Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Content

• Introduction
• 1. Realism and Terrorism
• Conclusion
• References

Introduction

Relevance of the work is due primarily to the essence of the threat of global political terrorism and view of realist. After the terrorist attack in New York September 11, 2001 terrorism is perceived as the central security threat at all levels of functioning of the world system locally, nationally, regionally and globally. This attack showed that it is pointless to divide security in today's society to the west, national or global. The world community has come to realize that this threat cannot simply be solved by force. The modern concept of security aligns it with the problem of development offering comprehensive solutions to both problems by joint efforts of developed and developing countries.

The war against terrorism has lasted for over 10 years, costing approximately 1, 5 million lives in Iraq and tens of thousands of lives in Afghanistan and Pakistan, demonstrating the obvious need for alternative anti-terror measures. (Schoenenberger, Schenker-Wicki and Beck 2014) In this term paper I want to consider the views of realist about terrorism.

1. Realism and Terrorism

Political realism is a school of thought that believes that nation-states are the essential actors in the international system (not individuals, groups, or corporations) and that there are structural reasons that the world functions the way it does that are beyond the immediate influence even of world leaders and powerful nation-states themselves. Due to its focus on the "big picture" --the structure of the whole international system and the distribution of power among the nation-states within it-- many have argued that realism is becoming increasingly irrelevant in a world of asymmetric warfare with non-state actors like terrorists.(Charles,2011).

According to an interview conducted with John Mearsheimer (2002), realism is really all about the relations among states, especially among great powers. In fact, al Qaeda is not a state; it's a non-state actor, which is sometimes called a transnational actor. Virtually all Realist theories don't have much to say about transnational actors. However, there is no question that terrorism is a phenomenon that will play itself out in the context of the international system. So it will be played out in the state arena, and, therefore, all of the Realist logic about state behaviour will have a significant effect on how the war on terrorism is fought. So Realism and terrorism are inextricably linked, although I do think that Realism does not have much to say about the causes of terrorism.

Center of terrorist groups are often a third world country. In many of them, the religion is predominant. Study the political situation in third world countries shows that the dominance of religious identity over national explained by the weak economy. The occurrence and activity of Islamist movements and organizations is a reaction to the lack of a modern civil society.

"In the fight against terrorism, there can be no such thing as nonalignment. Terrorism is a cancer that has afflicted developing countries as much as it has hurt the West." Moreover, fighting terrorism requires stepped-up expenditures for military and paramilitary forces -monies that most poor third world countries can ill afford. And because combating terrorism requires increased reliance on military measures, the center of political gravity often moves toward the armed forces. (Gupte, 1986)

Religion plays an important role in theories of international politics. Nevertheless, the religious aspect is often omitted from international politics scholarship because of the premise of secularization which derives from the origin of states and dates back to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which established the state as the only legitimate form of political organization. Thus, religious units have been excluded from the realm of international politics (Philpot, 2002, pp.70-72) throughout much of modern history and political scholars have had little to do with them. This is furthered by the fact that the public/private distinction is one of the bases of Western knowledge and religion has been put in the private sphere since the Enlightenment. This premise, however, has been questioned following the events of 9/11 and their aftermath. Bunyavejchewin (2012, p 6)

At the moment, there is no clear definition of terrorism. The modern usage of the term, developed in the mid-twentieth century, regards terrorism as a tool of ethnic and religious fanatics to serve political ends, such as liberation from an alien occupying group, or simply to exact righteous vengeance against a group labeled as a threat or enemy. (Frost, 2008, p.3). Today it is very difficult to understand what can be called terrorism. For the analysis of terrorism as a global threat, we can start from the teachings of Ayoob М. One of the factors of the situation with the terrorist threat is a third world country. In the Ayoob М terminology there is a concept `subaltern realism' it contains not only the idea of critical studies, but also the idea of realism as the centre of his teachings are states and their sovereignty. Threats of these countries due to its weak security began to move to the regional and global level. Subaltern realism does not show the process of relations between states, on the contrary contradictions within the state that later goes beyond begins the transition into the global atmosphere of tension.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the United States and its allies combated generally secular and nationalist terrorist groups, many of which depended upon active state sponsors. While problems of state sponsorship of terrorism continue, years of sustained counterterrorism efforts, including diplomatic and economic isolation, have convinced some governments to curtail or even abandon support for terrorism as a tool of statecraft. The collapse of the Soviet Union--which provided critical backing to terrorist groups and certain state sponsors, accelerated the decline in state sponsorship. Many terrorist organizations were effectively destroyed or neutralized, including the Red Army Faction, Direct Action, and Communist Combatant Cells in Europe, and the Japanese Red Army in Asia. Such past successes provide valuable lessons for the future. (National Strategy for Combating Terrorism 2003, p.7)

During the "Cold War," the external security situation is only partially determined by the external problems. To a large extent it is structured and supported by the superpowers in accordance with the objectives of their planetary confrontation. Superpowers were interested in preserving the local character of terrorism and its maximum, depending on their support as terrorism for them was only an instrument of their own solutions to global challenges.

With the end of the Cold War, we also saw dramatic improvements in the ease of transnational communication, commerce, and travel. Unfortunately, the terrorists adapted to this new international environment and turned the advances of the 20th century into the destructive enablers of the 21st century. (National Strategy for Combating Terrorism 2003, p.7)

After the collapse of the bipolar system in the world was the time of the transformation of the international system, which is characterized by contradictory trends and related with international security. First is the aspiration of superpowers for leadership. Second is an international process of globalization and interdependence. Third is the dominance of developed countries (under the leadership of the United States), which focused primarily on the use of military force to solve problem in the world. Terrorism is also transformed. Globalization helps transform terrorism blurring frames and borders. On the example of Islamist terrorism can be seen that if the Islamists previously acted in Muslim states, their activity is now shifting to the global level.

Globalization as a factor in the development of terrorism at the global level. Migrating from Third World countries to the first world Helped to terrorism to go global. In the ninetieth century, some 80 million people crossed ocean to new home-far more than in twentieth century. At the beginning of the 21 century, 32 million residents of the United States (11.5 percent of the population) were foreign-born. In addition visitors (students, businesspeople, and tourist) enter the country each year. (Nye, Jr. 2007, p.223). Raise the level of racism and racial conflicts. This prompted many migrants to join the terrorist groups. Globalization has created enemies under the wing of the first world countries. . In an era of globalized terrorism, the familiar state-centric threats have not disappeared; instead they have been joined by new (or newly threatening) competing political, ideological, economic, and cultural concerns that are only superficially understood, particularly in the West. An examination of the recent evolution of terrorism and a projection of future developments suggest that, in the age of globalized terrorism, old attitudes are not just anachronistic; they are dangerous. The current terrorist backlash is manifested in the extremely violent asymmetrical response directed at the United States and other leading powers by terrorist groups associated with or inspired by al-Qaeda. This backlash has the potential to fundamentally threaten the international system. Thus it is not just an American problem. Unless the United States and its allies formulate a more comprehensive response to terrorism, better balanced across the range of policy instruments, the results will be increasing international instability and long-term failure. Cronin (2003, pp. 34-37.) Global terrorism is different in that puts global challenges related to undermine the entire global system and a violation of its functioning.

Is the political realism becomes wrong direction because they believed that only the state can be international actors? Terrorist groups have become one of the actors in international system. According to J. Mearsheimer (2006, p. 235) we should all recognize that no theory - realism included - can explain every aspect of international politics. Having said all of that, however, Al-Qaeda operates within the state system, which operates according to realist logic. Osama Bin Laden is not determined to overthrow the state system and replace it with an Islamic version of the Holy Roman Empire. Instead, he is bent on pushing the United States and its European allies out of the Arab and Islamic world, and creating Islamic regimes across the world. But regardless of his ultimate aims, he is not going to overthrow the state system, which is here to stay for the foreseeable future. Thus, Bin Laden Will have to operate in the state system to survive; he will need to live in a state and he will have to pay careful attention to how different states react to him. So Understanding the workings of the state system - which is realism's forte - will help us understand his behavior.

With the advent of globalization has increased the threat of terrorism and undermines the security of states. What is the security for the realists? The principle of survival in the realist tradition is of paramount importance as all realists argue that in international politics the core objective of the state is survival. For realists survival is an objective, which once attained, lays the foundation for the achievement of all other goals. In an attempt at ensuring and guaranteeing the survival of the state, it may opt to choose one of two means - power or security maximizing - to achieving this end. This gives rise to two emerging strands of thought within the realist paradigm, namely defensive and offensive realism. In terms of defensive realism, Waltz and Grieco (1997, as cited in Dunne and Schmidt, 2005, p. 174) maintain that security is the principal interest of the state and as a result states will only seek to acquire the required amount of power necessary to guarantee survival. As a result, this view holds that states will not aim to acquire increasing levels of power of this process is to jeopardise its own security. On the other hand, offensive realists argue that the ultimate objective of every state is to gain hegemonic status in the international system. This view further holds that states constantly crave more power and are ready, should the opportunity arise to alter the status quo even if such an action would place their own security in jeopardy. Furthermore, defensive realism holds that states will enter into alliances in order to balance the power when faced with aggressive or strong states, while offensive realists argue that competition is rife in the international system because states are willing to risk their security and survival in an aim to enhance their status in the international system (Walt, 2002. p.200-207; Guzzini, 1998. p 127). (Intellicon, 2012)

What we can say about terrorism today? Purveyors of hatred spread their radical ideology over the Internet, attempting to recruit new terrorists both abroad and in the United States. The risk is not only that new terrorist cells are being created; online propaganda can also influence "lone wolf" terrorists, who can be extremely difficult for authorities to spot. The support of the American Muslim community in opposing extremism, increased awareness by the public at large, and a massive law enforcement effort have made the states a much harder target than it was in period of 9/11. But the tragedy of the Boston Marathon bombing is a reminder of how dangerous homegrown extremists can be, despite these advances. (Commission report, 2014). Approximately 17,958 people were killed in terrorist attacks last year, and of those deaths 82% occurred in just 5 nations: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Syria. Of the 162 surveyed nations, Iraq holds the deplorable top spot with approximately 2,492 terrorist attacks in 2013, which killed 6,362 people. Combined, these nations accounted for nearly 15,000 fatalities. Since 2000 only 5% of these crimes were suicide attacks. The four terrorist groups responsible for the most destructive acts are Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda. The report notes that a radical variant of Islam was "the key commonality for all four groups." However, the study does not take into account the recent attacks from ISIS since the research tapers off at the end of 2013. Although terrorism is on the rise, the report notes that the figures are still relatively small when compared to the 437,000 people killed by homicide in 2013. For example, in the US an individual is 64 times more likely to die from a homicide than terrorism. (Macias, 2014)

How to struggle against terrorism by realist view? The realist model, however, provides many insights into the formation of alliances and the reasons why groups' divergent interests may drag them away from cooperation, quite possibly in spite of their professed wishes for such cooperation. The point is: we must find ways to bring franchisees' interests out of alignment with those of al Qaeda, thus weakening the entire network. This has apparently already been done in at least one case: against the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) of the Philippines. American and Filipino authorities worked to change incentives for the MILF, punishing it more heavily for working with al Qaeda, while using carrots to encourage it not to do so and to come to talks with the government about its local goals. Al Qaeda operatives have apparently stopped using the MILF's training camps in the Philippines. This was the successful application of a realist, divide-and-conquer deterrent strategy, and one known since at least Roman times. (Charles, 2011).

Conclusion

global security terrorism

For realist view only the state can be actor in the international system. He progresses and opens new direction of terrorism, such as cyber-terrorism, bioterrorism and other. Terrorism has its own development as the state. But, according to J. Mearsheimer terrorism exist only within the state and cannot exist as a state system. That makes it the worst threat because it is the center of the web of crime and has its group worldwide. It is not enough simply to use military force in defeating terrorism.

After the collapse of the bipolar system the global security system starts change. This gave rise to the threat of terrorism at the global level and helps develop it. It took all the reconsideration of existing theories. Understanding the threat of terrorism requires a review of the processes in the Third World which finally not completed the process of establishing institutions of integration. The territory of Third World countries are favorable for the development of the terrorism. In my opinion the only way of winning the war against terrorism is cooperation between developed and developing countries and aid to third world countries in the establishment of a modern society.

References

1. Schoenenberger, L., Schenker-Wicki, A., and Beck, M. (Feb 2014) Analysing Terrorism from a Systems Thinking Perspective. Terrorism research initiative. Volume 8, p. 16

2. Charles K. (Apr2, 2011). Realism and Terrorism. Retrieved from http://the-real-issues.blogspot.com/2011/04/realism-and-terrorism.html Available [5 Jan 2015]

3. Mearsheimer, J. Interview (2002): Conversations with History; The problem of Terrorism. Retrieved from globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people2/Mearsheimer/mearsheimer-con5.html Available [27 Dec 2014]

4. Gupte, P. (May 11, 1986) Terror vs. the Third World. The New York Times. Retrieved http://www.nytimes.com/1986/05/11/opinion/terror-vs-the-third-world.html Available [27 Dec 2014]

5. Philpot, D. (2002). The challenge of September 11 to Secularism in international relations. World Politics, 55(1) pp.70-72

6. Bunyavejchewin, P. (2012) Theories of international politics after the incident of 9/11. p. 6. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/236679783_Theories_of_international_politics_after_the_incident_of_911_The_richness_and_weakness_of_realist_tradition_in_the_twentieth-first_century Available [27 Dec 2014]

7. Frost, B (2008) Terrorism, Crime and Public policy. Cambridge University Press, p.3

8. National Strategy for Combating Terrorism February 2003, p.7

9. J. S. Nye, Jr., (2007), Understanding international conflicts. An introduction in History. Pearson Longman. p.223.

10. Cronin, A. K. (2003) Globalization and International Terrorism, International Security, Volume 27, pp. 34-37.

11. Mearsheimer, J., Conversations in International relations-interview with J. Mearsheimer (part2), International Relations, Vol.2 (2006, p. 235)

12. Intelligence Consultancy Namibia, (2012) Retrieved from http://intelliconn.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/realism-vs-globalism/

Available [29 Dec 2014]

13. Dunne, T. and Schmidt, B.C. (2005). Realism. In The Globalization of World Politics. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 162-183.

14. Walt, S.M. 2002. The Enduring Relevance of the Realist Tradition. In Political Science: The State of the Discipline. Katznelson, Ira and Milner, Helen, V. New York: W.W. Norton and Company. Pages 200-207.

15. Guzzini, S. (1998). Realism in International Relations and International Political Economy: The Continuing Story of a Death Foretold. London: Routledge. p.127

16. Macias, A. (2014) A Snapshot of Terrorism in the World Today. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/the-state-of-terrorism-in-the-world-today-2014-11 Available [29 Dec 2014]

17. Commission report (2014), Today's Rising Terrorist Threat and the Danger to the United States: Reflections on the Tenth Anniversary of The 9/11 Commission Report. The Annenberg public policy center of the University of Pennsylvania and The Bipartisan Policy Center. p. 15

Размещено на Allbest.ru