Search

Begin New Search Topic War on Terror

21. Stable Regime, Historiography and Truth Commissions: A Case Study of Pashtun Tahafuz Movement of Pakistan

Author:
Farhat Taj
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Review of Human Rights
Institution:
Society of Social Science Academics (SSSA)
Abstract:
This article discusses the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement's (PTM) demand for establishing a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) to facilitate the right to truth of victims of the war on terror in Pakistan. It highlights the tension among the right to truth, geopolitical considerations, and historiography in pursuit of transitional justice under a stable regime. It argues that Pakistan is not likely to establish a TRC due to its geopolitical considerations vis-a-vis Afghanistan. It, however, also underscores that PTM as a pressure group could contribute greatly to realising several human rights based right claims of the war victims, if it disengages itself from the anti-Pakistan Afghan diaspora
Topic:
Human Rights, Transitional Justice, War on Terror, Pashtun, Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM), and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Pakistan and South Asia

22. THE END OF THE WAR ON TERROR

Author:
Navin Bapat
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
On August 15, 2021, almost twenty years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Taliban recaptured Afghanistan from the American-supported government led by Ashraf Ghani. Afghans pushed to get on American transport planes to evacuate, conjuring images of the US evacuation of Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War. Others, afraid of Taliban retaliation, turned to social media to plea for help. Meanwhile, in Kabul, militants paraded in front of the evacuated US embassy, signifying the Taliban’s total victory.
Topic:
Taliban, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, 9/11, War on Terror, Vietnam War, COVID-19, Joe Biden, Ashraf Ghani, and Hamid Karzai
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, and United States of America

23. 9/11 DIDN’T CHANGE US—OUR RESPONSE TO IT DID

Author:
Joe Young
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
This Saturday is the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks that changed the US and me. It is an important time to reflect on the events themselves, but also on the scale of violence meted out in response to the attacks. The ill-fated Iraq war—a war of choice, built on at best faulty intelligence and at worst political manipulation and hidden agendas—cost thousands of American lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives. It also upended the lives of millions of Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons. The so-called war on terror intended not only to punish the 9/11 perpetrators but also deter states who would support them—created a new category of violent actors, “enemy combatants”. The Bush administration used this label to place these actors in a sort of legal limbo where the rules of war wouldn’t apply. Enemy combatants, the administration determined, could be held indefinitely, denied habeas corpus, and interrogated using enhanced techniques. Most of these memos and rules are collectively called the torture memos today.
Topic:
Terrorism, Torture, 9/11, War on Terror, Iraq War, and George W. Bush
Political Geography:
Iraq and United States of America

24. Exporting the War on Terror: Islamophobia in Asia

Author:
Khaled A. Beydoun and Sahar Aziz
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
Abstract:
Join us for a fireside chat between Professor Khaled Beydoun and Professor Sahar Aziz on the latest legal and political developments in the troubling rise of Global Islamophobia in India, China, and other Asian countries.
Topic:
Human Rights, Populism, Islamophobia, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
China, India, and Asia

25. “The Same Procedure as Every Year”: U.S. Counterterrorism Policy since 9/11

Author:
Dorle Hellmuth
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
The quote above refers to the recurring dialogue between Miss Sophie, a sophisticated English lady, and her butler James in a British comedy sketch from 1963. Miss Sophie every year celebrates her birthday by holding a festive dinner for her friends, Mr. Pomeroy, Mr. Winterbottom, Sir Toby, and Admiral von Schneider. Unfortunately, Miss Sophie has long outlived all her friends, so she is the only one seated at the table; her guests are represented by her butler James, who ends up waiting on the imaginary guests and consuming all of their alcoholic beverages while toasting Miss Sophie. All four courses of the dinner follow the same pattern: Miss Sophie will choose the beverage that best fits with the course, followed by James asking, “The same procedure as last year, Miss Sophie?” and Miss Sophie answering, “The same procedure as every year, James!” The exchange might also be used to describe U.S. counter-terrorism strategy since the 9/11 attacks. Even though Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump could not be more different in terms of their political outlooks, personalities, and leadership styles, there has been a remarkable continuity in their approaches. Since 9/11, U.S. counter-terrorism policies have focused on externalizing the terrorism threat, designed to prevent the enemy from coming close to the U.S. homeland, by means of border security and surveillance measures, and tie them up offshore, either on far away battlefields, at Guantanamo Bay detention camp, or in other overseas prisons.
Topic:
Security, Counter-terrorism, Leadership, 9/11, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

26. The Terror Trap: The Impact of the War on Terror on Muslim Communities Since 9/11

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
On October 7, 2021, 20 years since the U.S. launched the War in Afghanistan as part of its Global War on Terror, a group of seven civil society and research organizations, including The Bridge Initiative, are releasing a detailed report on the impact and consequences of the War on Terror. In The Terror Trap: The Impact of the War on Terror on Muslim Communities Since 9/11, thirty international scholars provide a critical assessment of the U.S-led “counterterrorism” apparatus and its policies and tactics, which have criminalized and securitized Muslims in the U.S. and around the world. The report examines the various dimensions of the so-called War on Terror, and its devastating impact on communities and nations worldwide. Some of the topics explored include the racist history of targeting minorities in the U.S.; the roots of the “terrorism” industry; the role of the Islamophobia industry in exploiting post-9/11 fears; the restructuring of the national security and surveillance state; the use of torture, rendition, black sites, Guantanamo Bay prison, and drone warfare; Countering Violent Extremism programs; the destructive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the destruction of Muslim civil liberties through the policies of infiltration, entrapment, and manufacturing crime; and further repression of American Muslims through the use of “terrorism” sentencing enhancement and discriminatory prison conditions. The report also documents the human impact of these policies, focusing on the widespread harm and trauma that has been caused, and often not documented, on communities, individuals, and families that were placed under suspicion. The report then seeks to provide a new way of thinking about abolishing the War on Terror as well as providing a pathway for communities to reflect on their current engagement with the structures of policing and counterterrorism. Finally, the report provides detailed recommendations signaling the need for systemic changes at almost every level.
Topic:
Counter-terrorism, Trauma, Islamophobia, 9/11, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

27. American Invasion And Withdrawals Post 9/11

Author:
Ibrahim Karatas
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Institution:
Transatlantic Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Abstract:
When the United States was hit by al-Qaida's terrorist attack on 11 September 2001 (hereafter 9/11 attacks), not only Americans but the whole world was shocked: The world’s only superpower was attacked at home and had lost more than three thousand people. To take revenge for the attack as well as to prevent new ones, the Bush administration decided to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq, which they claimed were sheltering and supporting al-Qaida. Afghanistan was invaded on 7 October 2001 because the US wanted (1) to eliminate Osama bin Laden (the mastermind of 9/11) and al-Qaida; (2) to remove the Taliban group from power and bring stability to Afghanistan by creating a democratic and peaceful state.[1] The US Army subsequently invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming that Saddam Hussain was supporting terrorism and producing chemical weapons. There were also allegations that the Hussain regime was behind the 9/11 attacks, but it was never proven. The US eventually removed both Taliban and Saddam Hussain from power and captured Hussain, who was later judged and executed by the new Iraqi government on 30 December 2006. US special forces killed Laden on 2 May 2011. As of today, the US has killed its two archenemies and changed regimes allegedly supporting terrorism in both Afghanistan and Iraq, yet could not bring stability. What is more, the remaining US troops are preparing to leave the two countries. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq is in better condition than the pre-invasion era as both states have failed, lack a strong authority, and cannot !ght terrorism. In Afghanistan, the Taliban was the enemy to be removed, however the US’s recent agreement with the organization has paved the way for re-control of the country by the group. On the other hand, Iraq has become a land of widespread terrorism, and the country is more divided than before, not mentioning Iranian in"uence on Baghdad. Based on the current situation, my arguments are that (1) the US is about to make the same mistake it did in Vietnam, and (2) Afghanistan and Iraq might again become the hub of terrorist organizations as well as regional rivalries. Although I do not approve of the US invasions, as Afghanistan and Iraq saw the worse with its invasion, these countries will face the worst with the US’s withdrawal.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, War on Terror, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

28. Thinking beyond Democracy and Freedom: A Post 9/11 War on Terrorism Scenario

Author:
Rana Eijaz Ahmad and Muhammad Sajid
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Political Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
This paper is going to explore the world beyond democracy and the shrouded concept of freedom. In the world of 'globalution' where revolution comes through Multinational Corporations and any specific form of government does not work but tolerance. Tolerance for this paper is all about respect for each other’s' ideology, opinion, and status. It makes us wise enough to make our surroundings a harmonized and liveable place. The dichotomous nature of societies demands space for each other. However, we humans are supposed to respect each other's existence without any specifications. We are just human beings instead of Confucianists, Communists, Capitalists, Hindus, Christians, and Muslims. Humans are born free but their specifications have made them intolerant towards each other. Tolerance is a basic ingredient of democracy, which is a means to an end, not an end itself. Freedom can only be observed with impositions and impositions are against the concept of freedom. Thus, this paper will conclude the outcome of the nature of the modern sovereign state system. It is teemed with liberalism (a mixture of liberalism and realism) and liberacantilism (a mixture of liberalism and mercantilism). Misinterpretations of the West have made certain errors during the post 9/11 socalled war against terrorism. These errors cumulatively transform terrorism into 'errorism'. This 'errorism' is bringing home the world that inequality and imbalances are occurring horizontally and vertically making this world disorder. Industrialization is going on in the West and the population is increasing in the rest, breaking the "iron cage of liberalism." It demands a glocal system of governance that could sustain people's co-existence at home and abroad. The triangulation method with primary and secondary sources would be used in the process of this research.
Topic:
Globalization, Democracy, 9/11, War on Terror, and Freedom
Political Geography:
Global Focus

29. Factsheet: The Patriot Act

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
The “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,” commonly known as the Patriot Act, was passed less than two months after September 11, 2001. The act greatly expanded the surveillance powers of the U.S. Government, allowing the National Security Agency to access phone metadata, authorize roving wiretaps, and detain individuals at the U.S. border. Congress has authorized the extension of certain portions of the act numerous times, however, as of December 2020, key provisions of the Patriot Act have expired.
Topic:
National Security, Surveillance, War on Terror, and Patriot Act
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

30. Rethinking U.S. Counterterrorism Strategy

Author:
Douglas London, Chris Costa, Charles Lister, and Karen Greenberg
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
After nearly two decades of the so-called War on Terror, the threats and challenges posed by terrorism to the United States and its allies have proliferated in number, grown in sophistication, and expanded geographically. While our terrorist enemies have proven resilient and adaptable, our strategy and tactics have remained largely unchanged. Although the U.S. mainland may be better protected from a 9/11-style attack, our interests overseas and the stability of regions like Africa and the Middle East have never been more challenged. As terrorism continues to evolve and the threats we face diversify, the time has come for a serious re-examination of American counterterrorism policy and the determination of more effective approaches to counter the threats of tomorrow. What lessons can we learn from the past two decades of countering terrorism? In what ways have our enemies adapted? How might we adapt to more effectively counter terrorism? Given domestic political constraints, what approaches are likely to be most realistic and effective?
Topic:
Military Affairs, Violent Extremism, Counter-terrorism, and War on Terror
Political Geography:
Middle East, North America, and United States of America