ABSTRACT
This study intends to critically carry out an
assessment among other things, role the United States is playing in the fight
against terrorism; whether the United States actions conform with international
laws and conventions. In order to research on the problem, the following
hypotheses were formulated to guide the study; the war on terrorism has
affected terrorists financing; the war on terrorism has had significant impact
on global security. The Power Theory was found viable as an analytical tool
because it is most suitable for the study. The theory posits that wealth and
military strength cannot make a state super power, but that states also need a
high level of influence as in the case with the United States. That is why the
United States is referred to as super power, because it possesses military
strength, wealth and influence over most nations. In order for us to achieve
the objectives of this study, information were derived through content analysis
of articles, documents, journals, internet sources, magazines, monographs and
books related to the study. The study found out that the United States did not
declare war against terrorism because it was interested in the security
situation in Afghanistan in particular and the world in general, but because the
Taliban and their allies finally engaged in activities that directly harmed the
United States.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Table of Content
Table of Illustration
Abstract
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
of Study
1.2 Statement
of the Problem
1.3 Objectives
of Study
1.4 Significance
of Study
1.5 Scope
and Limitations
1.6 Literature
Review
1.7 Theoretical
Framework
1.8 Hypotheses
1.9 Methodology
1.10 Definition
of Key Concepts
References
CHAPTER TWO
HISTORICAL ANTECEDENT OF AFGHANISTAN
2.1 Afghanistan
and Terrorist Activities
2.2 The
Fall of the Taliban Regime
References
CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Fighting Terrorists Finance
References
CHAPTER FOUR
THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM AND GLOBAL
SECURITY
4.1 America’s
War on Terrorism, impact on Global security
4.2 The
United Nations and The War Against Terrorism
References
CHAPTER
FIVE: SUMMARY,
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Summary
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendation
References
Bibliography
Appendix
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF
STUDY
Terrorism is a phenomenon that governments around the world
have come to fear. According to Jenkins (1975:1), terrorism is referred to as,
a strategy whereby violence is used to produce certain effects in a group of
people so as to attain some political end or ends, and one of the effects of
such a strategy is often fear, although there are also other effects. Thornton
(1964:73), in his contribution sees terrorism as the use of terror as a
symbolic act designed to influence political behaviour by extra normal means,
entailing the use of a threat of violence. Terrorism therefore may achieve
political ends by either mobilizing forces sympathetic to the cause of the
terrorists or by immobilizing the forces of the incumbent authorities.
Terrorism is a phenomenon that governments around the world
have come to fear. According to O’Connor (1987:149);
The problem of how to deal with the threat of terrorism has
been grappled with by political leaders of virtually every democratic nation (O’
Connor, 1987:149).
Since the Second World War, there have been hundreds of
terrorists groups operating world wide, each pursuing its own political agenda
that ranges from aircraft hijackings, hostage taking and embassy and department
store bombings, to the assassination of political leaders and diplomats.
According to Bush (1988:131);
Combating this continuing stream of terrorist events has
proved a troublesome political issue for democratic governments, especially when trying
to protect their citizens and property overseas (Bush, 1988:131).
Governments can usually enact legislation to guard against
terrorism at home and develop their domestic, law enforcement agencies to
detect and deter potential local events. It can also exercise a large measure
of control when resolving events such as hostage situations that have already
unfolded domestically, but when faced with events overseas, far from their
geographic sovereignty, governments are especially vulnerable and terrorists
know this. It is a notable fact that some states have regarded terrorism as one
means of conducting foreign relations. In this view therefore, Davis (1990:10)
posited that, Libya under Murmah Ghadaffi, established a large network of
training camps which at times gave support to specific attacks. He went further
to state that during the 1980s, Libya trained as many as seven to eight thousand
terrorists and guerillas per year, spent approximately one hundred million US
dollars on arms and financial disbursement to Palestinian terrorists, shared
intelligence with terrorists groups, provided transport aboard Libyan airlines,
supplied false passports and save-housed terrorists operating in Europe (Davis,
1990:10).
Suffice it to say therefore that, the activities of
terrorists escalated and came to limelight in contemporary times, as a result
of the terrorists’ attacks on World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on the 11th
of September, 2001, popularly referred to as “9/11”.
According to Andreani (2004:31), September 11th was for all
to see, an act of war. The sheer magnitude of the attacks, their merciless
violence, plus the world wide impact of the damages, immediately imposed the
word “WAR” as the only one commensurate with the event and the outrage it had
provoked. Less than 30 days after the attacks, President George W. Bush of the
United States, declared ‘WAR ON TERRORISM’ with a global reach and
announced that the war would end “only with the eradication of this evil”. In
the fall of 2001, the swift punishment of the perpetrators of these attacks,
and the defeat of their Taliban accomplices following a lightening military
campaign in Afghanistan, translated the US president’s promise into deeds.
The question one may wish to ask at this point is, “can the
war on terrorism end with a declaration of final victory?” The impact of the
September 11 attack on US has thus been contradictory. There is no doubt that
it did deliver a salvage blow to America’s prestige, its economy and its
international dignity. It has also helped justify a massive military build-up
which has placed the United States in an even more dominant position than it was
already. However, the knowledge or belief that terrorism is, directly or
indirectly, the hostile act of another state provides the target state with a
visible foe and creates the circumstances for the exercise of diplomatic or
military responses, which includes, the imposition of military, economic or
political sanctions and retaliation with the aim of deterring future terrorists
attacks as evident in the case of Afghanistan.
It is imperative to state that the war on global terrorism
may not end with a declaration of final victory, the use of the word, ‘war’ in
reference to such evils, and to terrorism itself, rather than against a
designated enemy, is essentially metaphorical. Based on the above, it is
important to carry out a research on the United States war on terrorism and the
impacts it has on global security, with a case study of Afghanistan, so as to
ascertain the role the United States is playing, whether it is of selfish or of
collective global interest.
1.2 STATEMENT OF
THE PROBLEM
According to a diplomat, as quoted by Ikenberry (2001:29), “One knows where a war begins, but
one never knows where it ends”. After the September 11 attacks, President
George W. Bush, declared “war on terrorism” and announced that the war would
end only with the eradication of this evil. Declaring a war against terrorism
is warranted to the extent that there is a normative element in any war, so
that success should confirm that certain types of behaviours are unacceptable
and that the perpetrators can expect to see their efforts thwarted and
eventually punished. The problem with this designation is that, it takes the
war beyond the immediate cause and raises questions of what is to be included
and excluded.
Many acts can be described as terrorism and they might be
undertaken in the name of many causes. The use of the word, “war” in reference
to terrorism itself, rather than against a designated enemy is essentially
metaphorical. According to Freedman (2001:63); Al-Qaeda (which claimed to be
behind the September 11 attacks on U.S) does not claim to be fighting a war for
terrorism, but one that pits true Islam against Christianity and Judaism.
Suffice it to say therefore that, according to the above statement, this is a
war about the future of Islam and therefore about the grievance of all states
with Muslim populations, and all conflicts in which Muslim groups are directly
involved.
This statement which is credited to Osama Bin Laden has done
more harm than good to the Muslim extremists in particular and global security
in general, which is evident in the nearly everyday suicide bombings taking
place all over the world. These extremists see this war, not against Christians
alone, but the US which they have tagged “infidel”. The world is now faced with
the mighty task of living with not just terrorism and its spate of violence,
but its impacts on global security if not managed.
Suffice it to say here that, if
careful efforts are not taken diplomatically, the “war against terrorism”, that
is being championed by the United States of America, may lead to an adverse
impact on global security that can even lead to a Third World War. Not also
forgetting the number of lives and properties, including U.S tax payers’ monies
that have being lost to this cause. Yet, the U.S is finding it difficult to
completely curb terrorism, because these terrorist groups have continued to
metamorphose in style and sophistication and not every country is cooperative
with the U.S in its war against terrorism and means by which terrorism thrives,
especially through terrorist financing.
To this effect, we raise the following research questions
which form the basis of this study.
Has terrorist financing affected the war on terrorism?
Has the war on terrorism had any impact on global security?
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF
STUDY
The primary aim of this study is, amongst others, geared
towards;
1.Analyzing the impacts of terrorist activities on global
security.
2. Appraising the role the United States is playing in the war
against terrorism, so as to ascertain whether it conforms with the stipulations
of international law.
3. Assessing the undertones in U.S unilateral declaration of war
on global terrorism.
Finding out the implications of the dual strategy employed by
the United States in Afghanistan, in the war against terrorism.
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE
OF STUDY
Studies in this subject have
exhaustively pin pointed the negative impact of terrorism on global security,
which no doubt has so far affected the peace and stability of the international
community.
This study will form a basis for further research and a
reference point in the study of war against terrorism. It will help to profer
ways by which the fight against terrorism can be carried out diplomatically, so
as to avoid any actions that may lead to a Third World War. The study will also
throw more light on the nature of terrorism as well as a guide to students,
institutions and countries that are involved and concerned about the war
against terrorism and especially in Afghanistan.
1.5 SCOPE AND
LIMITATIONS
As a result of time constraint, this study shall cover the
war against terrorism after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the
United States of America, to June, 2010, so as to appraise its effects and impacts
on global security, using the experience of Afghanistan. The study encountered
many obstacles in the process of carrying out this research work, which
includes financial constraint which is the reason for my inability to visit
Afghanistan for first hand information.
================================================================
Item Type: Project Material | Size: 99 pages | Chapters: 1-5
Format: MS Word | Delivery: Within 30Mins.
================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.