Search

Begin New Search Topic War on Terror Publication Year within 10 Years

11. THE LESSON OF THE AFGHANISTAN PAPERS

Author:
Navin Bapat
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
The Washington Post’s publication of the Afghanistan Papers reveals that, although the official line was that the war was turning in favor of the US and its allies in Kabul, policymakers have long been aware that the situation was bleak, deteriorating, and unlikely to produce anything resembling a “victory.” Following 9/11, the US identified failed states as a key national security risk, in that these environments enabled terrorists, rebels, warlords, and other non-state actors to plot and plan operations against the US and the international community. Given that Afghanistan seemed to represent the prototypical weak state, the solution was obvious: Afghanistan needed to be transformed into a strong state that would resist non-state actors—particularly terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda. But in trying to achieve this lofty goal, the US has lost thousands of soldiers and contractors and spent several trillion dollars—and the costs will likely continue rising. The Afghans themselves have suffered even more, with over 100,000 deaths since 9/11. Despite all of this loss—and the open acknowledgment that the strategy is failing—there is little appetite among US policymakers for reversing course.
Topic:
War, Military Affairs, Afghanistan, Military Intervention, War on Terror, and Military Contractors
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and United States

12. Terrorism: U.S. Strategy and the Trends in Its “Wars” on Terrorism

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The United States has now been at war in Afghanistan for some seventeen years and been fighting another major war in Iraq for fifteen years. It has been active in Somalia far longer and has spread its operations to deal with terrorist or extremist threats in a wide range of conflicts in North and Sub-Saharan in Africa, South Asia, and South East Asia. In case after case, the U.S. has moved far beyond counterterrorism to counterinsurgency, and from the temporary deployment of small anti-terrorism forces to a near "permanent" military presence. The line between counterterrorism and counterinsurgency has become so blurred that there is no significant difference. The national academic consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) has just issued new trend data on terrorism that are updated through the end of 2017. When they are combined with other major sources of data on terrorism, they provide the ability to trace the history of U.S. "wars" against terrorism in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. They show the results of America's "long wars" of attrition where it is increasingly unclear that the United States has a strategy to terminate them, or has the capability to end them in ways that create a stable and peaceful state that can survive if the United State should leave. The resulting graphics and maps are provided in the full text of the report on which this summary is based, and which is available on the CSIS website here. This summary both summarizes how the trends in such data reveal the patterns in terrorism and impact on U.S. strategy. The key conclusions, and an index to these graphics, are provided in this summary.
Topic:
Imperialism, National Security, Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Africa, United States, South Asia, Asia, North Africa, Southeast Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa

13. Human Cost of the Post-9/11 Wars: Lethality and the Need for Transparency

Author:
Neta C. Crawford
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University
Abstract:
All told, between 480,000 and 507,000 people have been killed in the United States’ post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. This tally of the counts and estimates of direct deaths caused by war violence does not include the more than 500,000 deaths from the war in Syria, raging since 2011, which the US joined in August 2014.
Topic:
War, Conflict, 9/11, War on Terror, Statistics, Transparency, and Iraq War
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, South Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, and United States of America

14. United States Budgetary Costs of the Post-9/11 Wars Through FY2019: $5.9 Trillion Spent and Obligated

Author:
Neta C. Crawford
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University
Abstract:
The United States has appropriated and is obligated to spend an estimated $5.9 trillion (in current dollars) on the war on terror through Fiscal Year 2019, including direct war and war-related spending and obligations for future spending on post9/11 war veterans. This number differs substantially from the Pentagon’s estimates of the costs of the post-9/11 wars because it includes not only war appropriations made to the Department of Defense – spending in the war zones of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and in other places the government designates as sites of “overseas contingency operations,” – but also includes spending across the federal government that is a consequence of these wars. Specifically, this is war-related spending by the Department of State, past and obligated spending for war veterans’ care, interest on the debt incurred to pay for the wars, and the prevention of and response to terrorism by the Department of Homeland Security. If the US continues on its current path, war spending will continue to grow.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Government, Military Affairs, Budget, Military Spending, War on Terror, and Veterans
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, South Asia, Middle East, Syria, and United States of America

15. The International Self-Defense Institute in the Era of Global Terrorism

Author:
Rodrigo Szuecs Oliveira and Carlos Canedo Augusto de Silva
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
The White House legal approach to the War on Terror has been one of the most discussed and least understood topics of international law according to legal counselors of the American government themselves. Despite several speeches and official notes on the subject, the issue remains complex because it involves constitutional rights, human rights and national security. This paper analyzes the War on Terror focusing specifically on the self-defense institute in the world risk society. This means that in order to understand how terrorism is threatening the international order, it is necessary to verify the conceptual changes that determine the self-defense institute and the results of this mutation.
Topic:
Defense Policy, National Security, Terrorism, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Low Cost Terrorism or the Invisible Threat: Terrorism and Brazilian Anti-Terrorism Policies

Author:
Marcial A. G. Suarez and Igor P. Acaio
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
We propose to study a tactical change into the violent political action of terrorist attacks: in addition to the car bombs and the attacks on public spaces performed by organized terrorist cells, attacks can growingly be pursued at a lower organizational and material cost. We propose to define such attacks as “low cost terrorism”, referring to recent events (Paris, London, Brussels, and Barcelona). Aside from the theoretical discussion and characterization of terrorism as a macrosecuritization process, we discuss Brazil’s anti-terrorist legislation in this context and highlight inconsistencies and inadequacies of the country’s to address the phenomena of terrorism, especially when referring to “low cost terrorism”.
Topic:
Terrorism, Budget, Counter-terrorism, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Brazil and South America

17. Fighting Terrorism: The Democracy Advantage

Author:
Amichai Magen
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Democracy
Institution:
National Endowment for Democracy
Abstract:
Global rates of terrorism have skyrocketed since 9/11, yet the aggregate increase tells us very little about the distribution of attacks across different regime types. Contrary to the traditional scholarly view and popular perceptions in the West, reasonably high-quality democracies enjoy a robust and growing “triple democracy advantage” in facing the scourge of post-9/11 terrorism. Not only are liberal democracies and polyarchies less prone to terrorist attacks than all other regime types, but the rate of increase in the number of attacks among these democracies is substantially lower in comparison to other regime types, and they are significantly better at minimizing casualties.
Topic:
Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Global Focus

18. Terrorism, tactics, and transformation: The West vs the Salafi-jihadi movement

Author:
Katherine Zimmerman
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
The Salafi-jihadi movement shifted to prioritizing local over global objectives during the Arab Spring. Analysts wrongly understood this as a weakening of the groups. Groups have hidden their true nature by hiding their ties to global jihadi groups, such as al Qaeda and the Islamic State, and by rebranding and reorganizing on the ground. Movement leaders design and execute attacks in ways that create doubt and ambiguity about the responsible party. This new technique exploits US counterterrorism policy, which is not designed to pursue anyone other than the individuals directly responsible for the attack. American officials are countering a dynamic enemy with an irrelevant and outdated strategy.
Topic:
Counter-terrorism, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, Salafism, Arab Spring, War on Terror, Sunni, and Jihad
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Middle East, Libya, Yemen, Syria, North America, and Arabian Peninsula

19. Structuring Cooperative Nuclear Risk Reduction Initiatives with China

Author:
Larry Brandt, Jason Reinhardt, and Siegfried S. Hecker
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International Security and Cooperation
Abstract:
The Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation engaged several Chinese nuclear organizations in cooperative research that focused on responses to radiological and nuclear terrorism. The objective was to identify joint research initiatives to reduce the global dangers of such threats and to pursue initial technical collaborations in several high priority areas. Initiatives were identified in three primary research areas: 1) detection and interdiction of smuggled nuclear materials; 2) nuclear forensics; and 3) radiological (“dirty bomb”) threats and countermeasures. Initial work emphasized the application of systems and risk analysis tools, which proved effective in structuring the collaborations. The extensive engagements between national security nuclear experts in China and the U.S. during the research strengthened professional relationships between these important communities.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
United States, China, and Asia

20. Re-embracing the Wartime Detention Mission

Author:
Ryan J. Vogel
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
President Donald Trump has made clear his intent to utilize wartime detention in the fight against al-Qaeda and ISIS. As former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Rule of Law and Detainee Policy, William Lietzau, and I have argued elsewhere, this could be a positive development in the United States’ evolving approach to the war against al-Qaeda, ISIS, and their associates, so long as it is coupled with a commitment to continuing key detention policies and humane treatment standards developed over the past fifteen years. In recent years, the United States has largely avoided adding to the detainee population at Guantanamo (GTMO) – mainly in reaction to some of the more infamous excesses from the first couple of years after the attacks on September 11, 2001. But failing to capture new enemy fighters has come with an operational and humanitarian cost. The United States should take the opportunity that comes with political transition to re-embrace the wartime detention mission.
Topic:
Government, Human Rights, Law, Prisons/Penal Systems, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Middle East, Global Focus, United States of America, and Guantanamo