反恐战争War On Terrorism
发布时间：2016-03-15 10:59
Introduction:介绍
According to the definition of “terrorism” from Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), it classifies terrorism into such two types as “international terrorism” and “domestic terrorism” (FBI 2014). Both of the two terrorism all characterize the activity that is involved violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law (FBI 2014). In fact, “terrorism”, which has its historical and social roots, became the top one hazard around the entire world. Moreover, it is also the product of various types of interests and disorders among the real world, finally reflecting on its nature of complexity, arduousness and protractiveness. In the contemporary world, it also brought about several dangers to our societies and human beings, especially the disaster happened in United States in 9/11. This big shock that people witnessed in United States on September 11, 2001 directly resulted the creation of “War On Terrorism”, which was claimed by US government.
与此同时，911之后，，美国人民持续安全意识增强，以及有关了很多关于他们的自由和人权。这是可以理解的，但是，没有理由过度延长恐怖主义的覆盖面。美国的过度敏感性制成其用于确定该活动是恐怖主义的标准，也可以扩大。从文章“反恐战争”行情，但在2002年6月描述的美国总统布什的声明在毕业班西点军校的是，打击恐怖主义应该是保持“人的尊严的不可转让的需求战斗中，法治，对国家和平等正义的力量极限“（2013沙阿）。Meanwhile, after 9/11, American people sustained a heightened sense of security, and concerned a lot about their freedom and human rights. It is understandable, however, not reasonable to over extend the coverage of terrorism. America’s over-sensitiveness made the criteria, which was used to determine if the activity is terrorism, to be broadened. Quoted from the article “War On Terror”, it described President Bush’s statement in the graduation class of West Point Military Academy in June 2002 that, the fight against terrorism should be a fight to preserve “the non-negotiable demands of human dignity, the rule of law, limits on the power of the state and equal justice” (Shah 2013). However, the statement and persistence of the Bush Administration triggered the public to consider deeply about if the “war on terrorism” is a good way to against terror, and, if US government intended to extend the influence of “war on terrorism”? What is more, the public also is questioning about whether or not the time and efforts that people spend on counter-terrorism is not efficient and productive. Not least, what are the true measures that can be took in resolve “terrorism’ issue? The following two sections are sitting in analyzing these above questions.
Section One: Over-extending War On Terrorism第一部分：在延伸反恐战争
On one hand, talking about the inside reasons of the appearance of terrorists, it is hard to leave the divergence among different countries or cultures in politics, economy, culture, religion, etc. Importantly, poverty issue should be another significant factor in causing “terrorism”. Afterwards, different and extreme disparity in politics likewise made the occasion of terrorism. Finally, distinguished religions are very easy to create the opposite attitudes, which might bring about terrorism as well. Hence, the above elements that caused terrorism show that terrorism can be solved step by step based on the good associations, adjustments and communications. If the world can hold the attitude of resolving the “terror issue” in a peaceful way, “war on terrorism” should not be over-extended. Unfortunately, the current fact is United States, after suffering from 9/11, took over the duty of protecting not just US citizens, but the whole world in defensing terrorists. Thus, their carefulness and over-sensitiveness led the “terrorism issue” become more severe as well as increase the difficulties in releasing the seriousness of terrorist.
Taking Middle Asia as an example to discuss about the overextending of “terror”, US government, as a hegemony leadership status in the world, often strongly impart the American style of thinking and democracy into Middle Asians without considering their cultures and religions (Discover The Networks 2014). This behavior finally caused another new terrorist events in that area because of US’s monopolization, especially in the president Bush time. In this case, the terrorist should not be happened at that time and in this area, but it also happened lastly. This unique reason to explain is the disparity in different countries and the inappropriate attitude in extending the issue. The real and reasoning acts US and the whole world should do is to ensure the organization of terrorists, the purpose, as well as the proof, for avoiding hurting certain innocent citizens.
On the other hand, the trend of overextending “war on terrorism” was created under the political influence of President Bush. The Bush Administration seized the opportunity to promote and emphasize US’s leadership status among the world through fighting against “terrorism”(Transcript 2006). Because of this, the Bush Administration often declared the importance of “war on terrorism”, reflecting on not only watching the Middle Asia area, but also shifting strongly to unilateralism and influencing living qualities of domestic citizens.
From the perspective of shifting policy, President Bush went continuously the way of President Clinton, who was a supporter of unilateralism. However, the difference between these two governors is President Bush took a lot more tough acts in implementing this policy, but President Clinton did not (Malone &Khong 2003, p.3). In a sense, unilateralism is another stimuli to cause the overextending issue (Malone &Khong 2003, p.2). For instance, interrupting talks with North Korea, bombing Iraq, and Quitting Kyoto Protocol are US’s specific acts in extending hostility and dissatisfactory between poor areas and developed countries (Malone &Khong 2003, p.17). The result of extending is the increasing numbers of terrorists.
Furthermore, from an elder named Harry Taylor, he stood out and complained about Bush’s improper acts in detecting citizens’ private calls and text messages in order to avoid the violence of terrorists (Yi 2006). During the Bush governance’s period, most Americans felt panic and intensive in living commonly and happily. Thus, from this perspective, overextending “war on terrorism” also affected Americans’ living qualities and happiness degree to some extents.
Section Two: Assessment of if the level of the defense on counter-terrorism is unproductive第二节：如果对反恐防御水平是非生产性评估
With the mature functions and increasing improvement in drone airstrike, it becomes to play a key role in fighting, especially in counter-terrorism. However, the most recent news proved that drone strike is not that productive and effective, as previously imagining. From UN survey report that released on the 18th, said that US frequently deployed unmanned attack aircraft in the world shooter terrorists suspects insofar led at least 500 casualties killing in civilians (Dehan 2013). What is more, this report also show that in Afghanistan, the Argentine in the past 18 months there have been 31 common civilians died in the drone attacks (Dehan 2013). Same as Yemen, the drone strike in Yemen also killed up to 58 people (Dehan 2013). The above statistics can directly stand out drone strike’s ineffectiveness in counter-terrorism, because it will result to another unnecessary kills in common citizens.
Even though United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights and counter-terrorism investigation blamed U.S that the movement in Yemen did violate international humanitarian law, U.S did not care much about the declaration (Dehan 2013). From the speech of White House Speaker: Jay Carney, the drone strike from U.S was not only followed by U.S Federal Laws, but also by International Laws (Hopkins 2013). The reason, provided by U.S, of using drone strike is to avoid other unnecessary kills, but not increase kills.Drone strike, a so-called useful technique to protect the world, is actually not a real and effective way to maintain the world order and peace. What really matters in counter-terrorism is not using what types of weapons or technologies, but really adjusting the contradictions. Since “terrorism” is a deformed socially and politically phenomenon and insecure threats, it should be considered as a political issue, which requires the whole world tries to resolve it from a higher viewpoint, but not just a war or military issue. Therefore, the integrated counter-terrorism is created, when President Obama aware of the core of “terrorism” (Hopkins 2013). Overall, the world must make endeavors to relief the severe global situations, decrease the numbers of poor populations, and increase the anti-terrorism coordination. The above three measures should be treated as an efficient and productive way to protect the peace of the world.
From the perspective of decreasing populations of the poor, the primary issue should be concentrated on how to reduce the differences between the poor and the rich as well as the developing and the developed. Under the influence of 2008 financial crisis, the process of decreasing poor populations sharply slowed down. According to the article in Finance China, it describes that the fundamental solution in decreasing the economic inequality issue is to make reformations or transformations in economic growing model (Finance China 2014). This reformation should be a global activity, because only doing that it is possible to find a developing balance in developed countries and developing countries. For those developed countries, such as U.S and U.K, they should modify their economic growing model with largely relying on debts. Alternatively, for those developing countries, especially in China, India, Middle Asia countries, they should build up a type of model with perfectly relying on domestic demands. It is understandable that every transformation is tough and miserable to get through. However, this time, it is a must for the entire world on the ground it is the unique and beneficial method to solve the “terrorism” issue. After releasing the economic inequality pressure from developed countries, the order of their countries and the world would be more stable, firm, fair and healthy. So therefore, simply using drone strike should not be a smart and productive way to protect the world.
From the perspective of increasing the coordination of anti-terrorism, the main issue should be focused on getting rid of unilateralism, but choosing multilateralism. Indeed, the struggle between using unilateralism and multilateralism does exist for a while in United Nation. At the present time, the most voices are inclining to support multilateralism on the ground that the implement of unilateralism will increase the possibilities of overextending issue.
According to Madrid Terror Talks, the world reached several agreements in the coordination of counter-terrorism some time, such as how to exert the function of United Nation, or, how to avoid the violation via Internet, media and religion (Malone &Khong 2003, pp.76-8). Based on realizing the importance of respect and coordination, in the future years, multilateralism will be a trendy in solving the “terrorism” issue. Multilateralism emphasizes more on the inclusiveness, diversity, openness and fairness, resulting it to achieve the goal of creating a new world peaceful order. So therefore, figuring out a new and firm world order is the other productive method in protecting the world’s security as well as fighting the terrorists. Unilateralism, mainly depending on weapon, should not be helpful in solving the issue, but hardening the problem.
Conclusion: 总结
Based upon the present situations of “terrorist” and “counter-terrorism”, the intensive condition was produced largely by the occasionally expansion of anti-“terrorist”. To U.S, they strongly and persistently using unilateralism policy to press the “terrorist” or related violations would unceasingly increase the difficulties in solving the “terrorist” issue. Moreover, because of the disparity of attitudes in “terrorist”, U.S did have a not harmony relationship in the whole world, which is not beneficial for both U.S and the global world.
Although “terrorism” brings the world a lot more kills and disorders, it still provides the world a timing and chance to build up a new global order and formation in order to well develop. After exploiting the insider of the occasion of “terrorism”, the solutions are becoming more and more clear, such as improving the global development both in economy and society, increasing the realization of different countries, and fostering the trusts among various countries or cultures. Apparently, fighting against the “terrorists” needs a big scale of world coordination and integration. This kind of integration does not only represent the coordination among developed countries, but also the long-term and close communications between developed areas and developing areas. Thus if they can try to truly associate and coordinate, the world will be more peaceful and ordered. And these above might be the last methods the world can use to reduce the appearances of “terrorism” and “terrorist” threats.
Lists of Reference文献
Discover The Networks 2014, War On Terror, Viewed 11 May 2014.
Finance China 2014, Global Inequality, Viewed 10 May 2014.
FBI 2014, Definition of Terrorism, Viewed 10 May 2014.
Hopkins N 2013, US Drone Attacks ‘Counter-Productive’, Former Obama Security Adviser Claims, 07 January, Viewed 10 Mayb 2014.
Ledeen M A. 2003, The War Against the Terror Masters: Why It Happened. Where We Are Now. How We’ll Win. St. Martin’s Griffin. US
Malone D M &Khong Y F. 2003, Unilateralism & U.S Foreign Policy: International Perspective. LynnerRinner. USA
Shah, A 2013, War On Terror, 07 October, Viewed 10 May 2014.
Transcript 2006, President Bush’s Speech on Terrorism, 06 September, Viewed 11 May 2014.
Yi Z 2006, Bush’s Plan on Counter-Terror, 06 April, Viewed 10 May 2014.
本文编号：34895
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenshubaike/lwfw/34895.html
