استراتي&Osla

Counter-Terrorism Law and Practice: An International Handbook

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 A Global Compact for Counter-Terrorism: Towards a Robust Multilateral Counter-Terrorism Regime Dr. Michael J. Boyle and Professor Alex P. Schmid Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence University of St. Andrews Sponsored by the The New Ideas Fund
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
2 Chapter One: Introduction One of the greatest challenges currently facing the United States concerns how it should establish and manage global cooperation for key counter-terrorism goals. Over the last eight years, the threat of international terrorism – particularly from groups like al Qaeda and its affiliates – has fundamentally altered the strategic environment in which the U.S. operates. No longer only facing a world of competing states with rival interests, the U.S. now faces a perilous threat from a sub-state actor which has proven its ability to strike both within the continental United States and within the territory of key U.S. allies. Modern international terrorism has proven itself to be a global phenomenon, as the key ingredients of terrorist events – operatives, materials, and financing – are rarely confined within the border of a single sovereign state. 1 It is then increasingly apparent that the response to modern terrorism must also be international in its scale and scope. The end of the Bush Administration poses an opportunity to rethink U.S. counter-terrorism policies, with an eye towards re-tailoring those policies to boost international cooperation for key counter-terrorism goals. The nature of a threat suggests a U.S. counter-terrorism response which puts a premium on the coordination of law enforcement agencies, intelligence services and military organizations, often across international borders. Yet to date the response from the United States and key Western allies has remained predominantly at the national level, with only fledgling attempts to internationalize the problem of terrorism. Indeed, one of the foremost criticisms of the Bush Administration is that its unilateral approach in foreign affairs runs contrary to the nature of the contemporary terrorist threat, which requires sensible and pragmatic international coordination. 2 The new Obama Administration has an unprecedented opportunity to shape international cooperation for years to come on key issues surrounding counter-terrorism. The question it faces is not about the need for additional cooperation, but about the proper modality for achieving it. Should the U.S. attempt to institutionalize its counter-terrorism efforts at the regional or even global level? If so, how should these institutions be created? What scope should they have? During the Cold War, when the U.S. faced an ideological threat from the Soviet Union, it constructed a dense network of alliances and institutions (such as NATO) to counter the threat. A number of influential voices have called on the United States to heed these lessons today. 3
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 61

استراتي&Osla

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online