With increased interdependence between countries, more room for conflict arose. In taking stands with certain positions or specific countries, enemies are made. As a result, countries actively invest in protecting their borders and maintaining vigilance to avoid internal attacks. The paper focuses on Al Qaeda and how best to confront it. It examines why it came about, how it has managed to stay alive, and how various policies can best be utilized in disarming the terroristic organization. The paper explores that with collaborative effort and research, it is possible to eliminate terrorism and minimize its effects.
A brief discussion of Al Qaeda
Background
The public mostly knows Al Qaeda after 9/11. However, the terrorist group was operational way before that, which will be explored in this section. The group was formed sometime between 1988 and 1989. Interestingly, in that period and the early 90s, the group did not call itself Al Qaeda as it was just an ordinary group committed to a more significant battle like many organized political and religious groups (Cruickshank & Bergen, 2015). Its leader and founder was Osama bin Laden.
Goals
One of the founding goals of Osama bin Laden was to form an Arab military force that would stand its ground against Soviet attacks. It led him to break away from MAK, the organization that he had been funding to help the Afghan jihad with his long-term mentor, Abdullah Azzam. He thought the Arab military force would succeed because his recruits were enthusiastic and willing to become martyrs.
After the Afghan Jihad, the goal became to train the young soldiers who had fought, in addition to equipping them to be ready to uphold Islam and defend Muslims worldwide (Bergen, 2006). Eventually, the goal became to drive the United States armed forces out of Saudi Arabia (including the Saudi Arabian peninsula) and other countries, for example, Somalia, by violence (Department of Justice, 2001)
Notable activities
In December 1992, two hotels in Aden, which were used to transit American troops to Somalia, were bombed. 9/11 was the most gruesome attack on America’s soil, and it led to a restructuring of many response teams and law enforcement. Many political or faith-based attacks have happened in Africa, Arabian countries, and some parts of Europe. There are also bombings that Al Qaeda claims responsibility for.
Summary of strategies the U.S. can use to respond to or prevent terrorist attacks
Terrorism has evolved over time from the methods used to the propagators, which could be a lone act or an organized group. Bremer (1987) observes that the counterterrorism strategy used by the U.S. Government is composed of three elements: firmness toward terrorists, pressure on states supporting terrorism, and practical measures to deter, apprehend, and punish terrorists. The three remain the same, but the actions within them continue to be tailored to fit the evolving nature of the threats.
Preventive strategies
To begin with, the government has to combat radicalization. This preventive measure might be difficult to enforce, but it solves the problem at the root. Preventing younger generations from being recruited or given extreme ideas would slowly cut off the problem because members of the organization will grow old or unable to function. Besides, if they cannot recruit new followers, the group cannot replace leaders, and soldiers are lost (Habeck, 2015). This could be done by monitoring the disseminated information and observing those showing extremist teachings. While at this, it is crucial to avoid targeting and unfair profiling. Young people who are wrongly accused of being terrorists decide to join because that is all that people decide to see of them (Purtill, 2015)
Besides, border security enhancement aids in preventing terrorism by Al Qaeda. Information sharing internationally ensures that terrorists and their group leaders do not enter countries for refuge or planning. It allows for wanted persons to be apprehended. Additionally, it would minimize foreign attacks on U.S. soil. This also covers the entry of illegal firearms into the country, weakening the gravity or completely stopping the attack.
Community engagement is also an underutilized yet very effective means for preventing terrorism. Creating safe spaces for minority and diverse communities to express themselves and present their grievances prevents resentment, which leads to retaliation. Furthermore, protecting them because it is their right makes the communities feel seen and not take matters into their own hands. They, too, get justice and protection, which means not calling an act of terrorism a hate crime, which gets less severe punishment. Having an unbiased stand even when the perpetrator does not fit the usual crime model allows for a safer nation (Fisher, 2017)
Response Strategies
DHS empowers them to properly collaborate with all other units responsible for response in case of attacks. First, funding must be adequate. This ensures proper staffing and acquisition of any material required. It also allows for the proper day-to-day running of the department. As DHS is empowered, they ensure the frameworks are updated and cover different scenarios that may play out. The responses are timely and more effective to rescue those in need and diffuse any situation.
Coupled with empowerment, interagency cooperation is critical. Post-9/11 analysis showed that one of the most significant flaws that caused the unwarranted loss was the inability of agencies to work together efficiently and communicate (Haddow, Bullock, & Coppola, 2017). Therefore, as part of learning from previous incidents, all agencies must learn how to streamline their communication, commands, and efforts while sharing information in real-time. When responding to an emergency, the flow of work must be uninterrupted. As agencies work together, countries must collaborate and fight against a common enemy (Habeck, 2015). This means the sharing of crucial information. Additionally, because each country fights through its military to maintain its territories, they could also undertake projects together.
Assessment of the potential appropriateness and effectiveness of the regular police
Al Qaeda will mainly target crowded places where unsuspecting people go about their busy lives. To properly execute a terror attack despite the magnitude in a space like that would need observation and planning. In such a case, a citizen might notice some suspicious activities or patterns. In this case, the regular police would be appropriate because they are easily reachable, including patrol cars. Therefore, if a citizen had probable cause, they would alert the nearest police. They can then determine the next step by calling more specialized enforcement or evacuating the area.
Historically, community police have tried to engage the community (Giovanna, Pooja, & Peterson, 2023). The more cordial the relationship is, the more likely they will give information about any suspicious activity in the neighborhood. Sometimes, all it takes is a tip to stop the further assembly of a homemade bomb. Information is crucial because it could save many lives during a planned attack. Furthermore, when physical radicalization meetings happen, the best bet is on the community to inform the police because, unlike virtual meetings, it is impossible to track or know where they will happen.
When effectiveness is considered, it heavily depends on the magnitude and the type of case. For example, 9/1 1 was beyond the police. However, in terms of timeliness, initial evacuation, and report-taking, the local police are most effective. If the scope is beyond the police, interagency collaboration should be included as a response measure. The police could secure a perimeter as the more specialized unit or department is coming to the scene.
Assessment of the potential appropriateness and effectiveness of military action
The historical and diverse aspects of the terrorist population show that they are prone to violence. This varies from lone people finding themselves willing to martyr themselves to well-organized, trained forces in Al Qaeda (Cruickshank & Bergen, 2015). Expert military training can only be met with the same excellence. This ensures that civilians are protected and territories are secured to prevent the enemy from claiming the theme.
The military might be the most effective, depending on the approach. When trying to penetrate areas that are highly filled with the enemy, the police cannot offer much help. If trying to rescue hostages or fight an open territory war, then military forces, due to their training, should be deployed (Ernest, 2004). Their expertise is also what is needed when trying to attack the headquarters of operations for Al Qaeda. Sometimes, these missions are arranged to try to disband fully or weaken the group. Unfortunately, this action can be war and, on both sides, result in many casualties.
With that acknowledged, it is also important to note that military force alone, in some cases, will not be sufficient. Enacting a new counterterrorism-focused authorization for military force is the best solution because it legally controls and outlines the responsibility and expectations. It also restrains unilateral executive branch action, which scholars have previously brought up as a failing by other documents. Reviewing the AUMF allows us to address new terror threats effectively (Wynne, 2018).
Appraisal of whether the federal government needs additional police powers or legislative measures to protect the country from terrorist threats.
To decide on this issue, the existing police powers and legislative measures must be examined. A proper analysis of the existing powers would show what they cover and highlight any loopholes that appeared in past cases. There would be no need to increase legislative or police powers if the gaps found in the analysis are negligible. Amendments can be structured to fill whatever gap the analysis finds instead of increasing police powers.
As mentioned earlier, with time, the nature of threats keeps evolving. With technology also quickly changing, the scopes previously covered may be insufficient to protect the citizens adequately. Additional legislative measures should be discussed to provide guidelines for both protection and prosecution when in violation.
Evaluation of the effect that increasing governmental powers with the aim to boost security has on the potential erosion of civil liberties.
The freedoms and liberties granted are one of the things that activists and citizens dearly hold on to. Moreover, one of the government’s main goals is to keep its citizens safe. A balance is sought out by all who research the issue. Dragu (2011) argues that security against terrorism and privacy as civil liberties need not conflict. This is because, in strategic interactions, a reduction in the civil liberty of privacy does not automatically lead to increased security or protection against terrorism.
The research also points out that in many democratic countries, radical speech is restricted regardless of whether the restriction increases the country’s security. Therefore, the civil liberties afforded would be regulated whether or not they affect security. A vital bias to note is that any antiterrorist organization will always want less privacy granted. An increase in governmental powers while protecting against terrorism is not worth the risk of erosion of civil liberties. Emergency power can be included where relevant authorities have more access and power during a terrorism crisis or looming danger. However, it is also challenging to determine in what case and under what duration the authorities will be allowed to handle the extra power (Dragu, 2011).
In conclusion, collaborative action is the best way to go about terrorism unleashed by Al Qaeda. Through research, the evolution of the group, its motivations, and how it operates becomes clear. The understanding influences the approach used, such as military involvement. Research also allows the analysis of the weak links between the approaches and provides solutions. For example, the reviewed AUMF gives solutions to the failings of its previous version. Through collaborative action, resource use is efficient and appropriate because the handling depends on who best can take care of a scenario. The effectiveness results from factoring in time, the magnitude of the event, the expertise needed, and the community. It is possible, even with the new terrorist threats, to protect the country and its citizens.
References
Bergen. (2006). The Osama bin Laden I know.
Cruickshank, P., & Bergen, P. (2015). Revisiting the Early Al Qaeda: An Updated Account of its Formative Years. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism.
Department of Justice. (2001). Al Qaeda International. Retrieved from https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/al-qaeda-international
Dragu, T. (2011). Is There a Trade-off between Security and Liberty? Executive Bias, Privacy Protections, and Terrorism Prevention. The American Political Science Review, 105(1), 64-78.
Ernest, E. (2004). Goodness Armed with Power. World Affairs.
Fisher, S. (2017). Terrorist or Disturbed Loner? The Contentious Politics of a Label. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/world/europe/politics-terrorist-label.html
Giovanna, Pooja, B., & Peterson. (2023). PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY: Police departments are driving community engagement efforts and prioritizing relationships with the communities they serve. Public Management, 34-36.
Habeck, M. (2015, December). A Global Strategy for Combating Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. A M E R I C A N E N T E R P R I S E I N S T I T U T E.
Haddow, G. D., Bullock, J. A., & Coppola, D. P. (2017). Introduction to emergency management. Oxford.
Purtill, C. (2015, July 15). What Northern Ireland teaches us about today’s war on terror. The World.
Sandler, T. (2015). Terrorism and counterterrorism: an overview. Oxford Economic Papers. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpu039
Wynne, J. (2018). AFTER AL-QAIDA: A PROSPECTIVE COUNTERTERRORISM AUMF. New York University Law Review.
write