Us government the long term approach building

This preview shows page 13 - 15 out of 23 pages.

US Government: The long-term approach, building democracy and representative institutions, as well as the four priorities of action, from the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism (White House 2006) Advance effective democracies as the long-term antidote to the ideology of terrorism Prevent attacks by terrorist networks Deny weapons of mass destruction to rogue states and terrorist allies who seek to use them Deny terrorists the support and sanctuary of rogue states Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror; and Lay the foundations and build the institutions and structures we need to carry the fight forward against terror and help ensure our ultimate success. This was one of the defining policy documents for the global war on terrorism. The strategy, which went through two editions, one in 2003 and one in 2006, owed its genesis to a student research project conducted at the National War College in Washington, DC. It is still available from a variety of sources but was removed from the White House website shortly after President Obama took office. US Army/Marine Corps: Principles of counterinsurgency from FM 3–24, Counterinsurgency Field Manual (Department of the Army 2007) Legitimacy is the main objective Unity of effort is essential
198 KIRAS Location The most important phase of any counter-insurgency or counter-terrorism campaign is recognizing that the threat exists. Counter-insurgency expert Robert Thompson believed it necessary to tackle an insurgency during its subversion and organization phase or at the first signs of a sustained campaign of violence (Thompson 1966: 50). In other words, he believed it necessary to defeat insurgents in both physical space and time. The problem for counter-insurgents and counter-terrorists is distinguishing between lawful or unlawful forms of discontent. Restricting guaranteed rights and freedoms every time a bomb is detonated will undermine the credibility and intentions of the government. Waiting too long to uphold the rule of law, however, will give the insurgents or terrorists the necessary time to build a robust organizational infrastructure that only the most dedicated efforts might hope to defeat. Terrorism and insurgency can be staved off with enough early warning, but this implies that an effective intelligence-gathering and assessment organization is operating. Few states possess such resources or foresight. Those willing and able to destroy the system need to be identified and tracked: this requires the assistance of a supportive populace. The question in pluralist systems is whether or not potentially seditious individuals can be monitored or arrested without violating civil liberties and undermining the rule of law, as recent debates in Sweden, the United States, and Great Britain suggest.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture