Issues in International Policy Part3
ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL POLICY Term Project 2 PAGE 1
ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL POLICY PAGE 7
Issues in International Policy Term Project 2
An Tagashira
PUP3052
Professor Torres-Spelliscy
June 23rd, 2019
Issues in International Policy
All over the world, states and countries are breeding, leaving in a state of fear, confusion, and restlessness bound by the uncertainty of their next moment. Most of such individuals and citizens are worried about what will happen to them or their close friend in the next moment. As it is believed, harm to one individual is a harm to the whole humanity and so threats to one nation on unlawful attacks is a threat to the whole world. The current situation brings us to the very common term recently known as terrorism. Terrorism is defined as the use of force or violence unlawfully against an individual or property to coerce or intimidate a government and its people to further and pass certain social and political objectives. Terrorism can be international or domestic as recognized by law enforcement. Terrorism can be contacted and carried out within the confinement and borders of a country by its own citizens or connected with foreign groups or governments (Hymans, 2013). Both of the types have been reported in different parts of the world. The issue has hit the world so heavily to the extent of being declared as a national disaster. Most of the powerful states such as the USA, Britain, France, and Israel have come into play to end the issue of terrorism. It is very clear their efforts have produced some desirable results in distracting and stopping many possible attacks aimed at innocent citizens in different parts. However, the terroristic groups are continually advancing in terms of their military training, and weapons assisted by the supporting nations mainly the Islamic states.
Terrorism is more of a tactic than an ideology which is aimed at achieving a specific end. The individuals adopted this system to fight and win asymmetric power struggles. The move has been adopted to cause fear in the population targeted. The result has been a violent response by the government’ of the people affected resulting to even great problems to innocent souls. There has been a cycle of terroristic attacks which need for more established strategies to disrupt. The terrorism fight and war have seen a great turn of events. The Islamic States which firmly support these terroristic activities have shifted into using the internet and the media to recruit followers, spread fear and affect public opinion. Some of the terroristic groups include al-Qaeda, Al Shabaab, Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), Islamic Army of Aden (IAA), Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), among other groups are still a great security threat to national levels and they ought to be fought commonly with well-established international laws and policies (Argomaniz, 2011). Most of the terroristic groups have got different ways of justifying their bloody and deadly acts by basing them on religious beliefs or spiritual principles inspiration, races, perceived political, social and economic unfairness. Al-Qaida and IS justify their violent actions through claims of fighting a holy war known as Jihad as a crusade against nonbelievers. The terroristic activities can be said to have reduced, a factor which can be attributed to different states and countries to come up with ways of dealing with the plans and attacks. most of these countries have been forced to invest heavily on the betterment of their security through military action, training, and powerful weapons acquisition. To outshine an enemy, the states must be prepared fully and much better on how to respond in case of an attack.
Some world data in 2014, most of the terroristic attacks were highly reported in Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, and Iraq. The death toll worldwide from terroristic attacks in the U.S is around 2.2 percent which brings out the reason why she is in the front line in fighting the terror war. Al-Qaida and IS are the most responsible for the organized group attacks in Western countries combined with the “lone wolf” (Weiner, 2015). The U.S has been on the frontline towards establishing a foreign policy towards countering terrorism. The past three presidents of United States could be hardly more different in terms of political orientation, life experience, worldview, and temperament but all of them devoted their period in power towards the same goal which is countering terrorism. The war against terrorism is not a United States deal but it is a global war on terrorism. Some of the moves by the U.S initially included the Afghanistan and Iraq surveillance of U.S citizens, costly and prolonged military campaigns (Cronin, 2012). Barack Obama was opposed to Bush’s excess use of power and overstating costs in the fight. He instead advocated for increased transparency about civilian casualties and clearer guidelines for the use of force. President Obama attempted to end ISIS and dramatically increased the use of drone strikes as a security and military action to threats. President Donald Trump has played up the terrorist threat with alarmist rhetoric thus escalating counterterrorism operations all over the globe. His policy is targeting the Islamic states by banning Muslims from entering the United States, a move that can be interpreted into Muslims being the face of terrorism. There has been no broad agreement on a foreign policy priority aimed at countering insecurity focusing on terrorism.
The fact that Europeans are getting radicalized making them travel abroad to join terroristic groups tells the world how far it is towards security stability. A comprehensive approach and long term commitment are required for an effective response. The member states hold the primary responsibility in the fight against terrorism. The cross-border nature of the threat calls for the European Union to play a supportive role in framing and structuring policies for the fight (Argomaniz, 2011). The European Union Council is entitled to developing both internal and external lines of action which are comprehensive responses. The key prioritized issues by European Union (EU) following the Paris attack in January 2015 in a statement to guide its work were, ensuring the security of citizens, cooperating with international partners and preventing radicalization and safeguarding values (Weiner, 2015). The key EU’s security milestones were improved firearms control, criminalization of terrorist offenses, Reinforced checks at external borders, New Commissioner for the Security Union, improved information exchange, Fight against online radicalization, Strengthened cooperation with third world countries and establishment of a European counterterrorism center.
Global politics and economics revolve around the global war on terrorism for it poses a great challenge to the world as a result of the attached unpredictability of future events. The very question that has permeated our lives is on how we can enhance our security. The worry is caused by a small percentage of the world’s population constituting to a small band of terrorists. Anything that the harmless citizens are planning on a daily basis is it a holiday, the very factor to be considered is security, how safe are the routes and if they will make it safe to the destination. The different nations have dedicated most of their resources towards acquiring sophisticated machines to tighten their nuts on security both on territorial waters, borders, and airspace. Day and night surveillance in the airports by use of different apparatus has been implemented (Hymans, 2013). Some international relations between different nations have been weakened by the implementation of harsh policies concerning immigration. For instance, America and Mexico are in bad stale following the move by America to build a parametric wall between the two nations. The immigration policies have been tightened leading to long queues, great human suffering and even abuse as far as human rights are concerned in the different immigration offices all over the world. All these measures are aimed at boosting security and make the nations terrorist-free zone. Regardless of these measures, the threats on terrorism have remained live for some of the victims are here with us, they are part of the community and take part in domestic level attacks. The nations have been sent to great public debts as a result of high costs incurred on military training and arms.
The United States as a superpower and a key player in maintaining world peace has incurred great expenses on arms, FBI and other military forces training over the years. The FBI is tasked in great roles of acquiring and following any information about the different operations being run by the terrorists, who are their financiers and their targets. Following the Al-Qaeda attacks to the U.S has made her mad over thwarting any other possible attack in the future (Weiner, 2015). The European Union is worried about nuclear energy technology which is at disposal and can be accessed easily by these terroristic groups. There are different measures which are getting taken to control the extremes of nuclear energy production and use though some nations have been accused of cheating in implementing the passed on policies. The international laws on terrorism are a factor of international relations as determined by how the world’s civilized nations collectively fight against terrorism. The war on Iraq presents more threat to world peace and a good avenue for terroristic activities. The threat of weapons of mass destruction from Iraq and even North Korea calls for the United Nations Security Council to reach a majority consensus on the best way possible on their elimination and control. Lack of consequences on the United Nation’s series of resolutions demanding Iraq’s disarmament over 12 years past raises the relevance of UN-sponsored diplomacy question (Turner Jr, 2013). It is thus clear that the policies should be inclusive of some consequences in case a certain nation goes against the agreement.
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that was reached by Iran, the European Union and other six other countries is an example of these world policies (Hill, 2015). The JCPOA policy comes at the right time when it is very urgently needed and its implementation goes uncompromised and if possible more stern measures added. Irrespective of the varied views presented by President Trump and Obama on the issue, to avert terrorism and promote world peace which they claim to be promoting too, then the word should be yes to JCPOA and any other policy. The consequences which include economic sanction and destruction of any nuclear plant established contrary to the policy are key to ensuring the agreement is respected and upheld. Additional policies and explicit military actions that can prevent Iran, North Korea, and any other nation from going nuclear should be used to supplement the JCPOA. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty(NPT) which Iraq is a member is also against the production of nuclear weapons which threatens the peace of the world (Turner Jr, 2013). If nations such as Iraq, North Korea, and others are left without close watch being given to them, then they can probably turn out to be the anchors and cradle of terroristic activities at the same time offering military and arms support for the attacks.
Military advancements by any nation are highly good for enhancing world peace but it should be done in good faith. Weapons production made for warfare should be highly discouraged for it is even against the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) provisions (Cronin, 2012). Some statistical data indicate that there is an increasing number of Unmanned systems production and use by the United States. Over 700 drones have been used by the United States which as per the U.S Air force which attaches the new security measure with high efficiency and other benefits at a lower cost (Hill, 2010). The UAVs do not require pilots to operate thus eliminating the costs of training a pilot. The use of drones is counter-productive at worst and unethical at best as indicated by both international and domestic laws. Al-Qaeda leadership and plans can only be abated and confronted by the use of drone strikes (Kugler, 2006). UAV attacks are supported by International laws if they are only carried out on armed conflict.
Generally, the threat as posed by terrorism is diverse and has led to heated up discussions between leaders and nations. A peaceful globe is the focus of many leaders but this wish and dream are true if the right security measures are put in place. Domestic policies and practices that rhyme with the international laws or supplement them is the way towards a safe world. The focus should be on striking better deals, agreements, and policies that position security at the forefront and eliminate the terroristic attacks and threats.
References
Cronin, A. K. (2012). Ending terrorism: Lessons for defeating al-Qaeda. Routledge.
Argomaniz, J. (2011). The EU and counter-terrorism: politics, polity and policies after 9/11. Routledge.
Hymans, J. E. (2013). The threat of nuclear proliferation: Perception and reality. Ethics & International Affairs, 27(3), 281-298.
Hill, M. Stephen, (2015). Is the Nuclear Deal with Iran Good for International Security?
Stephen M. Hill, (2010). Does Using Drones to Attack Terrorists Globally Violate International Law?
Richard L. Kugler, (2006). Policy Analysis in National Security Affairs: New Methods for A New Era.
Weiner, J. R. (2015). The War on American Diplomacy: ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and Taliban's Sustained Attacks on Peaceful US Missions Abroad. Cardozo J. Conflict Resol., 17, 487.
Turner Jr, J. O. (2013). Getting to No (Nuclear Weapons) with Iran: Will Coercive Diplomacy Work? (No. ATZL-SWV). ARMY COMMAND AND GENERAL STAFF COLLEGE FORT LEAVENWORTH KS SCHOOL OF ADVANCED MILITARY STUDIES.