Abstract:
The post 9-11 world depicts a totally different outlook in terms of the global politics and regional security. It was the first major event since the fall of the Berlin Wall which forced the nations into revisiting their security policy and beefing up their internal security networks which would allow them preempting any similar event of aggression in the future. United States of America and United Kingdom undertook punitive measures in order to overcome the challenges faced. Each of the state adopted multi prong policy which was directed towards domestic and international safety of their national interests. This paper looks into the different domains, the key decisions reached and the present state of security incorporated into the network of security systems in United States and Great Britain.
Keywords:
United States of America and its counter terrorism measures:
Since United States of America was the direct victim of the heinous attacks launched on its soil, it therefore took up the task of thwarting any kind of offensive in future. It therefore looked into the immigration factor, the airports security and in land security factors.
The use of Drone Air Strikes:
The Drone Air strikes, which is a state of the art technology and concept has been incorporated by United States of America in order to preempt any gathering of the extremist mindset that may be present and in action in any part of the world. In the light of this preventive measure large number of Drone strikes have been performed in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia in the parts that are believed to be the safe heavens of the extremists (Elisabeth Bumiller 20 June.2011). These actions have the formal approval of the White House and the Congress and have so far been termed as positive towards mitigating the overall threat from the enemy.
Afghanistan Invasion:
As a part of its counter terrorism policy, United States of America unleashed a war upon Afghanistan soon after the 9-11 events took place (Hodges 15-Apr-2011). This was done so in response to the establishment of the Taliban government that was working in coordination with the banned outfit Al Qaeda. The over ten years long war in Afghanistan has been fought under the counter strategy of overcoming terrorism and making the world a more peaceful place to live in.
National Counter Terrorism Center:
NCTC has been established in the wake of prevailing global circumstances. Most of the work is based on the intelligence agencies reporting and efforts which are undertaken to overcome and thwart any possible attempt upon the United States interest both within and in the global spectrum. NCTC enjoys the coordination and support of both Federal Bureau of Investigation and C.I.A that mostly looks into the global threats faced by United States of America (President ofWashington 1st September 2002.).
National Counter Terrorism Center also takes into account the nuclear and chemical weapons threat that exists to the global community in the form of few fragile forces and nations that are relatively susceptible to the threats of proliferation of the chemical and biological weapons. The Iraq invasion undertaken by the Bush Administration was part of the same strategy ensuring that the chemical weapons do not get used in any regional instability and war against neighbors.
Political diplomacy:
Political diplomacy remains one of the core functions and key points of American counter terrorism policy. In this regard they ensure reaching to the areas with relatively fragile domestic political structures and ensure that the frail governments do not stay at the mercy of the forces that are a threat to the global peace in general and United States of America in particular.
Key Differences between United States counter Strategy and U.K’s strategy:
Great Britain’s stance varies from America’s based on the indirect participation. Great Britain has not launched any direct offensive into any country. Great Britain does not employ Drone Attacks on any state directly or indirectly.
Similarity:
The point of similarity is the stance carried by Great Britain. Great Britain is strategic partner to United States in its War on Terror. Also, Great Britain under the umbrella of collation forces has participated in Afghanistan. During 2001 to 2010, many terrorists’ attacks that occurred in both UK and US had many similarities. That is also one of the reason that both countries acted similarly in evading terrorism. And the steps taken by both countries are wide open to the world. As the terrorist were operating throughout the world, and formed global terrorists groups, it was not only UK or US who come forward to form an alliance but many other countries came forward to save the world. But the biggest similarity between these two countries was forming military and intelligence groups. This military coordination, intelligence sharing was the basic similarity between two countries.
Laws incorporated in U.K against the spread of terrorism include the following:
The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005:
Under this act the control orders were introduced which were aimed at tightening the noose against the potential offenders. This was a continuation to the already existing Terrorism Act of 2000. This was enacted in the wake of September 2001 attacks on New York (Rights 22-Jan-2007 ).
Terrorism Act of 2006:
The July 2005 events were similar to the attacks undertaken against United States of America. In response to it, Great Britain government came into action and enacted Terrorism Act of 2006. The subject of interest was the increased number of days of detention of the alleged terrorists.
Terrorists Assets Freezing Act of 2010:
Since financial funding from different parts of the world has been believed to have been an integral factor towards the potential spread of hatred against people of different societies and religions, the Great Britain undertook the steps towards mitigating the spread of this mindset. In the wake of this move the action was taken with regard to freezing of the accounts of the potential wrong doers and the extremists and hardliner religious parties and members (Fenwick 13- September- 2013). Under this Act, the government and the security agencies had the legal right to freeze the accounts of any individual or group, organization that it sensed was potentially threatening towards the safety of United Kingdom and its citizens.
Domestic measures:
While other security agencies such as the M.I-6 makes sure that the cross border and international activities are held in check, the Law and Justice System aims at ensuring smooth running of various functions within the country and the citizens. The Youth development program and ensuring that the habitual minor offenders are not targeted by the professional international terrorists makes up for the core policy of the Law and Justice System. This entity also provides the basic protection and legal rights to any individual accused of wrong doing.
United Kingdom’s Four Prong Policy-4Ps:
United Kingdom has adopted and initiated a multi prong policy for the purpose of overcoming the menace of terrorism. These steps are entailed as the 4Ps. These are:
Pursue:
Prevent:
Protect:
Prepare:
U.S strategy against terrorism post 9/11:
After a year of 9/11, a report was published publically in U.S. The report commented on special ways how to protect the nation from terrorism. The report issued almost forty to fifty points that should be followed to avoid further terrorism (Biddle. 2010). These points relate to the national security strategy on terrorism.
National strategy for fighting terrorism by U.S.:
During the early years of attack on U.S., many policies were implemented by the government of America from time to time. One of the strategies was known as National Security Strategy. The main points of this strategy were to provide protection to the citizens, to form a structure that repels terrorists and terrorism, and at the same time to secure the country and its assets. This strategy called upon all departments of the country to be involved whenever needed. Political, economic, law enforcement agencies, fund providers and as well as armed forces are involved in national strategy structure.
U.S. strategy to fight internally and externally:
U.S. was the major country struck by terrorist attacks, wanted to create such policies that not only provide security to the country but also to the whole world. In this aspect U.S. created allies that fight against terrorism externally and involved law enforcement agencies to work inside the country and ensure full security to the citizens. This strategy emphasis that army is not the one who alone can win the war against terrorism. It means to win war against terrorism diplomacy should be followed. In this context, George W. Bush during his tenure announced the law enforcement agencies and the armed forces will work in coordination with its allies to fight terrorism internationally. The U.S. has demanded the U.K. to form such legislation that give full authorities to the law enforcement agencies to work freely in all EU countries as well as in U.S. the law enforcement agencies will b given full freedom to investigate internally in the country (Miriam Gani 2008).
The main points of the strategy as announced by George W. Bush were 4D’s (Sheehan 2007). According to these 4D’s:
- Defeating those involved in terrorism. The allies will be their partners.
- Denying the support given either financially or any other means to the states that help terrorists or give safe way to the terrorists.
- Diminishing all such actions that terrorists can use as a weak point. Politics, economic aspects are the most prominent aspects.
- Defending US. Citizens at national or international level.
Based on these 4D’s U.S. made strategies that were followed by all allied forces. These were the main points that were encouraged and endorsed by all the allied countries.
U.S. main fields that were addressed to combat terrorism:
U.S. was aware of the fact that it is fight that has originated from its ground and can spread to whole world if not controlled by time. U.S. unlike U.K. had to spend more on few areas. These areas are:
Economic areas, funds provision and distribution of funds, providing and taking care of good intelligence reports and also sharing intelligence with allies, and law enforcement agencies were the main factor that involved all allies along with U.K. to ensure maximum success result.
Counterterrorism department by the U.S.:
U.S. formed a counterterrorism department. According to that department diplomacy will be the most important factor. U.S. counterterrorism imposed few rules while starting war against terrorism. These rules were set by only U.S. and were forwarded to all its allies. U.K. did follow these rules. According to these rules, there will be no deal with the terrorists (Michael Kraft 02-Feb-2012). The terrorists will be put under the jurisdiction of criminal laws. They will be treated as special criminal cases. And along with these rules, U.S. pointed all countries that provide a back to terrorists should either stop those terrorists’ activities and corporate with U.S. in eliminating them or in other case should bear the consequences of bearing terrorists. So it means that any state sponsoring terrorists will be treated harshly.
U.S treatment to the international terrorists groups:
U.S. put pressure on the states that were sponsoring terrorists and made drastic steps to curb international terrorists. U.K. was partner with the U.S. but never indulged itself directly in the fight against international terrorist groups. U.S. found that these terrorist groups threatened the U.S. land, its allies as well as its citizens where ever they are present in any part of the world. So that task was mainly taken by the U.S. to control and defend such attacks (R.Amstutz 2013). For this purpose international and national level intelligence sector was given due charge and to point the areas where such groups are most active.
Counterterrorism set forth certain principles that allowed all its allies to be strictly following the issues of concern of terrorism, to make a mutual partnership program, and look into short run as well as long run policies. U.S. also made it clear o the whole world that the safety of its land and its citizens are most important factor or them and at the same time every single person has the right to live independently in this world. No one should fear the threat of death or terrorism.
National Security Strategy is another central entity established towards the elimination of terrorism. This was established in 2010.
Contest Strategy:
This strategy will be formally inaugurated and integrated into the system of security setup by 2015.
Conclusion:
References:
Biddle., SD 2010, American Grand Strategy After 9/11: An Assessment, DIANE Publishing.
Elisabeth Bumiller, TS 20 June.2011, 'Wars evolves with Drones,Some tiny as Bugs', New York times.
Fenwick, H 13- September- 2013, Developments Counter-Terrorist Measures & Uses of Technology, Routledge.
Hodges, A 15-Apr-2011 , The "War on Terror" Narrative: Discourse and Intertextuality in the Construction and Contestation of Sociopolitical Reality, Oxford University Press.
Micheal Kraft, EM 02-Feb-2012, U.S. Government Counterterrorism: A Guide to Who Does What, CRC Press.
Miriam Gani, PM 2008, Fresh Perspectives on the 'War on Terror', ANU E Press.
ofWashington, EOOTP 1st September 2002., 'The National security startegy of the United States of America'.
R.Amstutz, M 2013, International Ethics: Concepts, Theories, and Cases in Global Politics, Rowman & Littlefield.
Rights, GBPCOH 22-Jan-2007 , The Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism: first report of session 2006-07, report, together with formal minutes and appendices, The Stationery Office,.
Sheehan, IS 2007, When Terrorism and Counterterrorism Clash: The War on Terror and the Transformation of Terrorist Activity, Cambria Press.
