Counterterrorism Issues in the US - Essay Example

Counterterrorism: The United s of America and the International Community After 9/11 Since the September 11, 2001 incident that took more than thousands of innocent lives from the passengers of the hijacked plane and those who are just passing by the streets of New York and Oregon, questions then arose as why the terrorists were able to launch an attack that devastated the citizens of America and brought fear in the international community since it is an attack that was successfully and swiftly launch on a country that is considered as the most powerful nation ever existed in the modern era. In this regard, the American government took immediate measures at once to ensure that terrorism would not happen again, also, and the American government immediately implemented counter-terrorism precautions and laws that would aid them in their fight against terrorism. With this accord, the international community has find itself moving alongside with the American government in its campaign against terrorism. The American government, in connection of its campaign against terrorism and the people that were involved with the attacks, has tracked down the proprietors of the terrorist attacks in World Trade Center and Pentagon, the results of their investigations was that Osama Bin Laden and his terrorist group, Al-Qaeda, was behind the terrorist acts. Soon enough, Bin Laden was named as the world’s “most wanted criminal” and the American government swiftly launch an attack on Afghanistan were it is believed that the Taliban government hides Bin Laden and the rest of the members of Al-Qaeda. The assault to Afghanistan, as it was called, soon took place and Afghanistan was under American government since then. Aside from this, the American government has convinced other government to pursue hostility against any one who will commit terrorist acts. Countries that are being aided by the United States of America and the country’s original allies (ie. Great Britain) quickly joined the US in its fight against terrorism and soon afterwards, it seems that counterterrorism was newest trend of the new millennium. However, this paper will not focus its discussion on the attack in Afghanistan or on the war against Iraq; instead it will center on the discussion on the reaction and changes that occurred in the international community after the 9/11 incident. Also, not only will this paper will highlight on the changes outside the US but also the changes within the Bush administration and American government, especially on their immediate steps toward ratifying different laws about counter-terrorism and the start of their campaign against terrorist groups around the world, in which has greatly affected the future events from 2002 to the present. To some extent, Immigration status will also be discussed. In the end, the paper will create a simple analysis on how counter-terrorism was strengthened prior and after the 9/11 attack. Counter-terrorism, even before the 9/11, has been a big issue among the international community probably ever since the rise of Sicarii Zealots and Al-Assassin for almost two thousand years ago. US has been the main actor when it comes to promoting counter-terrorism so it is not obvious why did a terrorist group launched an attack in the US in September 11, 2001 were thousands of people died. According to B. Raman (2003), in his discussion about the non-governmental India-Russia-China Trialogue on security-related issues, the US considered as the most powerful nation in terms of security through its defense and military has found itself taken aback from the attacks that were launch onto them by a non-state actor, in which as we all know, brought the deaths of innocent people. As a result, a new perception about terrorism was brought by the 9/11 incident in the international community. Conviction and reflection from this incident can be seen as the UN Security Council resolution no.1373 was created (B. Raman, 2003). This resolution permitted them to frreze or suspends banks account of known terrorist group. Through collected actions taken by states that supported this resolution, it immediately affected movements some of the known terrorists. It did not entirely stop the attacks but hampered the movement of different terrorist groups around the world especially since financial funds deposited from banks around the world by known terrorist group were frozen. In Europe, the changes happened after the 9/11 did not differ from what the Americans did. They first strengthen their local forces to be prepared after what the hijackers did; they reinforce their airport security both local and international. Gathering intelligence was sped up though the help of countries and international negotiations all focus about countering terrorism was happening with major actors like North Atlantic Treaty Organization, United Nations and the US as its core. In addition, according to de Linde, et al. (2002), these actions created a productive atmosphere of harmonizing countries ready to repel or prevent any attack done by the terrorists. Unfortunately, not all European countries are the same when it comes to handling situation pertaining to terrorist attacks. Experience plays an important part against acts of terrorist groups since countries like Germany and United Kingdom can anticipate strikes from terrorists and retaliate at once because of attacks they have experienced domestically. It is also worth noting that some countries that have very little experience like Belgium and Netherlands are known to much safer place for terrorist groups since their laws have loopholes which make terrorist organization to some extent not illegal in their country (de linde, et al., 2002). Moreover, some of these countries viewed that their current framework and capabilities to counteract against terrorist attacks are still matched to any threat since there was revisions and additions made to enforce them. Such assumptions in this extent could be dangerous, for it might lead to another incident like the 9/11 where a terrorist group was able to launch an attack. This assumption is supported by some interviews and media reports, taken by de Linde and his group, has gathered that the level of urgency was much lower after the 9/11 incident (de Linde, et al, 2002). In these sense, we are to take the example of the United Kingdom where they are contented to some extent in their capabilities in controlling and determining terrorist attacks since they have been in a struggle against a certain terrorist group for more than a decade. However, it seems that they are not really that efficient since the conditions and situations are different this time. They are not able to determine the actions of the terrorist groups since they are now dealing with suicide attacks which they do not encounter frequently. Moreover, they are now facing terrorist group who are tightly connected with different terrorist groups from around the globe such as the case of the Jemaah-Islamiya and the Al-Qaeda network. It was also just recently that a regional counter terrorism unit was created (Clarke, 2007). Although this kind of unit would be a great help, the time that it took could have been resulted into different attacks such as what happen in Tel Aviv were two suicide bombers had launch an attack (Clarke, 2007). Even though it was way before the creation of a regional counter terrorism unit, it simply implies that during the time that there are no unit of this kind we could assume that the local force was having a hard time responding to alleged individuals who are involved in terrorist groups, especially since it is now common that natives of one country are working with terrorist group such as the case in some countries in south east Asia. Even though this seems as a bad sign, we cannot insist that the government officials are the one who are at fault. This attitude can be attributed to the lack of experience or training of government officials for terrorist attacks and preventions. However, though proper training and using different tactics, terrorist actions may be prevented like what the United Kingdom local police force and units who handle investigation have done some serious shifting in their methods of conducting investigation and tracking down possible terrorists. By developing a conscious balance between tracking down terrorist groups and ensuring public safety, they can measure the best chance to considering first the public safety; its best example was operation in Forest Gate 2006 (Clarke, 2007). By doing so, they were able to adapt with the prevailing behavior of attitude of terrorist groups, which is the use of surprise as their main advantage against their pursuer. But all of this could not happened if sharing of intelligence about known terrorist groups and their known locations have been a great help in preventing deaths and destructions to countries targeted by terrorist group. By creating a two way bridge, intelligence agency of different countries can relay each other vital information pertaining terrorist group. An example of this could be the situation in South East Asia, the known terrorist group that have been the source of many attacks on public place was the Indonesian based terrorist group known as Jemaah Islamiya. Aside from the Al Qaeda, the Americans has also its attention in this region since the terrorist group Jemaah Islamiya was heavily connected with them and have been known as coordinating joint training for young terrorists. Thus the U.S. has urge the countries in this region to actively participate In their campaign against terrorist, thus they have conducted several joint exercise to strengthen the capabilities of South East Asian countries against such as the case of the Philippines (Chanlett-Avery, et.,al 2004). In this situation, we can see clearly that, there is more than intelligence sharing involved even though some of these countries have their way of dealing these groups; new technique and knowledge have been added. Another one, let’s take a look on the experience of United Kingdom; they were able to establish two way connection between the police and the security service (Clarke, 2007). By having a free road of communication between these two, the job of locating terrorists can be achieved without having any casualties. Having the security service for the information gathering and the police for immediate action, then preventing possible attacks would be less difficult. Moving on, the American government after being devastated by the 9/11 attack has found itself reasserting its position and current condition with the emerging threat in the new millennium. Under their President Bush, they totally took the initiative to get back with the terrorists, much into the surprise of the international communities especially European countries who sympathize with what happen at the world trade center. Having a Unilateralist policy, they withdrew from international agreements and decide to rely in itself for actions (Weaver, 2006). Some of their actions were the immediate implementation of USA PATRIOT Act H.R. 3162, an act that could help in times threats from the terrorist. By suspending laws in time of national emergency, security personal could freely investigate and capture suspected criminals or terrorist and turned them for questioning (Weaver, 2006). It was criticize for having a different meaning other than aiding the security force during emergency. It was similar for declaring Martial Law for it suspends some human rights. The American government, although before they implement this law, have foreseen the necessary acts that should be taken once terrorist are known trying to launch an attack. Homeland security, a new federal agency was created during these times. Although it was a common knowledge that community protection was the responsibility of local government it was change when homeland security was created, it suddenly undermines how things worry naturally. The job that the local government usually handle was is now being shared by the federal government with much more power since they held upper positions and their decisions don’t normally affects small area and it usually affects every citizens. Also the function of INS (Immgigraiton and Nationalization Service) was transferred to this newly created department (Basmaji, Clephane, & Krebs, 2003). With this, the American government has it completely covered from every angle, thus enable them to be flexible enough to act in any kind of situation. Although it was not an issue in the beginning of the new millennium, immigration status became tighten after 9/11. Through the newly created homeland security, cooperation on a federal level basis can now be seen through bureaus responsible for immigration control and security measurement (Counihan, C.R. 2007). Anyone, caught suspicious enough can be detain and easily question. This act would improved their capabilities in preventing attacks. With those changes it only implies that the American Government is ready and currently in transition to cope up with any possible threat or future attacks. However, it only emphasizes the fear that the citizen, not the American government, have suffered when innocent lives were taken away in an instant. Although it look like too much, since human rights law to some extent are now being neglected and martial law seems like a minute away from happening but it is also a common believe that it is only temporary, just to relieve the stress of fear. The USA PATRIOT Act H.R. 3162 is not yet a permanent and revision to fully comprehend and justify its actions is still needed to be taken into account (Weaver, 2006). It will be less likely to happen while threats of terrorist groups like Al Qaeda are still in large and that possible attack in any given time is still possible. The on going “war against terrorism” is another reason why federal government had extensively empower itself, to be able to implement and show the sincerity of their “War” they must show that they are ready for everything, a role model for the international community. In the end, the 9/11 incident have brought enough pressure and sympathy around the globe that changes are taking place swiftly and terrorism is now viewed differently, it is much decentralized and attacks are carried out like it was a holy mission. Some laws are revised and some were implemented to prepare for possible attacks and prevent another incident similar to 9/11. However, laws were known to have side effects and it is certainly present in these revisions and implementation of laws that happen after the 9/11. One of them like the USA PATRIOT Act H.R. 3162 has been put into question by critics internationally and within America itself. The basis for these critics was based from the point of view of many people that laws, not just this USA PATRIOT Act H.R. 3162, as stated above was made to overlap civic rights and neglect them during national emergency. However, it does not undermine that there were no positive effects that were made. In reality, new experiences were brought to different countries by countries that are capable or experienced in countering terrorist acts, performing joint exercise and seminars like the one stated above. Terrorism did evolve and the whole world notices that after 9/11, and most of them know that people behind these attacks were one step ahead of them. Counterterrorism, on the other hand in the new millennium have improved though the active involvement of more than one country and collective actions taken by organizations around the world, example would be the united nations with its Security Council resolution no.1373. Collective actions to prevent terrorist attacks have resulted into negotiations and agreement between countries. Counter terrorism have open new path for countries to interact with each other and to some extent, have a dialogue aside from counterterrorism that could be effective in the near future Counterterrorisms have further evolved by having countries bonded by a single goal and that is to prevent and stop terrorist attacks in happening. The 9/11 may be considered as tone of the great tragedies that would haunt the new millennium but it resulted to a more united international community under one goal. Reference Basmaji, D.H., Clephane, D.A, Krebs, P.J (2003). The times they are changing practical immigration tips on changes after 9/11. Pp.1-2 Chanlett-Avery, E., Cronin, R., Manyin, M., Niksch, L., Vaughn, B. (2004). Terorism in Soutehr East Asia. Pp 1-2 Clarke, P. (2007). Learning from experience – Counter terrorism in the UK since 9/11.pp 3-6 De Linde, E.V., de Spiegeleire S., de Vries H., Lindstorm, G., Oibrien, K., Vayrynen M. (2002). Quick scan of post 9/11 national counter-terrorism policymaking and implementation in selected European countries. A research project for Netherlands Minsitry of Justice, pp. 4-7 Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. (2007). American Immigration policy since 9/11: Impact on Muslim Immigrants. Michigan, Counihan C.R. South Asia Analysis Group. (2003). COUNTER-TERRORISM: India-China-Russia Co-operation. New Delhi. Raman, B. Weaver, G.R. (2006). 9-11 A challenge to traditional American beliefs and values. Kokusai Bunka Kenshu (Intercultural Training) 50, pp. 12-20. Read More