Security from Global Terrorism - Term Paper Example

Failed s and Global Security Introduction The number of failed s has continued to increase in the past several decades. Although there are no clear definitions of what a failed state is, the reality is that these states with too low economic and political instability are still a major concern in the world (Silva, 2014). The modern world has turned into a village in the wake of globalization, and in today’s world what happens in one geographical location has an effect on people who are halfway around the world from the location. Due to the interconnections of social, economic and political factors around the world, a negative change of any of these factors in any region affects the rest of the world. As a state fails or declines, it leads to lost economic opportunities for the rest of the world (Alperen, 2011). However, apart from the lost economic opportunity, such nations pose a security threat to the rest of the world. This is why the study of failed states has become an attention for many scholars as well as policy makers. Unfortunately, there are no enough studies done in the area with regard to how these states pose a security problem to the rest of the world. At the same, there are few policies by the global leaders such as United States of America and the UK on the issue of failed states with regard to their contribution to global insecurity. This paper looks at the issue of failed states and how they relate to insecurity. Failed states contribute to global insecurity in a number of ways, some of which are interconnected. While it is not possible to enumerate all of them, some are clear and obvious. Some of the most important factors with regard to how failed states increase threat of insecurity are as follows. Act as training ground for terrorists and extremist groups Failed states have been seen to be a training ground for terrorists and terror groups. Terror groups take advantage of the fact that there are no stable governments and security mechanisms in these nations and use that to create a good environment for their operations. A good example is Somalia where radical groups such as Al Shabaab have been seen to sympathize and work with Al Qaeda (Daniels, 2012). From these failed states, terror groups can plan their operations successfully without fear of being caught. As Menkhaus (2013) says, a look at the major terror groups in the world such as al Qaeda indicates that they only operate in the areas where there is no good government. The failed states present a double opportunity for these terror groups; Easy to operate in Failed states are a magnet for terror and extremist groups because these groups find it easy to operate in these nations. According to Rotberg (2005), these groups can easily operate in these nations because the nations’ security machine is not adequate enough to detect them and kick them off. A failed or failing state does not have a stable central government and this makes the environment conducive for terror groups to operate there. Secondly, as Satterthwaite and Huckerby (2013) argue, corruption is always high in failed states and the operators of these terror groups can always bribe through the systems. At the same time, the elitist groups in these nations, who seem to benefit the most from the instability, also support the terror groups. According to Patrick (2010), one of the major characteristics of a failed nation is the existence of elitist groups in these countries. These elitists groups have their own armies which they use to oppress their political enemies (both real and perceived). In this regard, these elitists groups act as a support for the terror groups and use these terror groups for their own advantage. This therefore creates a very good operating ground for the militias which are directly related to the world’s major terror groups. Needless to say, the fact that these nations aid these terror groups either directly or indirectly is an indication that they are a big threat to global security. These terror groups are a big threat to the world security and especially the west because they mostly against western policies. Easy to find recruits due to unemployment As Ingram and Dodds (2012) say, failed states also provide easy access to recruits for the terror groups. Apart from providing a good training ground for the terror groups to operate in, the failed and failing countries also offer ready human resource for the terror groups. This is because the failed stats always have the highest rates of unemployment. The high rates of unemployment have two main effects which make these to provide the human resource for the terror groups. First, high rates of unemployment make it easier for many youth to risk being members of these terror groups. Secondly, radicalization of youth in unstable countries is easier. In any failed state, such as Somalia, it becomes easy for the young people to be affiliated with radical groups (Siler, 2014). These youth are made to believe that they are the freedom fighters and that they have the responsibility to redeem their nation. In this regard, they are then trained and recruited into the system. This as Forest (2007) argues, poses a very big issue for the global security system. The significance of this threat can be seen in the fact that such recruits from these unstable counties are the ones who have been used in major terror attacks in around the world. The issue of failed states and their role in global insecurity is however a divisive one. There are a differing of views with regard to how failed nations relate global security threat. This is especially so with regard to the developed world. To begin with, there are those who believe that these nations are a liability to the West especially with regard to security issues. They see these nations as posing a great threat and that they need to be dealt with in a way that will lead to them being stabilized. Others on the other hand have different views. Another set of scholars and policy makers believe that although they agree that these unstable nations should be helped to stabilize, they don’t really offer a big threat to the world and there is no need to formulate comprehensive policies which involve these nations in the security strategy. The third group brings an even more interesting side of the debate about these nations. This third group is more of sympathizers with these nations and they see them as the victims, not the villains. As opposed to what mainstream scholars and policy makers see these nations as being a liability or the culprits; these people think that these nations have been used by the developed world for their own good. There are various theories which have been used to illustrate how these failed and failing states are just victims of the capitalism from the West. First, it is argued that the West see these nations as a market for products such as guns and other fighting equipment. By keeping these nations at war, it is possible to have them keep buying the weapons (Ghani & Lockhart, 2009). Although this particular theory is not very convincing, it does connect with another theory that seems to suggest that these nations are in fact victims of the Western capitalization. First, it is necessary to note that all these nations are nations with some very important natural resources. For instance, Nigeria has some of the richest oil reserves while democratic republic of Congo and Sierra Leone have the highest reserves for diamonds. It is argued that by keeping these nations that way and unstable, western corporations are able to exploit these resources at the lowest cost possible. In unstable countries, these corporations’ are able to get these natural resources easily without having to benefit the local communities. A good case in point is Sierra Leone which went in anarchy and civil war in the early 2000s which were directly connected to the availability of diamonds mines in the country. While these claims are not entirely provable, it does seem that for the greater part, these nations are as a much a victim to the developed world as they are a liability. It is not easy to argue that western government such as USA and UK would have a policy dedicated to make these nations unstable so they can benefit from their natural resources. Some have put forward this kind of a theory. However, as Biscop (2007) argues, while this theory does not stand on its own feet, it does however appear that the West has failed to act in the responsible way to prevent companies from the West to act as fuel to increase the conflict in these states. One of the ways to appreciate how the west is to blame for the conflict is that these failed states are in very serious civil wars where advanced war equipment such as guns, military tanks, bombs and grenades are used. Needless to say, these nations don’t produce this kind of equipment and it is only reasonable to argue that this equipment is imported from the west. This then brings in two main issues. First, it proves that these nations are more of victims as opposed to culprits. And secondly it proves that the West has been negligent in the way they control and regulate their businesses in light of protecting the world security. Support illegal trade (guns and weapons) These nations are also supportive of illegal businesses. Such businesses include the sale of illegal weapons as well as piracy. A good example here could be Somalia. Somalia has been in anarchy since two decades ago and has not had a stable government since then. The bad atmosphere has made it possible for all types of international criminals to operate in the country. Somalia is a country in the eastern African region with one of the longest cost lines. It has some of the best natural harbors in the world. At the same time, its location make is a very important trade route for goods transported by sea. This is because it borders Kenya which also has a very significant coastal line with regard to sea transport. Due to the instability in the nation, Somalia has become the home for sea pirates which terrorize and capture ships en route in the Somalia cost (Ploch, 2011). This as Murphy (2013) says, poses a major threat not only to trade but also to the global security. In the East, there have been major kidnapping by Somalia pirates who keep kidnapping foreigners especially from the west (Howard, 2010). The unstable nations also provide a market for illegal weapons which can then be used to instability the security in the world. From these arguments, one major conclusion can be made. That is, the unstable nations do provide a challenge to the world security, but not in the way that many people think. It can be agreed that these nations do provide a challenge but at the same time, they should not be seen as the culprits but as the victims. Having this kind of view will probably help in stabilizing them as opposed to if the other view is used. It should however be noted, as Mogire (2013) argues, that these nations are also free republics and also have a responsibility on their part to make sure that they have stability and relative peace. It also does seem, quite evidently, that the instability of these nations is directly linked to economic issues. These economic issues then directly connect to the western capitalism where big firms from the west are involved. In this regard, the west is supposed to be accountable and do their part as regard to how these nations should be stabilized. At the same time, proper foreign policy which directly tackles the issue of failed and failing states must be implemented in order to deal with the issue of terrorisms. References: Alperen, M. (2011). Foundations of Homeland Security: Law and Policy. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Biscop, S. (2007). The EU and the European Security Strategy: Forging a Global Europe. London, UK: Routledge. Daniels, C. (2012). Somali Piracy and Terrorism in the Horn of Africa. New York, NY: Scarecrow Press. Forest, J. (2007). Countering Terrorism and Insurgency in the 21st Century: International Perspectives, Volume 2, Combating the Sources and Facilitators, Volume 2. New York, NY: ABC-CLIO. Ghani, A. & Lockhart, C. (2009). Fixing Failed States: A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World. Oxford, Uk: Oxford University Press. Howard, T. (2010). The Tragedy of Failure: Evaluating State Failure and Its Impact on the Spread of Refugees, Terrorism, and War: Evaluating State Failure and Its Impact on the Spread of Refugees, Terrorism, and War. New York, NY: ABC-CLIO. Ingram, A. & Dodds, K. (2012). Spaces of Security and Insecurity: Geographies of the War on Terror. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Menkhaus, K. (2013). Somalia: State Collapse and the Threat of Terrorism. London, UK: Routledge. Mogire, D. (2013). Victims as Security Threats: Refugee Impact on Host State Security in Africa. London, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Murphy, M. (2013). Contemporary Piracy and Maritime Terrorism: The Threat to International Security. New York, NY: London, UK. Patrick, S. (2010). Weak Links: Fragile States, Global Threats, and International Security. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Ploch, L. (2011). Countering Terrorism in East Africa: The U. S. Response. New York, NY: DIANE Publishing,. Rotberg, R. (2005). Battling Terrorism in the Horn of Africa. New York, NY: Brookings Institution Press. Satterthwaite, M.L. & Huckerby, J. (2013). Gender, National Security and Counter-terrorism: Human rights perspectives. Londom, UK: Routledge. Siler, M. (2014). Strategic Security Issues in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Comprehensive Annotated Bibliography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Silva, M. (2014). State Legitimacy and Failure in International Law. New York, NY: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Read More