Combatting Terrorism: Effective State Responses and Lessons from Australia and Singapore
VerifiedAdded on 2023/04/25
|9
|1761
|399
AI Summary
The essay discusses how states should respond to the threat of terrorism. The United Nations suggests four key measures: addressing conditions conducive to terrorism, preventing and combatting terrorism with minimal harm to civilians, strengthening counterterrorism tactics and alliances, and prot...
Read More
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: COMBATTING TERROR
COMBATTING TERROR
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note
COMBATTING TERROR
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
1COMBATTING TERROR
The world is composed of territorial units which are demarcated from each other by
means of political boundaries. Each of these territorial units are known as state and the
responsibility of protecting its interests are upon the respective governments of the states (Fuller
2019). In this particular essay, the discussion shall be focusing upon the open ended thesis
statement of the ways in which a state should respond to the threat of terror. The English term
terror originates from the French term ‘Terreur’ meaning fear, denoting the Reign of Terror
which had come about soon after the French Revolution of 1789, and the onset of the rule of
Napoleon in France who had ruled as a ruthless autocrat (Benjamin and Steven 2016). In the
field of politics and international relations, the term terror refers to a state when the national
security is at stake and that is the moment when the civilian government is supposed to take steps
that shall be combatting the tense situation, and bring back the country to the state of normalcy.
According to the United Nations Organizations, a state is supposed to take four
key measures to combat terror. The first pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations
Organizations is to address the conditions that have the potential to spread terror (Gioa 2016).
There are several reasons as to why the spread of terror can become conducive. Externally, the
threat of terror can come from the terrorist groups functioning at the international level. They are
always on a look out for the loopholes in the security system of a nation and they plan out ways
and means to overcome them and encroach into the territorial space of a nation and cause attacks
on civilians. Usually on major events to be held in a country that it tends to become quite
vulnerable and susceptible to terrorist attacks (Seidl et al., 2016). Internally, the conditions
leading to separatism and rebellion are the potential causes which can cause the outbreak of
terror. In nations where the democratic political culture is absent, the propensity of factions with
sectarian interests to be satisfied by the government of the nation to resort to violence is quiet
The world is composed of territorial units which are demarcated from each other by
means of political boundaries. Each of these territorial units are known as state and the
responsibility of protecting its interests are upon the respective governments of the states (Fuller
2019). In this particular essay, the discussion shall be focusing upon the open ended thesis
statement of the ways in which a state should respond to the threat of terror. The English term
terror originates from the French term ‘Terreur’ meaning fear, denoting the Reign of Terror
which had come about soon after the French Revolution of 1789, and the onset of the rule of
Napoleon in France who had ruled as a ruthless autocrat (Benjamin and Steven 2016). In the
field of politics and international relations, the term terror refers to a state when the national
security is at stake and that is the moment when the civilian government is supposed to take steps
that shall be combatting the tense situation, and bring back the country to the state of normalcy.
According to the United Nations Organizations, a state is supposed to take four
key measures to combat terror. The first pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations
Organizations is to address the conditions that have the potential to spread terror (Gioa 2016).
There are several reasons as to why the spread of terror can become conducive. Externally, the
threat of terror can come from the terrorist groups functioning at the international level. They are
always on a look out for the loopholes in the security system of a nation and they plan out ways
and means to overcome them and encroach into the territorial space of a nation and cause attacks
on civilians. Usually on major events to be held in a country that it tends to become quite
vulnerable and susceptible to terrorist attacks (Seidl et al., 2016). Internally, the conditions
leading to separatism and rebellion are the potential causes which can cause the outbreak of
terror. In nations where the democratic political culture is absent, the propensity of factions with
sectarian interests to be satisfied by the government of the nation to resort to violence is quiet
2COMBATTING TERROR
common. They can launch terror attacks at the government offices and the officials to assert their
political inclination. For example, the Taliban often launch terror attacks on the Afghan
Government officials and the offices. Not that the sectarian demands of certain collectivities are
always unjustified, however resorting to violence for achievement of the sectional interest are
however wrong (Miller 2018).
The second pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations Organizations is to
prevent and combat terrorism. The United Nations Organization is not favourably disposed to the
idea of violence as it condemns any form of loss to be inflicted on the life and liberty of the
civilians, hence it says that the states must ensure that the chances of terror attacks to happen
must be eliminated. Violence should be the last resort and must only be resorted to at the times
of emergency. The United Nations Organizations says that the state must ensure that the most
effective and skilful methods of combatting terrorism must be undertaken by the state which
shall ensure very less harm to the civilians and the terror causing agents must be paralyzed. Two
examples must be presented in this regard (Gioa 2016). Chechnyan separatists had taken the Star
Theatre of Moscow under their siege and had threatened to blow up the theatre of their demand
of granting separate statehood to Chechnya is not met. The Russian Security Forces had by
means of spraying chlorofoam gas paralyzed the terrorist and the audience. In the state of
senselessness, the hostages were rescued and the terrorists detained with very less civilian
casualty (Karlsrud 2017). Mecca Masjid of Saudi Arabia had once been taken under siege by a
person claiming to be Imam Mahdi. His troop had taken shelter in the basement of the mosque
and the Saudi Security Forces had flooded the basement and had electrocuted the terrorist. In this
way, the terrorists were paralyzed and the worshippers were rescued (Karlsrud 2017).
common. They can launch terror attacks at the government offices and the officials to assert their
political inclination. For example, the Taliban often launch terror attacks on the Afghan
Government officials and the offices. Not that the sectarian demands of certain collectivities are
always unjustified, however resorting to violence for achievement of the sectional interest are
however wrong (Miller 2018).
The second pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations Organizations is to
prevent and combat terrorism. The United Nations Organization is not favourably disposed to the
idea of violence as it condemns any form of loss to be inflicted on the life and liberty of the
civilians, hence it says that the states must ensure that the chances of terror attacks to happen
must be eliminated. Violence should be the last resort and must only be resorted to at the times
of emergency. The United Nations Organizations says that the state must ensure that the most
effective and skilful methods of combatting terrorism must be undertaken by the state which
shall ensure very less harm to the civilians and the terror causing agents must be paralyzed. Two
examples must be presented in this regard (Gioa 2016). Chechnyan separatists had taken the Star
Theatre of Moscow under their siege and had threatened to blow up the theatre of their demand
of granting separate statehood to Chechnya is not met. The Russian Security Forces had by
means of spraying chlorofoam gas paralyzed the terrorist and the audience. In the state of
senselessness, the hostages were rescued and the terrorists detained with very less civilian
casualty (Karlsrud 2017). Mecca Masjid of Saudi Arabia had once been taken under siege by a
person claiming to be Imam Mahdi. His troop had taken shelter in the basement of the mosque
and the Saudi Security Forces had flooded the basement and had electrocuted the terrorist. In this
way, the terrorists were paralyzed and the worshippers were rescued (Karlsrud 2017).
3COMBATTING TERROR
The third pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations Organizations is to
building up of counter terrorism tactics by a nation by means of strengthening the army and also
by entering into alliances with the international organizations. Terrorism is an international affair
and collective effort must be undertaken to combat it. The stronger nations must help out the
weaker ones (Gioa 2016).
The fourth pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations Organizations is to
ensure that in the process of combatting terror the human rights of the civilians must not be
compromised with. Situations of emergency emerging out of situation of terror can cause the
human rights of the civilians to be violated and that must be avoided. In this regard the United
Nations Organization has strictly forbidden the association of terrorist activities to be associated
with any religion (Gioa 2016).
Having mentioned of the methods that a state should follow in combatting terrorism, the
discussion shall now be devoted towards comparing the US method of countering terror vis-a-vis
Australian and Singaporean model. The aggressive foreign policy approach of US is somewhat
wrong. In the past she had attacked Afghanistan in the year 2001 and Iraq in 2003 (Karlsrud
2015). The Talibans were raised by the US to deal with the Soviet expansionism in Afghanistan,
and when the Talibans resisted against the US imperialism, they were accused of being a
potential threat. Hence, post the 9/11 incident, US occupied Afghanistan to combat terror
however almost two decades later now, there is no stability in the region, and the battle between
Taliban and Afghan Civilian Government, and US forces is still going on. The watershed in
Afghanistan had been the death of Bin Laden, even then the Talibans are still a potent force
(Karlsrud 2015). In Iraq, Saddam was raised to power by the US and when he realized that he
was being used by the US to their benefit of having a foothold in the Middle East and the
The third pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations Organizations is to
building up of counter terrorism tactics by a nation by means of strengthening the army and also
by entering into alliances with the international organizations. Terrorism is an international affair
and collective effort must be undertaken to combat it. The stronger nations must help out the
weaker ones (Gioa 2016).
The fourth pillar for countering terror as per the United Nations Organizations is to
ensure that in the process of combatting terror the human rights of the civilians must not be
compromised with. Situations of emergency emerging out of situation of terror can cause the
human rights of the civilians to be violated and that must be avoided. In this regard the United
Nations Organization has strictly forbidden the association of terrorist activities to be associated
with any religion (Gioa 2016).
Having mentioned of the methods that a state should follow in combatting terrorism, the
discussion shall now be devoted towards comparing the US method of countering terror vis-a-vis
Australian and Singaporean model. The aggressive foreign policy approach of US is somewhat
wrong. In the past she had attacked Afghanistan in the year 2001 and Iraq in 2003 (Karlsrud
2015). The Talibans were raised by the US to deal with the Soviet expansionism in Afghanistan,
and when the Talibans resisted against the US imperialism, they were accused of being a
potential threat. Hence, post the 9/11 incident, US occupied Afghanistan to combat terror
however almost two decades later now, there is no stability in the region, and the battle between
Taliban and Afghan Civilian Government, and US forces is still going on. The watershed in
Afghanistan had been the death of Bin Laden, even then the Talibans are still a potent force
(Karlsrud 2015). In Iraq, Saddam was raised to power by the US and when he realized that he
was being used by the US to their benefit of having a foothold in the Middle East and the
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
4COMBATTING TERROR
reserves of oil in the region. Post the war with Iran and Kuwait, Saddam was accused of having
nuclear weapons and that Iraqi citizens were being tortured by the dictatorial Saddam hence they
needed democracy and redemption from tyranny (Kaplan 2017). US decided to attack Iraq in
2003, however even that political stunt was not able to combat terror in Iraq and over the years
terrorist organizations like Al-Qaida and ISIS had risen to combat the US imperialism in Iraq
under the garb of safeguarding democracy and battling terror. This shows that the aggressive
foreign policy of US has been a failure. However nations like Australia and Singapore have set
positive examples in combatting terror. Australia has as such never intervened in any foreign
nation except on the occasion of Civil War in Falkland Islands when the separatists had
threatened to oust the President by means of coup d’etat. That was a humanitarian intervention to
combat terror and Australia had withdrawn soon after the crisis had come to an end. Even during
the period of war Australia had not intervened in the internal politics of the Falkland Island
(Kaplan 2017). Australia has entered into diplomatic ties with several other nations of Oceania
and other poor island nations of Asia Pacific to combat terror, by providing them financial
assistance and military help without interfering in their internal politics. Singapore as such does
not involve itself in the internal matters of any other nation and its foreign policy approach is
mainly aimed at entering into regional cooperation organizations like the ASEAN for economic
prosperity and regional cooperation in combatting cross border terrorism and smuggling.
Singapore has never interfered in any foreign nation militarily, and the country has as such been
free of terrorist activities, and is also not in the hit list of any terrorist organization as such
(Kaplan 2017). The foreign policy approach of Singapore and Australia has been non aggressive
and they have been able to combat terror effectively.
reserves of oil in the region. Post the war with Iran and Kuwait, Saddam was accused of having
nuclear weapons and that Iraqi citizens were being tortured by the dictatorial Saddam hence they
needed democracy and redemption from tyranny (Kaplan 2017). US decided to attack Iraq in
2003, however even that political stunt was not able to combat terror in Iraq and over the years
terrorist organizations like Al-Qaida and ISIS had risen to combat the US imperialism in Iraq
under the garb of safeguarding democracy and battling terror. This shows that the aggressive
foreign policy of US has been a failure. However nations like Australia and Singapore have set
positive examples in combatting terror. Australia has as such never intervened in any foreign
nation except on the occasion of Civil War in Falkland Islands when the separatists had
threatened to oust the President by means of coup d’etat. That was a humanitarian intervention to
combat terror and Australia had withdrawn soon after the crisis had come to an end. Even during
the period of war Australia had not intervened in the internal politics of the Falkland Island
(Kaplan 2017). Australia has entered into diplomatic ties with several other nations of Oceania
and other poor island nations of Asia Pacific to combat terror, by providing them financial
assistance and military help without interfering in their internal politics. Singapore as such does
not involve itself in the internal matters of any other nation and its foreign policy approach is
mainly aimed at entering into regional cooperation organizations like the ASEAN for economic
prosperity and regional cooperation in combatting cross border terrorism and smuggling.
Singapore has never interfered in any foreign nation militarily, and the country has as such been
free of terrorist activities, and is also not in the hit list of any terrorist organization as such
(Kaplan 2017). The foreign policy approach of Singapore and Australia has been non aggressive
and they have been able to combat terror effectively.
5COMBATTING TERROR
References
Benjamin, Daniel, and Steven Simon. "The Global Terror Threat in 2016: A Forecast."
Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) Sentinel 9 (2016).
Fuller, Christopher. "Using Law to Fight Terror: Legal Approaches to Combating Violent Non-
State and State-Sponsored Actors." (2019).
Gioia, Andrea. "The UN conventions on the prevention and suppression of international
terrorism." In International Cooperation in Counter-Terrorism, pp. 19-40. Routledge, 2016.
Kaplan, Abraham. The counter-terrorism puzzle: A guide for decision makers. Routledge, 2017.
Karlsrud, John. "The UN at war: examining the consequences of peace-enforcement mandates
for the UN peacekeeping operations in the CAR, the DRC and Mali." Third World Quarterly 36,
no. 1 (2015): 40-54.
Karlsrud, John. "Towards UN counter-terrorism operations?." Third World Quarterly 38, no. 6
(2017): 1215-1231.
Miller, Jordan. "Terrorism on Trial: Exploring the ICC as a Means of Combating Terrorism."
PhD diss., Brandeis University, 2018.
Seidl, Andrea, Edward H. Kaplan, Jonathan P. Caulkins, Stefan Wrzaczek, and Gustav
Feichtinger. "Optimal control of a terror queue." European Journal of Operational Research
248, no. 1 (2016): 246-256.
References
Benjamin, Daniel, and Steven Simon. "The Global Terror Threat in 2016: A Forecast."
Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) Sentinel 9 (2016).
Fuller, Christopher. "Using Law to Fight Terror: Legal Approaches to Combating Violent Non-
State and State-Sponsored Actors." (2019).
Gioia, Andrea. "The UN conventions on the prevention and suppression of international
terrorism." In International Cooperation in Counter-Terrorism, pp. 19-40. Routledge, 2016.
Kaplan, Abraham. The counter-terrorism puzzle: A guide for decision makers. Routledge, 2017.
Karlsrud, John. "The UN at war: examining the consequences of peace-enforcement mandates
for the UN peacekeeping operations in the CAR, the DRC and Mali." Third World Quarterly 36,
no. 1 (2015): 40-54.
Karlsrud, John. "Towards UN counter-terrorism operations?." Third World Quarterly 38, no. 6
(2017): 1215-1231.
Miller, Jordan. "Terrorism on Trial: Exploring the ICC as a Means of Combating Terrorism."
PhD diss., Brandeis University, 2018.
Seidl, Andrea, Edward H. Kaplan, Jonathan P. Caulkins, Stefan Wrzaczek, and Gustav
Feichtinger. "Optimal control of a terror queue." European Journal of Operational Research
248, no. 1 (2016): 246-256.
6COMBATTING TERROR
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
7COMBATTING TERROR
8COMBATTING TERROR
1 out of 9
Related Documents
Your All-in-One AI-Powered Toolkit for Academic Success.
+13062052269
info@desklib.com
Available 24*7 on WhatsApp / Email
Unlock your academic potential
© 2024 | Zucol Services PVT LTD | All rights reserved.