CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Terrorism is a security problem that has
plagued the world for centuries, states like USA just took a different softer
approach towards it till it took a gruesome turn in the 20th century. Although
attention to terrorism has increased sharply in recent years, it is by no means
a new phenomenon. For decades terrorists have carried out attacks against
non-combatant targets causing massive destruction by means of vicious assaults.
The war on terror was the United States
response to the events that is popularly referred to as the 9/11 attack which
made terrorism a top priority for the US government. The 9/11 events ushered in
a new type of military action for US. The global war on terror is one of the
main combatants of the US new strategy by the government to ensure America’s
right to self defence and world’s obligation to the defence of freedom.
On September 11th, 2001, the strategic
landscape of the world was altered instantly. The radical Islamic group,
Al-Qaeda, challenged the global hegemon, the United States of America, by
striking targets in New York City and Washington D.C., symbolizing the
hegemon‘s economic and military power. The shock and impact of that day on the
U.S. foreign policy and strategy are often compared to those caused by the
Pearl Harbour attacks of 1941. The difference is that the terrorist attacks
struck at the heartland of the United States, and was broadcasted live across
the entire world through the television and internet channels. It also caused
the deaths of almost three thousand people, mostly civilians and billions of
dollars of damage. However, the most unprecedented aspect of the challenge was
that it stemmed not from another state, but from a non-state actor. The scale
and ambition of the U.S. response are equally formidable. President George W.
Bush declared a war which came to be known as the “global war on
terrorism”: the enemy was identified, the allies were mobilised, hesitant
parties were warned, ideological parameters were established, police, and
surveillance functions of the state were strengthened, the defence budget was
substantially increased and military action was launched.
Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda’s leader, had
proved that it is sufficient to mix a dose of religious extremism and zeal,
good planning, imagination, a few hundred thousand dollars with the right
political, social and strategic context in order to provoke a new global
conflict. Almost everyone is in agreement that, this new conflict is different
from the previous ones, just as the Cold War was different from the two world
wars. Discussions regarding its nature still continue
The official report of the 9/11
Commission describes the attacks of 11 September 2001, resulting in the death
of nearly 3,000 civilians as ‗a day of unprecedented shock and suffering in the
history of the United States. On 12 September 2001, President Bush met with
senior officials, as he said, ‗to assign tasks for the first wave of the war
against terrorism. It starts today. A week later he explained, ‗Our war on
terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until
every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. The
9/11 Commission considered the fatwa issued by the so-called ‗World Islamic
Front‘ at the request of Osama Bin Ladin and Ayman al Zawahiri, calling for
every Muslim who can to murder any American anywhere, to be a ‗declaration of
war. The concept of a
‗war on terrorism‘ or ‗war on terror‘ has
thus been taken literally rather than metaphorically in the sense of opposition
to an idea, such as the war against fascism or the war on drugs. Two weeks after the attacks of 9/11, the
Security Council unanimously adopted anti-terrorism resolution 1373 (2001) on
28 September 2001, which reaffirmed the Council‘s unequivocal condemnation of
the terrorist acts of 11 September and obligated all Member States to
criminalize the wilful provision or collection of funds for terrorist acts and
to freeze any financial assets and economic resources of those who commit or
attempt to commit terrorist acts or participate in or facilitate the commission
of terrorist acts and of persons and entities acting on behalf of terrorists.
Moreover, all States must refrain from providing any form of support to
entities or persons involved in terrorist acts and prevent terrorism by denying
safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, commit terrorist acts and
provide safe havens as well. They must prosecute anyone who has participated in
the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in
supporting terrorist acts and should also ensure that terrorist acts are
established as serious criminal offences in domestic law and seriously punished.
They also must intensify and accelerate the exchange of information regarding
terrorist actions or movements, forged or falsified documents, traffic in arms
and sensitive material, use of communications and technologies by terrorist
groups, and the threat posed by the possession of weapons of mass destruction.
Before granting refugee status, all States should take appropriate measures to
ensure that the asylum seekers have not planned, facilitated or participated in
terrorist acts. The Security Council also established a 15-member
Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) to
monitor the resolution‘s implementation, revitalized in 2004 to provide expert
advice on all areas covered by resolution 1373, to facilitate technical
assistance, and to promote closer cooperation and coordination with regional
and intergovernmental bodies. Terrorism in the twentieth century tended to
accompany political conflicts centred on nation-states, in struggles for
national independence or liberation from oppression or occupation. In recent
years international terrorism has taken new directions through the linkage
between struggles in different places and the rise of groups motivated by
transnational religious ideologies. As the Bishops‘ Working Group pointed out (Countering
Terrorism, p. 5), Al-Qa‘eda has both highly specific aims (US withdrawal from
Saudi Arabia and the destruction of Israel) and more generalised ones (the
removal of Western influence in Islamic lands and the establishment of an
international Muslim caliphate). This requires the maintenance of a state of
enmity between authentic Islam, as understood in Osama bin Laden‘s purist
strand of Wahhabism, and the United States and its allies throughout the world.
Terrorism is not a new challenge to
international order, although the influence of the United States has resulted
in significant rethinking of the international law and politics of terrorism
since the attacks on the US of 11 September 2001, which has had ramifications
in all regions, including the Asia Pacific. The ―Global War on Terror‖ came to
dominate US foreign policy in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The effort served
as a guiding light for how the United States interacted with friends, allies,
and adversaries and deeply influenced US priorities around the globe, in
general, and in the wider Middle East, in particular. While it will likely
never be announced as concluded, the Global War on Terror is effectively over,
due to four separate but related reasons: the killing of Osama bin Laden, the
perceived failure of
counterinsurgency as an effective policy
instrument, the significant costs of the effort, and the Arab Awakening, this
does not mean, however, that the United States will no longer pursue counter
terrorists. Drones and Special Forces have emerged as the key tools in US
counterterrorism, and the United States is likely to continue pursuing
terrorist cells and highvalue targets aggressively across the globe for decades
to come using these means. However, this practice should be viewed as one of many
defence efforts that the United States carries out on a regular basis in order
to guard the full range of US interests. Elements of the emerging US
counterterrorism effort remain problematic, but the end of the Global War on
Terror nevertheless presents Washington with a window of opportunity to reorder
its relations with the nations and peoples of the Middle East and North Africa
and frees up resources for the United States to tackle other emerging strategic
priorities, such as the shift of global power to the Pacific, the revival of
the US economy, and security challenges such as energy security and cyber
defence.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Terrorism has formed a large part of
history and the United States has had its share. Due to the effects of the 9/11
attack, terrorism and establishing counter terrorism attacks are now a major
priority of the United States. The United States has since experienced series
of terrorist attacks that has threatened the security in this region.
The report of the UN High-level Panel on
Threats, Challenges and Change said in 2004 that terrorism ‗attacks the values
that lie at the heart of the Charter of the United Nations: respect for human
rights; the rule of law; rules of war that protect civilians; tolerance among peoples
and nations; and the peaceful resolution of conflict. It also alluded to the
fact that ‗terrorism flourishes in environments of despair, humiliation,
poverty, political oppression, extremism and human rights abuse; it also
flourishes in contexts of regional conflict and foreign occupation; and it
profits from weak State capacity to maintain law and order. Terrorism is
normally understood to refer to ‗…criminal acts intended or calculated to
provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or
particular persons for political purposes …‘ It is the object of 13
multilateral and 7 regional treaties, which define and provide for
criminalization of specific acts relating to such behaviour as hijacking,
bombing, financing of terrorism and nuclear terrorism. Terrorism has been said
to have been caused by so many reasons ranging from religious causes to just
selfish need of individual non-state actors but none of the world’s responses
to terror has been as effective as the war on terror.
Terrorism has proven to be hard to
eradicate as long as these non state actors have the resources, even cutting of
the head has no effect since they just grow another. However, these attacks can
be minimized and managed to a certain level. This study seeks to examine the
role United States play in if not eradicating completely the terrorists but
minimizing their damages, and also try to establish and investigate the
following problems:
I.
What are the causes and impacts
of the terror acts that are scarring the world?
II.
Is there a significant
influence of United States towards this terror crisis?
III.
What are the achievements and
contributions of the United States in the war against global terror?
IV.
What is the outcome of the
United States and UN intervention in eradicating global terrorism?
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The main objective of this research
project is to analyze the reasons behind America’s creation of the War on
Terror.
The following listed
objectives are to be achieved from this study;
I.
To examine the causes and
impacts of the terror acts that are scarring the world
II.
To identify the influence of
the United States towards the terror crisis
III.
To identify the achievements
and contributions of the United States in the war against global terror
IV.
To identify and analyze the
outcome of the United States and UN intervention in eradicating global
terrorism
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
From the above objectives the following
are the relevant research questions to be used for this study:
I.
What are the causes and effects
of Terrorism?
II.
What are the strategies
employed by United States towards Global Terror?
III.
Did the Global War on Terror
have any achievements?
IV.
Has the Global War on Terror
succeeded in completely eradicating Terrorism?
1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
HO1: Religion was a major cause of
terrorism.
HO2: Religion was not a major cause of
terrorism.
HO1: War on terror has been a success.
HO2: War on terror has not been a
success.
HO1: Hegemonic power was a major
influence for the creation of GWOT.
HO2: Hegemonic power was not a major
influence to creation of GWOT.
1.6 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
This research study
shall be based on the following assumptions:
I.
Terrorism has taken a global turn and has
become an international problem thus making it an important part of
international relations. It is basically another concept that develops
interdependency and inter relations in the international system
II.
Although there have been other attempts to
fight terrorism besides the Global War on Terror, it is the most popular
pre-emptive strategy against terrorism,
III.
The hegemonic power of the USA played an
important role in the establishment of the Global War on Terror.
IV.
GWOT might have been creative for positive
achievements but in the course of its action it was also met with some
criticism.
1.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The world has had series of terror crisis
for a long time. These crises have been studied extensively by social
scientists, political analysts and other scholars. In many of these studies,
the analysts have focused mostly on the intervening roles of groups and
organizations, such as the UN. What this study found missing, however, is an
in-depth analysis of the role/s of individual member states, such as the United
States. The researcher hopes to portray the dynamics of terrorism and the
extent of the United States roles.
Also, the study seeks to capture the
extent to which the United States has restored security and economic
development to these terror battered states and to the entire region. It will
also help to explore the mechanism established to strengthen war against terror
and the challenges encountered in their operations. The study is also expected to add to existing
body of knowledge on the subject of terrorism as it relates to the United
States and hopefully contribute to answer some critical questions as relates to
the subject matter.
1.8 LIMITATION AND SCOPE OF
THE STUDY
This research study is to cover USA’s
approach to fighting terrorism. the time frame of the study would therefore
focus on the period right before the creation of the GWOT for better
understanding of the reason behind its creation. other areas to be covered include
other international participation. The study would focus mainly on the United
States of America’s involvement with GWOT and not every aspect of terrorism.
1.9 ORGANISATION OF THE STUDY
This study will be divided into five
chapters for easy clarification. Chapter one is the introduction and background
of the study which covers the statement of problem, objective of the study,
significance of the study, amongst others.
Chapter two covers literature review and
theoretical framework. Attempts would be made to review scholarly literatures
on the nature of activities of the United States towards global terrorism.
Emphasis would also be made on the Nature of America‘s policy and the
establishment of the war on terror. The study would also make use of a theory
suitable to this study to further buttress this work.
Chapter three would focus on the
methodology used for data collection. For the purpose of this study, the
researcher would employ secondary data as its research methodology.
Secondary data would include
publications, books, articles, magazines and internet sources. The researcher
visited the Afe-Babalola university library and online libraries in order to
source and gather available data.
Chapter four would be devoted to the
role, contribution and achievements of the United States towards the terror
acts that broke out in the world and then outcome of the intervention as an
analysis of the study.
Chapter five concludes the study by
summarizing the entire work and making some recommendations based on the
findings of the study.
1.10 DEFINITION OF TERMS
It is necessary to attempt a definition
of some of the key concepts of this study. These concepts are defined as
follows;
Terrorism
UN Security Council Resolution 1566
(2004) gives a definition: criminal acts, including against civilians,
committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of
hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public
or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or
compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from
doing any act. A UN panel, on March 17, 2005, described terrorism as any act
“intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants
with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an
international organization to do or abstain from doing any act.‖
European Union
The European Union
defines terrorism for legal/official purposes in Article1 of the
Framework Decision on Combating Terrorism
(2002). This provides that terrorist offences are certain criminal offences set
out in a list comprised largely of serious offences against persons and
property which: given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country
or an international organization where committed with the aim of: seriously
intimidating a population; or unduly compelling a Government or international
organization to perform or abstain from performing any act; or seriously
destabilizing or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic
or social structures of a country or an international organization.
Security
Security according to Buzan (1989:236)
―is taken to be about the pursuit of freedom from threat and the ability of
states and societies to maintain their independent identity and their
functional integrity against forces of change which they see as hostile‖. The
security of states is therefore threatened by any change that might threaten
that monopoly of violence–whether through external invasion or internal
rebellion.
Conflicts
Conflict is a disagreement through which
the parties involved perceive a threat to their needs, interests or concerns.Uhuegbu and Aja (2001:24) see conflict
as an opposition of vested interest between states or other actors. The
conflict may be in the area of trade, politics, finance, culture or military.
They went further to note that conflict may take the form of threat, war,
sanction, terrorism, border dispute or severance of diplomatic ties, etc.
National Security
Oche [2001] described national security
as a nation’s ability to protect and develop itself, promote its cherished
values and legitimate interest, and enhance the well-being of its people; it is
thus the freedom from those tendencies which can undermine internal cohesion
and the nation’s ability to maintain its vital institutions for the promotion
of its core value. According to Otto and Ukpere [2012], national security must
be related to the presence of peace, safety, happiness and protection of human
and physical resources or the absence of crisis, threats to human injury among
others. It is the function of every responsible government to ensure that the
security of the country, its citizens and their property is maintained.
National Development
According to Lawal & Oluwatoyin
[2011], national development can be described as the overall development or
collective socio-economic, political as well as religious advancements of
country or nation, which is best achieved through development planning, which
can be described as the country’s collection of strategy mapped out by the
government
Peacekeeping
Peacekeeping as a collective term covers
a diverse range of interventions: from traditional peacekeeping, to peace
enforcement, peacemaking, peacebuilding, conflict prevention, humanitarian
operations, etc. Peacekeeping is defined by the United Nation as ―a
unique and dynamic instrument developed by the Organization as a way to help
countries torn by conflict to create the conditions for lasting peace‖ (UN,
2004).
Peacekeeping is simply defined as the
preservation of peace, especially as a military mission in which troops attempt
to keep formerly warring factions, including the armed forces of any country,
from further fight or escalating already tensed situation.
Counter-Terrorism
The most common definition of
Counter-Terrorism on the internet is the practices, tactics, techniques and
strategies that government, militaries, police departments and corporations
adopt in response to terrorist threats and/or acts both real and imputed.