Administrative Policies to Fight Terrorism

Administrative Policies to Fight Terrorism

Since the 9/11 attacks during the year 2001, the United States has faced significant changes not only in the personal and emotional lives of its citizens, but also in terms of its security measures. Indeed, many citizens have suffered significant losses of freedom and rights in the name of national security. Furthermore, many citizens suffer these losses willingly, believing the government-imposed statements regarding that these are (ironically) necessary in order to preserve the very freedoms citizens are giving up. Being emotionally charged, citizens do not think either rationally or critically about the freedom that they are giving up in order to preserve a way of life that the government is systematically destroying by means of its policies. Furthermore, the new national security policies have also targeted persons that the government has profiled as possible terrorist. Most notably, these persons are generally Arab and/or Muslim in ethnic and religious heritage.

A find myself rather in agreement with critics such as Mark Weisbrot (2001), who hold that the latest atrocities that the government has committed in the name of the "war on terrorism" is just one in a string of many worldwide. Indeed, through its actions and foreign policy, the United States government has created for itself many enemies around the globe to such an extent that Osama Bin Laden is merely a convenient name among the many to blame for 9/11. Indeed, according to Weisbrot, the government has refused to meet with the Taliban for talks in favor of full-blown war.

It is difficult, under these pressures, to determine policies to fight terrorism on a truly effective basis. This is particularly true in the criminal justice system. Many critics of the government has shown our leaders' policies to be fundamentally flawed and self-serving. It is therefore a challenge to find ways in which to effectively combat terrorism within the borders of the United States, even while members of the American military are dying in the government's war in Iraq.

I do not however believe that the matter is hopeless. The criminal justice system is one of the fundamental elements that ensure to the citizens of the country the freedoms and rights that the country has been known for since its birth. In order to continue ensuring these rights, the criminal justice system can establish policies and procedures to ensure that all citizens, regardless of race, religion, or any other divider, receives the rights due to them when they enter the system.

Weisbrot, again in considering the government, suggests that the reasons for terrorism need to be established before a targeted policy can be issued. After 9/11, it appears that the government, and indeed the criminal justice system, succumbed to the general hysteria experienced throughout the country. The situation can be compared to a group of children who has experienced something traumatic: emotion overrides everything else. And the government shrewdly used nationwide hysteria to advance its own agenda.

The first step towards better and more targeted policies within the criminal justice system is therefore establishing the fundamental reasons behind terrorism. In order to do this, a thorough investigation of currently existing and past government and criminal justice policies need to be examined. These can then be scrutinized as establishing a basis for the nature of the current manifestations of terrorism in the United States.

There are several existing policies that I also feel should be either eliminated or replaced by better policies. Profiling possible terrorists for example often target people of Arabian origin, or those adhering to the Muslim religion. When one of these people is arrested for even a minor offense, the criminal justice system often treats them unfairly as compared to other ethnic groups. Ironically, while the system occupies itself with ineffective and time-consuming policies, terrorism thrives. In this, the criminal justice system has created for itself a decoy and for the terrorism network in the country an opportunity like never before.

To curb this problem, I would suggest a policy of more thorough investigation as a starting point for curbing the terrorism problem. Under-cover agents can for example be used in order to investigate suspicious persons, rather than arresting the suspected offenders without conclusive proof of their actions. Under cover agents could also uncover larger networks of terrorism rather than making a single arrest at a time and then possibly targeting citizens who are law-abiding in the first place.

Each arrest occupies valuable time and resources within the criminal justice system. A more targeted policy would focus these towards a more effective policy to curb terrorism. Targeted and multiple arrests via under cover work will also have the benefit of discouraging existing terrorists from their activities. While it is possible that this will also lead to more covert and hidden activities, a more targeted policy can at least make it more difficult for terrorists to conduct their activities with quite the same confidence as before.