Understanding the War on Terror 2nd
War on terror has come a long way from when it started to its current state. Currently, it is a global war involving many countries led by the United States and the United Kingdom with other allies. It has influenced the lives of many people, with Americans being the most affected. In his book Understanding the War on Terror 2nd edition, Coaty provides detailed and opinionated information on the war on terror. From this book, one can understand the war better, namely how it has evolved over the years as well as where it is headed in the future from the changing policies all the time. War on terror can be traced back to the 1980s to the regime of Ronald Reagan when the government sought to sign in a legislation that would allow freezing of terrorist group assets. However, the war on terror changed after the September 11, 2001 attack on American soil. This marked a significant change in the war on terror. After the realization of the magnitude of damage that can be caused by terrorists, as well as the fact that it was conducted in one of the most secure nations, new strategies of fighting the war on terror were required. Nevertheless, the definition of the word terrorism has acted as a bigger influence on the approach used for tackling the terrorist as well as making policies.
It can be noted that there is no one agreed definition of terrorism that exists to lay a boundary for making policies meant for fighting terror. The policies of war on terror are made depending on the understanding of what is terrorism that influences what policies are put in place. The definition does not seek to give one meaning. On the contrary, many definitions state what can be considered terror. Politicians, on the other hand, decide on policies that are ideal for fighting terror. Thus, policies will be made according to the meaning of the word. This affects the way terrorism was dealt with in the past and present as a criminal act under both international and domestic laws. Therefore, these policies have caused a massive implication to all people involved internationally, including those that are recognized as criminals. Depending on the understanding of the word, some people might find themselves in anger of torture and even murder without trial depending on the policies put in place. It may be argued that both international and domestic policies on war on terror have been influenced by the meaning of the word, which has had quite a devastating implication to the whole world.
The September 11 attack on American soil changed the American understanding of terrorism. Prior to the attack, Americans have never had any fear of being attacked by the terrorist groups. It was considered a foreign affair that did not have much to do with the domestic issues. Because of the attack, Americans understood terrorism better, which evoked the government to reevaluate the past strategies on war on terror in order to make plans for future combating of terror. War on terror changed tremendously after the attack where Americans entered into war with Afghanistan, making a new dawn in the history of war on terror. All their policies were made regarding the attack, which has continued to influence the policies made by the United States. Moreover, considering the influence of the United States on the war on terror, the international policies are also influenced by the September 11 attack to some extent. A critical question that exists is why it is necessary to have an agreed definition of the term.
The main reason is that policies on fighting terrorism are made depending on the understanding of the term. When it is understood differently, different approaches will be used by different people. The danger posed by differing definitions can be illustrated by comparing the United States approach to the international criminal approach. The United States used torture as a way of dealing with the terrorist that was used as a policy. The torture was quite harmful to the victims who went through it. On the other hand, the international approach was different. These differences are caused by the difference in understanding of the word torture and severe pain. For instance, understanding of the word severe pain was different meaning that is excruciating pain and a condition of extended duration with certain persistence and intensity. This meaning influenced their torture on the terrorist detained. With such definitions of terms related to terrorism, policies made in the United States were different from the international ones.
The definition has been a consistent issue on the war on terror, where different definitions pose a great danger such as the one aforementioned. Therefore, one of the main reasons for seeking an internationally agreed definition of terrorism would be to have similar policies that would address the war on terrorism in a more humane manner without such means as torture. Some of the implications caused by the policies implemented are damage to America’s reputation. Using torture such as use of military dogs and death mocks, the United States witnessed its reputation on human rights and justice challenged. Such operations and policies on torture showed how inhuman the policies were. This was especially evidenced in the Guantanamo Bay prison. Additionally, taking prisoners to a third country in order to avoid legal protection that could be offered in America made its reputation dwindle.
Another implication caused by the policies because of differing definition is people who are considered terrorists. According to a number of definitions, terrorism is a political act of violence perpetrated by non-state groups. It is evident that bias tendencies have arisen from such definitions where only non-state groups are against the western interests. Those who support the western interests but commit similar crimes are not considered terrorists. This bias is caused by the differing definition that can be influenced any time to suit a certain policy. This can be evidenced by the fact that terrorists are supposed to exist in the despotic countries only that are against western ideologies. One of these countries is Saudi Arabia that is considered to harbor terrorists. However, when such groups exist in other countries allied to the western countries, this might not be considered as a terrorist action.
Considering the future of the war on terror, one should define the key elements in eliminating terrorism in the way mentioned above, through elimination of despotic regimes. Moreover, a strategy that can address the problems in countries that give rise to terrorists such as Somalia should be considered. Helping such countries ensures that the government can deal with terrorism within their own country, which increases the chances of winning the war on terror. Without self-sufficient governments in such countries that can help to control terrorists, it would be too hard to fight terrorism since new adherents to terrorism will continue to rise.
The key elements that are crucial in fighting the war on terror, in the current times, as well as in the future, are within state powers. These state powers include diplomacy with other countries, economic resources, intelligence, and information necessary for tracking and identifying terrorists, the military, and enforcement of the law. States that have all the five elements are in a better position to fight the war on terror than those lacking them. A majority of the countries where terrorists come from such as Afghanistan and Somalia lack most of these elements, making the states incapable of stopping terrorist activities within their own borders. Apart from these elements, cooperation between all countries wishing to fight in the war against terrorism is very important to compliment each other as well as give help to countries that cannot fight against terror without help.
Conclusively, the war on terror has evolved over the time with a serious focus after the September 11 attack in the United States when people understood what terrorism really meant, and the magnitude of destruction and insecurity it could cause the whole world. Since then, strategies on fighting the war on terror have continued to change rapidly, with many strategies focusing on identifying and stopping the terrorists as well as eliminating the terrorist groups such as al Qaeda. However, the major influence of policies on war is the definition of terrorism that determines the measures that are taken in combating it. This has proved to be dangerous and poses a serious implication due to lack of one agreed definition. Such dangers are the extent of dealing with the terrorists as evidenced in the torture cases. With an agreed definition, it would be easier to fight terrorism in a humane way without biasness. Fighting terrorism requires cooperation from all nations in order to combat it. Additionally, states need to improve their powers on the five crucial factors necessary for fighting terror. One definition should be agreed upon in order to have a set of agreed policies that can be used to deal with terror on a global scale rather than having each country such as the United States with its own definition that can cause negative implications. Consequently, the agreed definition should be the key while making policies on war on terror.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]