Anti-terrorism analysis and policy implications

Terrorism is an act that requires will, determination, conviction, and intelligence to number merely a few attributes. Whereas the first three regard purely motivational attitudes, the latter implies the skillfulness to act according to what drives the act. Today, technology facilitates terrorist activities and thus national security is more so endangered and with it, people's lives and the well being of societies are put at risk. Modern technological means of communication and information technology allow for prospective terrorist individuals to connect with each other at unlimited level, whereas no previous time boundaries and distances restrict them. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper admitted to the ever-growing concern for an increase in number of advanced cyber attacks within the following years. If, in 2011, the issue was among the last addressed, cyber threats moved ahead of the list a year later when it was acknowledged that ?we currently face a cyber environment where emerging technologies are developed and implemented faster than governments can keep pace.

This is indeed concerning because the U.S., like the majority of modern societies are extremely dependent of information technology and most, if not all information is compressed into cyber space. This further makes the country vulnerable to attacks while it is also more difficult to predict the course of cyber terrorism because, by the time a route is established and a predicament is made, evidence leading to the uncover is likely to have moved or disappeared completely.

In 2011, the assessment over Al-Qa'ida revealed the continuous danger that the group represented for both the U.S. And Europe. James Clapper predicted that Al-Qa'ida would follow up on methodological techniques and would look towards recruiting individuals in small operational plots ?to demonstrate its continued relevance to the global jihad.

However, a year later, it was concluded that regional affiliates were actually relevant in combating the movement and it was expected that Al-Qu'ida would suffer a decentralization. Nevertheless, that was not to underestimate the potential danger because the group was expected to subsequently be representative to operatives who are looking to seize any opportunity and attack conformingly. Therefore, Cladder was suggesting and indeed emphasized that the group is as dangerous in action as it is ideologically. Because individuals worldwide adhere to the movement's beliefs, Al Qu'ida is unlikely to dismiss terrorist attacks in favor of symbolic status in the near future.

Both agendas prioritized developing of weapons of mass destruction. It was understood that nations' initiatives in this respect were limited by deterrence and diplomacy but that terrorism is not subject to similar principles. In Iran's case, the 2012 assessment brought no new insights but the idea persisted that the country is likely to follow up on nuclear weapon construction. Indeed, Clapper admitted that the U.S. had knowledge of Iran's ?scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons.

Clapper also admitted to keeping track of North Korea's investments in uranium exploitation as the possibility was maintained that the country might make use of nuclear weapons. In matters of global challenges, the 2012 assessment revealed that India established active cooperation with Afghanistan and supports the U.S. initiatives in the country as opposed to a year before when it merely looked into the idea. The potential difficulty posed by China as an international actor in 2011 was reassessed a year later when it was acknowledged that Beijing is also an important regional factor and a powerful influence over China altogether.

Problems in the Middle East and Africa with local economy and development were further addressed in the 2012 assessment with Clapper mentioning that international help is required for many countries within the region and that ?violence, corruption, and terrorism are likely to plague Africa in areas key to U.S. interests.

Therefore, what determined new assessments was that, while many of the countries will further depend on international help, consequently the U.S., the latter is also likely to be affected, though not on a similar level with actual countries in the region. Moving closer to Europe, assumptions were made in regards to Russia which was expected to lessen its cooperative relationship with U.S. due to Putin being reelected in May 2012. Moreover, when addressing the issue of cyber attacks in 2012, Clapper stated that both Russia and China were considered primary actors, which further puts Russia into spotlight. In Latin America, the drug cartels in Mexico continued to pose challenges to the government, but Clapper assessed no advance in interfering seriously outside the U.S. border.

In matters of intelligence threats, the 2012 assessment seems to have given somewhat extended attention to transnational organized crime, although it remains at the bottom of the list. Whereas in 2011, economy was addressed within a larger context, it was given intrinsic attention in the following assessment because of continuing struggles such as unemployment and credit tightening. Furthermore, if originally ?the impact of water and other resource scarcity on state stability?