Terrorism as a Global Issue
Terrorism is currently a global issue affecting most nations. Initially, terrorism was thought to be a problem associated with a few nations but has turned out to be a global threat. The terrorists have spread their ideologies to various individuals in different countries. They have made their followers believe that there is glory in murdering innocent individuals. Terrorist attacks are now common to hear or witness in different regions. The United States (US) is the most commonly known country that faced the attacks (Ganor, 2005). In recent years, attacks have been witnessed in Germany, France, Spain, and Britain among other countries. With regards to the terrorist attacks, various countries have shown differences in their recovery strategies.
Varied Responses to Attacks
The September 2001 attacks in America, Jewish Museum of Belgium shootings which took place in 2014, Charlie Hebdo shootings that took place in January 2015, and Paris attacks of November 2015 and others elicited led to varied responses (Kenworthy, 2016). Immediately after the attacks, all the countries carried out an analysis of the series of events which took place prior to the attacks. Thereafter, to prevent such attacks in the future, they made plans that would assist in case similar approach is used by the attackers. There are however eminent differences in the overall approach to the issue.
Differences in Approach
In their response, America mainly uses the military to target the terrorist hideouts and drive them out. An example is what was witnessed in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars after the 9/11 attacks. Spain and London focus on enhancing the law and intelligence and countering radicalization. The events show that the countries, in contrast to the United States, do not believe in using the military as for them that only makes extremism more pronounced.
Differences in Intelligence Collection and Actions
Another difference is evidenced with regards to the extent to which the intelligence gets in monitoring communications of the citizens and the public and the subsequent arrests or actions. In this counter strategy, Germany believes in maintaining data privacy and liberties. Americans do not believe in that, especially after the 9/11 attacks. However, in America, arrested terror suspects are given a trial. When the arrests do not lead to trial, they are considered to be an intimidation. The Americans hardly accept domestic intelligence collection unlike the French (Napolitano, 2011). In France, intelligence collection—outside the courtroom is perceived to be okay.
France's Focus on Gathering Intelligence
France mainly focuses on gathering intelligence that would aid in neutralizing the suspects as early as possible so as to prevent the attacks. For example, the Sarcelles bombing resulted in a comprehensive investigation. The gathered evidence links an attack on someone that the French authorities already know. In a previous terrorist attack, the authorities had surveilled the individual and after failing to find any results, they shifted the survey to different individuals. Following the Sarcelles attack, there was renewed surveillance and arrests were made.
Differences in Recovery Plans
The strategy prevented future attacks that were to take place. In 2012, the authorities killed and arrested suspects who were planning to carry out a series of attacks. The initiative is an indication that France mainly monitors suspects. These differences between America's recovery plan and that of other countries mainly arise due to the inherent differences in threats, public attitudes, available resources, and historical experiences that the various countries experience with regards to terrorism.
Enhancing Security in the United States
To enhance security in the United States, authorities should focus on assisting the public change its culture. That is, the public should be sensitized and made aware of the individuals around them and their activities. They should be proactive in sharing intelligence information even outside the court. The focus should be shifted to the prevention of the attacks. The authorities of America should work towards making the environment more flexible with regards to countering terrorism. The several rights that the citizens enjoy making it hard to counter terrorism Christopher (Wray, 2017).
References
Christopher Wray, (November 30, 2017). Keeping America Secure in the New Age of Terror. FBI. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/keeping-america-secure-in-the-new-age-of-terror
Ganor B. (2005). The counter-terrorism puzzle – A guide for decision makers.
Herzliya, Israel: Interdisciplinary Center Publishing House. pp. 253-255.
Janet Napolitano, (June 8, 2011). “Strength, Security, and Shared Responsibility: Preventing Terrorist Attacks a Decade after 9/11”. Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved from http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/strength-security-and-shared-responsibility-preventing-terrorist-attacks-decade-after-911
Josh Kenworthy, (March 24, 2016). “How the US and Europe differ on fighting terror, integrating Muslims”. The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2016/0324/How-US-and-Europe-differ-on-fighting-terror-integrating-Muslims
