Strategies for countering terrorism after September 11

¶ … counter the new terrorism threat (post 9/11) and whether these strategies have been successful. It will also look at many possible long-term strategies to counter the new terrorism. Terrorism is a growing threat to world safety and security. Countering this new terrorism menace is something all nations must work on together and in harmony, otherwise the threat of terrorism will only grow more menacing and unpredictable. Many measures have already been enacted, and more need to be developed to keep the country and the world safer and more secure.

Even before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on New York and Washington, experts were calling world terrorist threats the "new terrorism."

Authors and experts have found attacks such as the chemical attack in the Tokyo subway, suicide bombings, and the 1993 bombing of the World Trade center to be a new trend in terrorism that makes it ever more lethal and threatening. Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have become the major threat in terrorism campaigns, and it seems only a matter of time before at least one terrorist organization unleashes WMDs on unsuspecting nations.

In the not so distant past, most terrorists had clear ties to well-organized terrorist organizations around the globe, such as Al Qaeda. These organizations were strictly structured with a known chain of command. Al Qaeda, which has been in existence since the 1980s, still adheres to this basic structure, but many new terrorists and their organizations do not. Some terrorists act independently, and others are only loosely connected with any organization. In addition, modern terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda, are increasingly connected around the globe. Earlier structured groups were easier to infiltrate, while global organizations with no one central headquarters are much more difficult to find and infiltrate. Thus, the new model of terrorism requires new countermeasures and control.

Protections Already in Place

There are many measures the administration has taken to ensure the safety and security of the American people. The Office of Homeland Security was created after the 9/11 attacks, and its mission was broadened in 2003. The office monitors security threats to the nation, among other safeguards, but critics feel it has not done enough to protect Americans from terrorism, and that, like most government agencies, it is "top-heavy" with administrators and micro-managers who truly accomplish very little.

Instead of relying on one mega-government agency, giving power to state and local governments could be a way to ensure safety at a more management level. Many local governments receive important intelligence that could be important, even vital, to national security, and with local jurisdiction, they would be free to act on this intelligence, rather than passing it on to national agencies. The Department of Homeland Security is a step in the right direction, but there are other ways to help ensure the safety of Americans on a national and local level.

Another countermeasure has been the increased security at airports. Long lines, x-ray machines, bomb-sniffing dogs, and banned liquids are all a part of the airport experience for Americans since the 9/11 attacks. For the most part, Americans have become used to the increased scrutiny as a price for their safety. While the airport security measures have caught some potential terrorists, for the most part, the increased security has gone unrewarded. In fact, tests of the system have shown that people carrying guns, knives, explosives, and other weapons have slipped through security from time to time. There is a human factor in any of these measures, and humans are not perfect, they make mistakes. Thus, there are bound to be some exceptions that slip through security and make it onto an airplane. This does not mean the security measures do not work or should be abandoned; it is simply one fact to consider in the ongoing battle against terrorism. Mistakes will be made and people will slip through the cracks in any security system.

One of the most controversial measures against terrorism in this country has been the use of unauthorized wire and phone taps in order to identify and locate terrorist. So far, this threat to freedom and liberty does not seem to actually have provided any terrorists, but the practice still continues. Many opponents to this type of scrutiny feel it gives the President too much power, tips the balance of power that was created to separate the judiciary, legislative, and executive branches of government, and threatens the civil liberties of all Americans. Authors Mockaitis and Rich state, "Since 9/11 American has witnessed the most serious erosion of civil liberties since the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II."

Supporters feel it is necessary to ensure the safety of Americans, especially by terrorists who might have already infiltrated American soil.

Another measure that has created controversy and discussion is the strengthening of the nation's borders. Many believe the border fence and other security measures on the Southern border will help keep illegal aliens out of the country, but will keep at least some terrorists out as well. In the past, it has been relatively simply to travel between countries both on the Northern and Southern borders, but increased security has made it more difficult, and there have been some suspected terrorists caught trying to come into the country though these channels. The security at the borders needs to be strengthened even more, especially in Canada, where in many areas it is a simple matter to walk from one country to the other outside of boarder security. To keep the country truly safe, all the borders need to be secured and strengthened, and that includes the ports and waterways as well.

Target Hardening and Displacement

Target hardening, which is sometimes called target displacement, is another way for the country to ensure critical targets in and out of the country are well guarded and secure. Placing high security monitoring and staff on nuclear power generators to ensure their safety after the 9/11 attacks is an example of target hardening, and so is the increased security at the nation's airports. In effect, target hardening is the deepening of protection around a target that is vulnerable, and making is less vulnerable. This makes it more difficult for the terrorist groups to overcome the security and attack the target, and they normally turn to a "softer" or less critical target.

While some target hardening has taken place throughout the country, there are still numerous vulnerable targets that must be addressed. In addition, many of our foreign embassies and business ventures are also very vulnerable, and the security around these locations should be hardened as well.

Chemical and Biological WMDs

Many experts believe the two biggest terrorist threats currently facing the United States are chemical and/or biological weapons of mass destruction. The subway attack in Japan is an excellent example of this kind of attack. In 1995, a Japanese religious group placed a bag of the nerve gas sarin on a subway platform. Twelve people were killed and over 5,000 were injured in the biological attack, and most experts feel it could have been much worse.

This is not an isolated incident, many experts believe there are many other biological weapons available to terrorist organizations, and the biggest problem they face is how do disperse them effectively.

Many considerations must be handled in order to control these types of attacks. First, the country must attempt to block these items from entering the country. Intelligence, monitoring, infiltration, and higher security at the nation's borders and ports can fend off at least some of these weapons. Second, if they do enter the country, there must be ways of locating and disarming them before they are set off. Of course, that is much easier said than done. Local and national response experts will need to be trained in how to deal with these weapons. Expert Steven Simon states, "Emergency response teams will need to be able to pinpoint the location of a device, identify its type, and know in advance how to render it safe once it has been seized. Local authorities will have to detect and identify biological and chemical agents that have been released."

There must also be ways of blocking their release into the country. Author Simon believes that buying and/or destroying surplus military equipment around the world can help ensure that these devices are not purchased by terrorists who hope to use them to disperse WMDs on a global scale.

Container Security

Another area where the United States is vulnerable is our ports. There is little scrutiny of the cargo that enters and leaves America's ports, and many studies have indicated how easy it would be to smuggle WMDs or even nuclear weapons into the country through containers loaded on ships. Because a majority of these shipments originate in foreign countries, it is difficult to monitor them as they are loaded and make their way into this country. There must be much greater effort put into security at the nation's ports. First, port workers must be screened and checked, just as security workers at the nation's airports are screened and checked. In addition, there must be a way to easily screen or view the contents of the containers to ensure that terrorist organizations are not smuggling weapons into the country. The country has several areas that are weakly enforced and scrutinized, and the ports are high on that list, because of the sheer volume of material that surges through them each day. Thus, securing the ports and checking container cargo needs to be high on the agenda of Homeland Security, before a terrorist attack is launched from that arena.

Future Strategic Theories

One of the most controversial ways to combat global and national terrorism is with the use of deadly force. While not everyone agrees with the use of force to counter terrorism, many experts believe it is one of the only ways to successfully counter the new terrorism and render in ineffective. Author Mockaitis continues, "The Western alliance led by the U.S. must assist countries such as the Philippines to combat indigenous insurgencies backed by Al

Qaeda."

In addition, most experts agree that this must be a joint effort between nations, and that others must be convinced that the threat is dangerous enough to warrant this use of deadly force as a means of control.

One way to do this is to enlist the aid of other Middle Eastern nations and their moderate populations. Mockaitis states, "Finally, the moderate majority in key Arab states must be persuaded to support the war or to at least stop supporting Al Qaeda. This last task will be the most difficult to achieve since it requires some significant changes in U.S. foreign policy."

So far, gaining the support of other Middle Eastern countries has not been accomplished, and those that do have good relations with the West often suffer attacks inside their borders from terrorist organizations. This is true of Saudi Arabia, who Osama bin Laden feels has turned its support to the West and so has become a nation of infidels.

Many experts recommend a change in U.S. foreign policy to gain more support from Arab nations and their populations, rather than driving them away with actions such as the invasion of Iraq, which has resulted in animosity toward the U.S. By many nations around the world, including the Middle East neighbor, Iran.

There is another important way to combat terrorism that many people overlook. Global terrorism doe not threaten only one country. It is not waged by only one or two terrorist organizations or factions. It is a global threat, and one way to combat it is for the first world countries to help aid under-developed nations. Lack of educational opportunities, good governing, and the ability to make a decent living are all problems facing many nations around the world, and these conditions can foster unrest and even jealousy in populations who have little hope of ever achieving the opulence of modern Western life. Fully developed nations such as the United States must make an effort to create a higher standard of living in other nations to help foster better understanding, more opportunities and satisfaction that may ultimately lead to a less volatile world and fewer terrorist activities.

Many experts believe that the greatest long-term solution to the war on terror is to become more understanding of what causes terrorism, and to treat the "symptoms rather than the disease."

In other words, experts must understand the underlying beliefs that cause terrorism, and work to understand them rather than simply control or remove them.

Another global problem that is leading to national terrorism in Latin America is the drug trade. Drug dealers and suppliers are becoming increasingly violent in their business, and this violence has spread throughout the area. While this does not seem to be a threat to America directly, this violent reaction to drug control has become an accepted way of life in many Latin American countries and has led to violence in other areas as well. That violent lifestyle can spread to America when dealers and drug lords bring their business to the streets of American cities, and this form of "acceptable" violence can escalate into a lifestyle of violence and destruction if it is not controlled and eliminated. Part of the global war on terror should be to control drug trafficking and the violent lifestyle it supports.

Finally, many believe in the future that cyberterrorism will continue to be a great threat to the infrastructure and economy of the entire country. Another expert proposes joint agreements or ownership in many large, currently private companies. He writes, "What the U.S. government does not own, it cannot completely defend. Private owners do not necessarily share the government's perception of the terrorist threat and are often able to resist regulation."

While many companies and stockholders might baulk at joint-ownership with the government, it might ensure the infrastructure is safer and more secure than if security is left only to the private business sector.

In conclusion, countering and controlling the new terrorism threats is an ongoing challenge for all the countries of the world. One thing seems certain. The threat of global terrorism continues to multiply, and it is only a matter of time before they strike the United States again. The terrorists around the world are determined and fanatic about their need to destroy the "infidels" and they will stop at nothing to achieve their goals. In the 21st century, it seems there is little any nation can do to totally combat terrorism. There will always be terrorists, and there will always be victims. To counter the new terrorism, the nations of the world must join together, share intelligence, and work to rid terrorists from their nations and their borders. Terrorism will never go away entirely, but effective control measures, like those discussed here, along with global cooperation, could keep terrorism at least under some semblance of order and control.