Countering Terrorism and Threats
Modern counterterrorism activities are based on efficient criminal justice processes with respect to the fundamental principles of human rights and the supremacy of law to provide a legitimate response to any threat. At the same time, this response from criminal justice helps mitigate and even avoid the risk of unlawful and unreasonable use of force against people outside procedural guarantees and protections. In addition, it may reinforce the commitment of society to the rule of law and improve its trust in criminal justice authorities, even if terrorist threats are serious and life-threatening on a constant basis.
However, the role of criminal justice in countering terrorism may be regarded as a challenging one. First of all, the primary goal of any counterterrorism strategy is the prevention of threatening incidents. Thus, law enforcement agencies may prevent terrorist attacks in some cases; however, not all criminal justice practices that currently exist are highly efficient in relation to terrorist conspiracies, people’s safety, and their civil rights. In other words, the criminal justice system does not have enough available resources to manage an extensive terrorist threat or address the reality. In addition, already existing practices do not fully address rising domestic terrorism. That is why it is essential to consider the efficiency of counter-terrorism efforts in the field of criminal justice to ensure people’s safety without the violation of their rights.
For its prevention, work with citizens is highly essential. However, a lack of community cooperation with police and other criminal justice agencies may be observed. Thus, as a result, due to the absence of clear and well-elaborated policies and practices, counter-terrorism efforts are complicated by the violation of human rights. It goes without saying that the system requires efficient, well-funded, and forward-looking preventative strategies against terrorism, targeted violence, and threats. They should include the improvement of investigative techniques and powers, evidentiary rules, and a substantive offense system in general.
General Background
The history of counter-terrorism in the United States started in the 1940s. However, terrorism was regarded in a completely different manner. Since 1945, the country has seen the Soviet Union as a rising global competitor and a threat to American well-being (“U.S. counterterrorism since 1945,” n.d.). As a result, during the Cold War, the government elaborated on multiple security policies and regulations to confront its main rival. To be precise, policymakers persuaded people that communism was the main threat to the United States. In addition, the Soviet Union was blamed for increased terrorist attacks that occurred in the 1970s-1980s (“U.S. counterterrorism since 1945,” n.d.). Along with international terrorist attacks, domestic terrorism, on the basis of various ideologies, started to grow. Moreover, influential extremists aimed to affect the country’s criminal justice system by attracting law enforcement and military personnel in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s (Jones et al., 2021). At the same time, terrorism was not regarded as a serious problem that affected national security, and terrorist attacks were perceived as the consequences of the Soviet Union’s ideology.
The situation dramatically changed on September 11, 2001, when the United States entered the global war against terrorism. In addition, this tragic day has marked the escalation of more destructive terrorism that had never been seen before. This incident, peculiar to new trends, such as highly indiscriminate targeting, suicide attacks, and the participation of loosely affiliated extremists, demonstrated the vulnerability of the country’s security system. It demonstrated the necessity to consider the seriousness of terrorism and elaborate on new counter-terrorism efforts. They should include the strengthening of judicial capabilities and law enforcement, the expansion of border and aviation security, counter violent extremism and terrorist financing, more deep global information sharing, and the improvement of crisis response.
However, in two decades since the devastating 9/11 attacks, the sources of terrorist threats have substantially changed to be completely disconnected from their traditional understanding. To be precise, The United States may be currently regarded as a hard target for international terrorism – since 2001; there was only one case of a foreign terrorist organization coordinating an attack inside the country (“What is the threat to the United States today?” n.d.). At the same time, the main threat currently emerges from the political spectrum, including political polarization, ubiquitous firearms, and other factors. Using the power of social media in combination with online communication, complex domestic terrorism is generated on the basis of various ideologies.
The number of terrorist attacks caused by ideological reasons demonstrates the necessity to reconsider already existing preventative strategies. In general, since the 9/11 attacks, 107 people have become victims of jihadist activity in the United States (“What is the threat to the United States today?” n.d.). However, this death toll may be compared with that caused by far-right terrorism, including white supremacist, anti-government, anti-abortion, and militia violence – it has killed 114 people (“What is the threat to the United States today?” n.d.). Moreover, the country has faced attacks inspired by nationalist and black separatist ideologies, far-left views, and ideological misogyny. Thus, in the present day, the United States’ terrorism issues are also homegrown, and they are not related to any particular ideological perspective or group. This situation should be considered in the paradigm of counter-terrorism efforts as they address citizens and American society in general, as well.
At the same time, since the 9/11 attacks, counter-terrorism efforts have been the government’s response to people’s fear as well. In other words, multiple law enforcement agencies aimed to create a well-structured set of measures to ensure the public that the situation was under control. In general, people keep being afraid of terrorism, and their fear did not decline substantially during the last twenty years (Mueller & Stewart, 2018). However, in the present day, promoted by technological progress that provided access to information and its rapid dissemination, a lack of trust in law enforcement agencies in relation to counter-terrorism exists. It is majorly connected with public concerns that under the aegis of counter-terrorism and the power of the law, authorities violate people’s civil rights through excessive and biased control.
Theoretical Basis
Public attitude to counter-terrorism efforts and homeland security partially corresponds with the principles of radical criminology. Radical theories view criminal law as a specific instrument of control under the population. According to them, criminal justice policies promote violence rather than aim to mitigate it. In the present day, although people keep being afraid of terrorism, the erosion of this fear may be observed due to the time passed since 9/11 and the absence of mass media propaganda. At the same time, counter-terrorism efforts started to be perceived as a threat to citizens’ rights and freedoms. Thus, all branches of the criminal justice system affected by public attitude should prove the expediency of their activities and elaborate on counter-terrorism efforts to make them more efficient, though just and unbiased.
Efforts of Homeland Security
The Department of Homeland Security of the United States was created in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and in the present day, this organization is responsible for the unification and coordination of all homeland security efforts. In 2019, it updated and introduced the Strategic Framework for Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence, which addresses not only terrorism but targeted violence as well (Department of Homeland Security, 2019). The improvement of the department’s efforts to counter terrorism is connected with the nature and character of threats that have substantially changed since the 9/11 attacks. As previously mentioned, domestic terrorism is currently on the rise, and countering it is challenging as attacks are not tied to one specific ideology or factor. The next change is related to new ways of communication across the globe that may facilitate the organization of attacks. In addition, extremists and terrorists have more developed weapons in comparison with means that were available twenty years ago (Department of Homeland Security, 2019). Thus, existing counter-terrorism efforts of Homeland Security may be divided into several sections:
- The prevention of terrorist attacks. This goal presupposes the implementation of practices designed for the collection, analysis, and dissemination of terrorism information, cooperation with other agencies for an efficient and time-sensitive response, the strengthening of transportation security, and countering violent extremism through cooperation with communities and local law enforcement.
- The prevention and protection against the use of biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological weapons for mass destruction. First of all, it is necessary to identify what kind of materials may be referred to as the weapon, where it is stored, and how it is transported internationally and domestically. This information is essential for the detection, location, and prevention of its hostile use through cooperation with law enforcement agencies and other counter-terrorism departments.
- The strengthening of transportation security, migration system, and border control. Although domestic terrorism has already become a serious issue, international terrorism should be considered as well. That is why counter-terrorism efforts aim to prevent illegal import and immigration and provide people’s safety while traveling.
- The expedition of lawful travel and trade. These efforts presuppose the establishment and enforcement of security standards, risk management related to goods and people transit, and the maximization of compliance with the country’s legislation.
- The disruption of transnational criminal organizations. These efforts also address cooperation, data collection and sharing, and the time-sensitive response of criminal justice agencies in the United States and other countries.
- Mitigation of vulnerabilities and raising public awareness and preparedness. These efforts include educational programs, community empowerment, and the building of the nation’s core capabilities in order to teach people how to detect potentially threatening activities and inform law enforcement agencies.
- Development of strategies for a fast recovery and quick response in the case of terrorist attacks. It includes the financial support of authorized disaster support activities and reconstruction projects.
Efficiency of Efforts
In general, it is possible to state that counter-terrorism efforts of the Department of Homeland Security have multiple positive outcomes and generally ensure safety for citizens. However, at the same time, there are gaps connected with a lack of standards, legislation, and the performance of law enforcement agencies. To be precise, in some cases, counter-terrorism efforts may violate people’s basic civil rights. For instance, data collection on the Internet may violate people’s privacy even if it aims to improve protection against targeted threats and detect the organization of terrorist attacks,
In addition, counter-terrorism efforts may be regarded as less efficient if they are not connected with reality. Thus, cooperation between criminal justice agencies, especially the police, and communities is essential for the detection and prevention of attacks. However, in multiple cases, there is a lack of such cooperation due to multiple factors that led to the absence of trust in the police, such as ignorance, racial prejudice against citizens, or discrimination. Moreover, stereotyped thinking and racialization, in combination with strengthening counter-terrorism efforts, may lead to violence against particular population groups on the basis of race or ethnicity.
In the present day, people’s privacy is partially protected by the Fourth Amendment, that “protects “persons, houses, papers, and effects” from unreasonable searches and seizures” (Días, 2020, para. 13). In addition, the police, as the main stakeholder in relation to this issue, aim to establish contact with communities through training to raise awareness concerning the benefits of such cooperation. However, in relation to discrimination, no substantial actions were taken, and the non-White population still faces the criminal justice system at disproportionately high rates.
From a personal perspective, already existing measures need to be improved to raise people’s awareness in relation to the expediency of counter-terrorism efforts. From a short-term perspective, the police should address communities through training and information dissemination. In general, people should understand that criminal justice authorities process information only to detect suspicious activities to prevent crime. From a long-term perspective, racial discrimination should be abolished for all branches of the criminal justice system. Changes on the basis of proposed measures will be observed through data received from public surveys dedicated to the attitude to counter-terrorism efforts.
References
Department of Homeland Security. (2019). Strategic framework for countering terrorism and targeted violence. Web.
Días, Á. (2020). When police surveillance meets the ‘Internet of Things.’ Brennan Center for Justice. Web.
Jones, S. G., Doxsee, C., Hwang, G., & Thompson, J. (2021). The military, police, and the rise of terrorism in the United States. Center for Strategic and International Studies. Web.
Mueller, J., & Stewart, M. G. (2018). Public opinion and counterterrorism policy. CATO Institute. Web.
U.S. counterterrorism since 1945. (n.d.). World101. Web.
What is the threat to the United States today? (n.d.). New America. Web.