism through the different articles it encompass. Terrorism is not a new occurrence, but it has grown in magnitude and perpetration during this century. Terrorism uses force to compel governments or people to take certain actions. International terrorism occurs on an international scale where terrorists from a different country attack another country. Different countries use different counterterrorism strategies. However, most countries prefer counter insurgency, which also applies military force on people believed to carry out the terrorist activity or their supports. However, conciliation offers a crucial tool in countering terrorism because of its non-violent and negotiation nature, though conventional wisdom dictates that terrorists should not have grounds for negotiations. References Gage, B. (2011). Terrorism and the American Experience: A State of the Field. The Journal of American History. Page 73-80. Kegley, C. (2002). The New Global Terrorism: Characteristics, Causes, Controls. Prentice Hall. 1st Edition. Page 5-275. The United States President. (2011). National Strategy for Counterterrorism. The White House. Page 3-26. Read More