Cybercrime and Homeland Security Essay: Preemptive Measures Analysis

This essay, titled "Cybercrime and Homeland Security," addresses the critical issue of preemptive measures in the context of modern terrorism. The author begins by highlighting the evolving nature of terrorism, which now extends into the digital realm, and the devastating impact it has had globally. The essay explores the legal complexities of preemptive strategies, referencing the United Nations' stance on unilateral action. It then delves into the dual nature of counter-terrorism, distinguishing between preemptive and defensive strategies, and emphasizes the importance of analyzing various factors, such as costs, foreign relations, and domestic losses, when considering preemptive measures. The essay also examines the root causes of terrorism, including conflict zones, lack of development, and the role of the internet. It concludes by arguing that preemptive measures should be consistently employed to monitor and mitigate the rise of such activities while ensuring security and trust within a nation. The author also acknowledges the need for objective measures, such as increased security and intelligence, when facing imminent threats. The essay provides a comprehensive overview of the challenges and considerations involved in addressing cybercrime and homeland security in the face of terrorism.

Running Head: CYBERCRIME AND HOMELAND SECURITY
WHEN SHOULD PREEMPTIVE MEASURES BE TAKEN AGAINST TERRORISTS
Name Of the Student
Name Of the University
Author’s Note

1
CYBERCRIME AND HOMELAND SECURITY
Terrorism has spared no country. However, modern terrorism is beyond the physical
nature of war and has escalated to the matters of digital world too. In 2016, nearly three quarters
of the mortality rate was the outcome of terrorism in only five countable states: Iraq,
Afghanistan, Syria, Nigeria and Somalia.
Under the United Nations prototype, unilateral pre-emptive strategy without an imminent
force is unlawful (Arend 2003). But determination of a force as imminent is a subjective matter.
However, according to Bandhopadhyay and Sandler (2011), pre-emptive and defensive strategies
are two folds of counter-terrorism taken by the targeted country. Pre-emptive measures include
detailed analysis of core factors including comparison of costs, foreign relations and interests,
domestic losses due to war and terrorism, risk target and so on (Sandler 2015). In other words
terrorism aims to assault the right and freedom granted to the people in a country by its rule of
law of that country.
The causes of terrorism has been explained as firstly, the conflict zones and ungoverned
territories which forms the base for such violent activities throughout the neighbouring states and
countries. Secondly, lack of development and inclusive governance meaning poverty, inequality,
discrimination, and other exclusions lead people towards terrorism even if it is more as a means
to employment than an act of aim. Thirdly, internet has given wings to such activities and one
such example being Da’esh’s terrorist campaigns.
Pre-emption is new approach and successful pre-emption strikes include precise and
prompt actions with decisive effects. Thus, United States should always be prepared to invest
some fund in intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance capabilities, planning assets and
prospectively, new military forces. However the National Security Strategy do not have

2
CYBERCRIME AND HOMELAND SECURITY
exclusive establishment for pre-emptive military action but apprehension of current policy may
form a foundation for the elaboration of general conditions to be considered for the establishment
of pre-emptive use of force. Nevertheless, the National Security Strategy of the United States of
America (September 2002)has given freedom to act pre-emptive if necessary to fight terrorism
(Bunn 2003).
It is true that government can take numerous measures to control terrorism and include
sustainability and development to prevent conflict against the state among such people and
prevent them from getting attracted to such lethal activities. However, when pre-emptive
measures can be implemented is a subjective question to one and only simple answer. If the
terrorism is so deeply rooted in our society, then it is our duty to identify it and try to minimize
it. Thus, it can be concluded that in my opinion, such measures can always be in action to
monitor the rise of such activities and at the same time ensure security and trust among the
people towards their nation and its governance. However, some measures like immediate
deployment of army and other defences in an area, keeping an area on high alert, high security
and strenuous checking by the police and defence are objective measures that can be taken only
when the threat is imminent or there has been a movement or information for such threat and
defence needs to be prepared to reduce the impact and fight terrorism in best way possible.

3
CYBERCRIME AND HOMELAND SECURITY
REFERENCES:
Bunn, M. E. (2003, July). Preemptive Action: When, How, and to What Effect?. In Strategic
Forum (No. 200, p. 1). National Defense University.
Arend, A. C. (2003). International law and the preemptive use of military force. The Washington
Quarterly, 26(2), 89-103.
Bandyopadhyay, S., & Sandler, T. (2011). The interplay between preemptive and defensive
counterterrorism measures: A two‐stage game. Economica, 78(311), 546-564.
Sandler, T. (2015). Terrorism and counterterrorism: an overview. Oxford Economic
Papers, 67(1), 1-20.