The Clinton administration underestimated the technological ability of several of the “rogue” states to develop long-range missiles and politicized its intelligence estimate. However, missile threats to the United States from any one of those states also depend on the intentions of that state and political developments that might affect those intentions.
To prosecute the war on terrorism, President Bush has assembled a diverse coalition of countries for political, diplomatic, and military support. Some of those countries are long-standing friends and allies of the United States. Others have new or changing relationships with the United States. Although there may be a price for their support, America should not pay an excessive price—one that could be detrimental to longer-term U.S. national security interests. And though it may be necessary to provide a certain amount of immediate aid (directly or indirectly) as a quid pro quo for the support of other nations in our war on terrorism, the United States needs to avoid longer-term entanglements, open-ended commitments, and the potential for an extreme anti-American backlash.
Topic:
Security, Religion, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, America, Europe, Middle East, and Asia
The purpose of this analysis is to assess the likely impact that the US campaign against global terrorism launched in the wake of the attacks of September 11th, 2001, will have on key American interests in the Middle East over the medium term (next 12 months). The main focus will be on the expected perceptions and reaction to US policy of selected important Middle East actors, regime stability and changing regional alignments.
On September 11, terrorists attacked freedom. The world has responded with an unprecedented coalition against international terrorism. In the first 100 days of the war, President George W. Bush increased America's homeland security and built a worldwide coalition that: Began to destroy al-Qaeda's grip on Afghanistan by driving the Taliban from power. Disrupted al-Qaeda's global operations and terrorist financing networks. Destroyed al-Qaeda terrorist training camps. Helped the innocent people of Afghanistan recover from the Taliban's reign of terror. Helped Afghans put aside long-standing differences to form a new interim government that represents all Afghans – including women.
Topic:
Defense Policy, National Security, Terrorism, and War
The spectre of the deliberate use of disease in war has long haunted humankind. The biological warfare threat became more realistic after the terrorist attacks against New York and Washington on 11 September 2001. Not only did the terrorists demonstrate that they were prepared to murder large numbers of people indiscriminately, they also exposed the vulnerability of many societies. The sense of vulnerability was increased by attacks in the United States with letters containing anthrax bacteria, which killed several people and infected many more. Against this background the Fifth Review Conference of the States Parties to the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (BTWC) convened in Geneva on 19 November 2001. One of its main tasks was to evaluate the functioning of the treaty in the light of scientific and technological developments. Biotechnology has expanded rapidly in the past three decades—offering the prospect of a better quality of life—but it can be applied to design new types of biological weapons (BW). This raises concern as to whether the BTWC is sufficiently comprehensive to cover these developments.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Science and Technology, Terrorism, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Despite years of research, the community's knowledge of how an adversary might use nuclear (and radiological), biological, and chemical (NBC) weapons remains restricted in important ways. The historical data that inform this area are rather limited and largely dated. We do not have much in the way of adversary planning documents or doctrine to study, and nations acquiring NBC weapons do not usually address employment concepts. Despite these gaps, we do know that NBC weapons afford potential adversaries cost-effective force multipliers and that a number of states of concern are actively pursuing their development.
Along with the highly developed forms of organized crime, can terrorism be ranked in the category of the tough challenges which the world has to face? This question is worth asking, as too often the perception of that threat is a faint one.
For years nongovernmental terrorism in Latin America was considered to be an epiphenomenon of the Cold War, and consequently explained in terms of that war. The persistence of terrorism throughout the region in the 1990s not only has indicated that many of our assumptions concerning the causes of terrorism were misleading, but also has lead scholars to reexamine the phenomenon of nongovernmental political violence. This paper investigates the validity of a number of hypotheses recently explored in the literature by applying a pooled time series cross section regression analysis to data from seventeen Latin American countries between 1980 and 1995. Findings indicate that nongovernmental terrorist acts in Latin America are more likely to occur in countries characterized by widespread state human rights violations. Likewise, evidence is found that nongovernmental terrorism in the region tends to be more prevalent in countries characterized by electoral and associational liberties than by restrictive dictatorships. Association between economic performance or structural economic conditions and the incidence of terrorism is not substantiated by the findings.
In the post-September 11th evolution a new transatlantic dimension is emerging based in the struggle against terrorism in a global perspective. Terrorism is identified as today's central threat to international security and co-operation.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, and Terrorism
Confronting bin Laden's rallying cry of "good" and "bad" terrorism lies at the heart of any battle to defeat terrorism. This now entails the courage to address directly the terrorists' and their state sponsors' rhetorical weapon of choice, the accusation of racism. In fact, their claim inverts the very heart of a civil libertarian agenda, since it is closely associated with a deep-rooted antisemitism.