Introduction
Terrorism involves the use of force unlawfully against the government or people to intimidate or force them to accept some political, religious, or social ideas that align with that organization (Joppke & Sneller, 2017). Many terror groups have unleashed horror on people in the United States and other countries worldwide. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks worldwide. Acts of terror by those loyal to ISIS and its ideologies have caused the death of innocent people and wounded many others.
The US uses several instruments in counter-terrorism, which include military force, diplomacy, intelligence, the criminal justice system, disruption of finances, and other tools necessary for action. The US and its allies intensified attacks on ISIS bases and areas of control, assassinated ISIS leaders, reclaimed regions captured by the group, cut off their supply of funds, and imposed restrictions on travel to Syria and Iraqi to silence.
Alternative approaches to counter-terrorism are necessary as military use has its negative effects, especially on human rights. Through the Inter-American Convention against Terrorism, members cooperate in prevention, combating, and eliminating terrorism. Member states resolved to use criminal justice and exchange valuable information, adopt best practices, as well as, provide finances and technology necessary for fighting Violent Extremists (VE). These practices adopted are laid down through policies by the Global Counter-Terrorism Forum (GCTF), which emphasizes the application of criminal justice and the use of counter-narratives and other activities for positive results, instead of violence. In conclusion, the use of military response as a way to counter-terrorism has had its negative side, especially on human rights. It is better to adopt a less violent approach and use criminal justice, with emphasis on counter-narratives and activities for positive results.
The US and Terrorism
The US faces a growing threat from terrorists, which has become more dynamic with the groups using multifaceted tactics and technologies to achieve their agenda. Extremists such as ISIS use various methods to abolish Western influence in Muslim regions by enforcing sharia law by taking advantage of wars, weak governments, and political and religious differences. Radical organizations such as ISIS have their form of governance and have been able to penetrate the US and carry out attacks from inside. They use the state of the art media to recruit fighters, sophisticated explosives, and move funds unnoticed. The US, therefore, should formulate policies that respond to terrorist attacks to stop such extreme occurrences and find alternative ways to curb their recurrence in the future.
Background of US and Terrorism
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) aimed at establishing an Islamic state that adhered to strict sharia law (Rowen & McNiff, 2017). Many countries had to increase security to stop their citizens from joining the fight in Iraqi and Syria. ISIS was formerly headed by a self-proclaimed caliph known as Abu Bakr al Baghdadi who died in 2019. The organization gets its finances from extortions, selling oil and taxation in areas under their control, looting, and funds from wealthy individuals in the Middle East and around the globe. These individuals and organizations are opposed to the suppressive Assad government.
ISIS has claimed many lives and caused lots of destruction globally. In the past year, the group claimed to have killed 3,665 people globally. In their al-Naba newsletter, the terror group gave a chronology of events on the murders with Iraq leading at 1,458, Syria 1145, Afghan at 356, Sinai 228, and others, such as West Africa, Yemen, and Somalia (Johnson, 2019). The terror group used explosive devices, assaults, assassinations, sniper operations, ambushes, and suicide bombers. Vehicles and homes were destroyed, as well as bases and barracks. There were wildfires and crops of great economic value-destroying of which is just the start as noted in the newsletter.
The Bush administration emphasized fighting terrorism after the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center. A similar abortive attack had happened in Pennsylvania, which had led to the crash of a jetliner. The Bush administration aimed at destroying all forms of terrorism through various methods including, apprehending terrorists or having them killed, cutting off their support base and infrastructure, and counterattack on the terrorists and states that facilitate or harbor them (Joppke, 2015). The war on terror changed the country’s way of relating to others and made fighting terrorism a top priority, which displaced other competing priorities.
How the US Responds to Terrorism
Rumors and anxieties in anticipation of attacks have led the US to adopt the strategy of anticipation, prevention, preparedness, and warning to prevent future terrorist attacks. Preparedness is done by government bodies and the civilians as well and exhausts all forms it needs to take. Meaning, anticipating the assaults in one way or multiple methods, having a proper response for the situation, specifying roles of different agencies involved, developing backup alternatives, forecasting possible assaults targets, and cooperation is necessary. Research on new forms of targets and warning mechanisms requires the availability of communication networks that are not complicated to enable reporting of suspicions and observation.
9/11 impacted the American defense policy, which underwent reviews and had a huge budget allocation to increase and acquire new military technologies, acquire fighter jets through procurement programs, and missiles defense. New security measures for defense and homeland security policies were also put in place to protect the US and its citizens from enemies. The Department of homeland security was created through congress, and guidelines were put in place. Intelligence had to be beefed up, and different departments were created to deal with the information gathered. The policies had a lot of concerns on safety, discrimination on race and religion, and also raised suspicions as Americans were encouraged to report any suspicious person or activities.
A partnership-based approach has been used by both the Obama and Bush administrations to solve conflicts with the Islamic State. Also, changes to the US military procedures and assistance programs have been effective. A global coalition where countries cooperated in lines of effort to fight and defeat ISIS involved engaging in direct military combat, offering support to partner ground forces in Syria and Iraqi, eliminating the group’s leaders. Other methods included collecting and sharing intelligence, restricting the movement of foreign troops, and disrupting the flow of finances in ISIS (Blanchard & Humud, 2018). Even with the cooperation between countries that were marked with lines of efforts, ISIS and its affiliates continued their assaults in Iraqi and Syria, causing terrors all over the globe as they were not eliminated. The ISIS leaders are still at large as not all of them were killed. In 2014, ISIS lost ground though the challenge lies in reconstruction and governance of recaptured regions. The US policymakers are mainly concerned with consolidating gains and eliminating any issues that could lead to a renewal of conflicts.
Alternative Approaches to Counter-Terrorism
The interventions used to counter-terrorism have not made the world peaceful or managed to stop terror attacks. The use of military responses to counter-terrorism has affected human rights and resulted in offensive retaliation, inequality, bad governance, and increased conflicts. It is, therefore, essential to research and implement strategies that reduce conflicts and promote peace and human rights in conflict regions keeping in mind the safety of the people.
The Violent Extremist Action Plan presents approaches to counter-terrorism in different regions around the globe. America, which has experienced its share of attacks held a convention, the Inter-American Convention against Terrorism, under the Organization of American States (OAS) that discussed Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) and areas of priority. Emphasis was placed on increasing security, the use of criminal justice, cutting off financial bases and support for these organizations, and eradicating VE behavior through regional cooperation. A third of the members of OAS approved the convention by 2018. Convection aimed to promote cooperation with members working towards preventing, combating, and eliminating terrorism and other crimes associated with it through exchanging valuable information, adopting best practices, and access to financial and technical assistance. Security-wise, weapons of mass destruction should be kept away from reaching extremists
. The Global Counter-Terrorism Forum (GCTF) has also laid down policies that relate to good practices, which should be adopted globally to prevent or counter VE by applying criminal justice. The Memorandum of good practices was established in 2014 to respond to the increasing number of foreign fighters that join these extremist groups, and these practices are also included in the Security Council Resolution (Global Counterterrorism Forum, 2014). Good practices that are adopted in action against VE include developing a long-term trustful relationship with communities vulnerable to recruitment and offering alternatives to violence for those in need through positive narratives and activities.
Other good practices cover producing counter-narrative content on social media, getting vulnerable people involved in the counter-narratives, and avoiding stereotyping VE. Besides, facilitation and recruitment need to be detected early and stopped through creating awareness for communities to be resilient to VE, have intelligence and gather information on recruitment activities, and send across the right message on CVE against radicalization. Measures should also be put in place to curb traveling to fight in conflict regions through analyzing, detecting, screening, and monitoring cross-border activities. Finally, the information should be gathered to apprehend those returning from war zones and recruitments, evidence collected for security purposes, and frameworks laid to rehabilitate returnees based on their conditions.
Conclusion
The response to counter-terrorism through military force has not proved to bring the issue to an end. It worsens the situation as human rights are violated, and more damage is done to regions. A more justified and humane way to handle this concern is through the use of alternatives. Using criminal justice as a measure to deal with VE can limit the loss of life and destruction of property. Counter-narratives and activities propelled towards positive outcomes can also be effective in conflict areas.
Reference
Blanchard, C. & Humud, C. (2018). The Islamic State and U.S. Policy. Congressional Research Services. Web.
Global Counterterrorism Forum (2014). “Foreign Terrorist Fighters” (FTF) Initiative The Hague – Marrakech Memorandum on Good Practices for a More Effective Response to the FTF Phenomenon
Joppke, C. (2015).The Secular State Under Siege: Religion and Politics in Europe and America. Polity.
Johnson, B. (2019). ISIS Claims 3,665 Attacks Worldwide Over the Past Year. Homeland Security Today. Web.
Joppke, M., & Sneller, R. (Eds.). (2017). The root causes of terrorism: A religious studies perspective, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Rowen, B., & McNiff, C. (2017). Sunni militants terrorize countries all over the world in their bid to implement an Islamic state. Infoplease. Web.
Smelser, N. J., Mitchell, F., National Research Council (U.S.)., & National Research Council (U.S.). (2002). Terrorism: Perspectives from the behavioral and social sciences. National Academies Press.