Domestic and International Terrorism the Differences Between Essay

Excerpt from Essay :

Domestic and International Terrorism

The differences between domestic and international terrorism

The Federal Bureau of Investigation in America states that terrorism has been classified into two categories as international terrorism and domestic terrorism. Domestic terrorism is defined as an act planned by a group of individuals of evil intentions against the government or against the citizens of the state without any foreign force. On the other hand, international terrorism is a plan plotted against the government or its citizens by a group of individuals and plans are on a foreign basis, and their motivators are from a foreign country outside the United States or the deeds exceed national boundaries. Examples of domestic terrorism include the Oklahoma city bombing and the Olympic city bombings (Burnett, 2007).

Cases of terrorism in the United States have characterized small rebel groups in its records. These rebel groups use terrorism as their tool to achieve certain objectives: this does not vindicate these cases to be protests or non-violent civil disobedience. From FEMA's (Federal Emergency Management Agency) report, cases of terrorist attack exist in various forms based on technology type possessed by the terrorist, the political issues surrounding it, and available weaknesses of the subject target to the terrorist. In most of the terrorist attacks against the United States, bombings cover for more than 70% (United States, 2009). The other methods that terrorist use in carrying out their attacks are, cases of biological and chemical agents, attacks in the direction of utilities or public services, or even attacking the transport facilities. During the Seattle world trade conference in 1999, more than 350 international rebels plotted and converted the protest against the association of the world trade causing chaos in the city. Groups for animal rights and extremist environmental groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front still maintain their position as major domestic terrorist organizations (United States, 2009).

In simple terms, the thick line differentiating domestic terrorism and international terrorism is that the activities of domestic terrorism are limited to one country. Similar is the case as the objectives of international terrorism and domestic terrorism also differ. The setting of domestic is on a smaller platform, and the motives behind it are limited. Domestic terrorist are not restricted, and they may form alliances with other foreign states, which they term as a global enemy, but their main target is sub-national and national. Domestic terrorism is also complicated in a way. There is a host of different organizations are commonly known for fragmenting off different factions. Changes take place as time goes by in the major threats from domestic terrorism. For example, for this year, the threat might be from a left-wing group and the next year it is the right-wing group. In most cases, these terrorist groups are diffuse not to mean that they cannot be organized; but in many cases, they are resistance operations of leaderless characteristics and lone wolf styles. Many terrorist groups are starting to form up and their motives, objectives, and direction are not known. Domestic terrorism is very easy to deal with as compared to international terrorism; methods such as the use of informants and infiltration can be employed and have been successful (United States, 2009).

International terrorism is the new trend in terrorism as it is organized and funded by international terrorist networks. In an increasing manner, groups using the pretext of religion are directing threat against the United States. Another issue of concern is the rapid growth of political involvement of radical Islamist parties in foreign countries. Something also worth noting is the growing interlinks of different terrorist organization that may involve combinations of training for military, transfer of technology, or political advice. Having a look at the whole issue surrounding international terrorism is the threat propagation from weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Iran is perceived to be the most active state that involves herself in fueling and supporting terrorism. Japan also admitted to have had some underhand deals in the program of enriching uranium and possessing secret nuclear weapons. Suggestions state that the Al Qaeda has tried to gain radiological, biological, and chemical and nuclear weapons. In the policy of the United States for international terrorism has an essential component of the military. This is reflected in the operations of the United States in Afghanistan, arrangement of the United States forces to a different location for some missions and regarding the supporters and administration, the war in Iraq (Burnett, 2007).

The issue of great magnitude to the 110th Congress is whether sufficient information is being provided by the administration on the longstanding objectives and the cost of the diverse plan. In case this does not occur, the military force is an essential method for counterterrorism including scaling other methods including law enforcement enhanced with intelligence and pro-active public diplomacy. Activities of the extremist Islamic groups have been increasing in number; getting fund from different forces has resulted in a good reception of the radical perception in target populations. This has intensified to the point that countries fail to resolve the issue of international terrorism. The youth in the Muslim world may end up with the perception that radical views are good and resulting in increased cases of terrorism. Terrorism is an international issue; the main challenge it poses to policy makers is that of maximizing international support and cooperation without compromising the essential options and interests of the United States National Security (Burnett, 2007).

The role Department of Homeland Security plays in the future attacks

The secretary of the department of homeland security designed the nation's first complete strategies the federal government intends to implement for homeland security. This report was commonly referred to as the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR). This development was the first major step undertaken by the government in instructing the measurements in homeland security enterprise to charge a common interest: a home safe for all citizens, resilient and secure from threats of terrorism, and other threat that risk the interest, way of life and aspirations of America. This was accomplished by QHSR through setting a secure homeland vision, specified objectives, and key mission priorities for each of the mission areas. This review is persistent and extends on the strategies of the National Security that was released recently. There is accumulating evidence showing the horror of the challenge that is ongoing of establishing one DHS from different entities and organizations which were previously separate (Burnett, 2007).

The proceedings of BUR and QHSR challenge us to put into consideration difficult issues concerning the organization, mission precedence of the Department of Homeland Security. Faking of single optimized and integrated department from components abstracted from agencies that were formed previously has been a major task for all the senior management team at DHS from the time of its establishment (Netanyahu, 2006). There were five main mission areas of homeland security identified by DHSR; constraining terrorism and improving security, safeguarding and sustaining cyberspaces and making sure there is flexibility in disaster. The missions and objectives that were associated as defined in the QHSR encompass the foundation of the efforts taken to keep America resilient, safe, and secure. The QHSR was a major step in accomplishing the homeland security of America. The principle that underlies the report released by BUR is the need to evaluate resources, structures, plans, and programs from bottom to top.

First, the Department of Homeland Security gives the guidelines for reinforcement of the foundation for homeland security. Simply preventing terrorism, BUR also concentrates on combating threats from cyber security that all hazards are taken care of the significant need to review our immigration system. The BR also focuses on the significance of making sure there is security and flexibility in the systems that offer the moving of goods and people across our borders. Department of Homeland Security lays a cornerstone in the improvement of management and operations for the department and increment of resources' accountability entrusted to DHS. The federal government takes pride in the effort brought in by the staff members of the homeland security department and those working with the territorial, tribal, local, state, and federal officials, businesses, private citizens and all who take part in ensuring that America is a safe place. To the achievement of DHS, they have been able to do some recommendable work, and they promise more in the coming future. The results by BUR and the QHSR will act as guidelines for these significant efforts (Netanyahu, 2006).

In 2007, there was an amendment made to the 2002 Act of Homeland Security initiating the enactment of the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review in 2009 and carry out the complete reviews after every four years. The function of QHRS was to display the threats towards the interest of the national security of the nation, depict and strategies on the missions of the homeland security and do a review of the strategy of the homeland security. It would evaluate the arrangement of the department in achieving its strategies; promote methods…

Cite This Essay:

"Domestic And International Terrorism The Differences Between" (2013, April 25) Retrieved August 24, 2017, from

"Domestic And International Terrorism The Differences Between" 25 April 2013. Web.24 August. 2017. <>

"Domestic And International Terrorism The Differences Between", 25 April 2013, Accessed.24 August. 2017,