This essay will be discussing terrorism, using the event of 9/11 as its main case study. To be able to approach this analysis effectively it will discuss the nature and nurture of the crime as well as focusing on the four main concepts that which include: boundaries between national and international, crime and war, the powerful and powerless and public vs. private.
Nature of the Crime
Nineteen men commandeered four fuel-loaded US business planes that headed for west coast destinations. A sum of 2,977 individuals were killed in New York City, Washington, DC and outside of Shanksville, Pennsylvania (History.com, 2019). The attack was organized by al Qaeda pioneer Osama bin Laden. At the World Trade Centre (WTC) site in Lower Manhattan, 2,753 individuals were killed when seized American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 were purposefully collided with the north and south towers (CNN, 2019).
Of the individuals who died during the underlying attacks and the ensuing collapses of the towers, “343 were New York City firemen, 23 were New York City cops and 37 were officials at the Port Authority” (CNN, 2019). The victims ranged in age from two to 85 years. Approximately 75-80% of the victims were men (History.com, 2019).
At the Pentagon in Washington, 184 individuals were killed when captured American Airlines Flight 77 collided with the building (CNN, 2019). Near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, 40 passengers and crew members on board United Airlines Flight 93 died as the plane crashed into a field (History.com, 2019). It is believed that the hijackers crashed the plane in that area, as opposed to their obscure objective, after the passengers and crew members attempted to retake control of the flight deck. “As of October 2019, 1,645 (60%) of 2,753 WTC victims’ remains have been positively identified, according to the medical examiner’s office” (History.com, 2019).
The hijackers were Islamic terrorists from Saudi Arabia and a few other Arab countries. Allegedly financed by the al Qaeda terrorist organisation that is in association with Saudi criminal Osama Bin Laden, they were supposedly acting in counter for America’s help of Israel, its contribution in the Persian Gulf War and its proceeded with military nearness in the Middle East (History.com, 2019).
A portion of the terrorists had lived in the United States for over a year and had taken flying exercises at American business flight schools. The 19 terrorists effectively snuck box-cutters and blades through security at three East Coast air terminals and loaded up four early-morning flights destined for California, picked in light of the fact that the planes were stacked with fuel for the long cross-country venture (CNN, 2019). Not long after remove, the terrorists secured the four planes and took the controls, altering ordinary passenger jets into guided missiles (History.com, 2019).
Nurture of Response
A significant effect to consider in the causes for the terrorist attacks, 9/11 is globalisation. The 9/11 terror attacks calls attention to the intricate and impulsive nature of a globally connected networked society and the unpremeditated costs that flow from the multidimensional processes of globalisation. Globalisation takes into account the partition of the world, proceeding clashes and oppositions and powering scorn and ailments. Accordingly, within globalisation conflict was reinforced by including the contrasts among East and West (History.com, 2018).
The 9/11 attacks incited the United States president, George Walker Bush to announce a worldwide ‘War on Terror”. President George Bush approached world pioneers to join the United States, saying, “Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists” (History.com, 2019). George Bush warned that those countries refusing to join their fight or those continuing to allow terrorist to reside in their country would be treated as hostile regimes. The aftermath of the attacks and George Bush’s mandate reignited legislative reform around the world. The most notable of these legislative attempts at preventing and punishing terrorist activity are those of the United States of America, the United Kingdom and the United Nations (History.com, 201). All of these legislative responses realise that the most effective way of preventing terrorism is cutting it off at the stem, in other words stopping its funding.
Joint airstrikes with Great Britain aiming for Taliban and al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan started in 2001, with the ground war starting in the following month (History.com, 2019). Al Qaeda pioneer Osama bin Laden was executed by U.S. powers in his fort in Abbottabad, Pakistan in 2011. The War in Afghanistan authoritatively finished in December 2014 (History.com, 2019).
Even pioneers of countries that did not coexist well with the American government imparted their distress. The international reaction to 9/11 was essentially affected by the United States but initially must be led by the United Nations to be able to attain a corresponding and effective level of international cooperation. Before 9/11 the United Nations delivered the Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism which joined actions planned for slowing the development of assets having a place with suspected terrorists and filled in as a point of reference to United Nation Security Council Resolution 1373 (History.com, 2019). The goals forces four commitments on Member States, necessitating that they avert and control the financing of terrorism, condemn assortment of terrorist assets in state an area or freeze resources of individuals who threaten or plan to threaten.
But public reaction was mixed. The leader of the Islamic militant group Hamas announced, “no doubt this is a result of the injustice the U.S. practices against the weak in the world” (History.com, 2019). Similarly, people in a wide range of nations accepted that the attacks were a result of America’s social authority, political interfering in the Middle East and interventionism in world undertakings. Some, particularly in Arab nations, transparently praised the attacks. In any case, the vast majority, even the individuals who accepted that the United States was incompletely or altogether answerable for its own adversity, still communicated distress and outrage at the passing of innocent individuals.
On October 7, 2001, airstrikes by the United States and Great Britain are hurled in Afghanistan at Taliban and al Qaeda training camps and targets. “What America is tasting now is only a copy of what we have tasted,” al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden says in a video statement released the same day” (History.com, 2019).
At the same time, the war in Afghanistan was decimating al Qaeda’s core operations.
The group has played up religious divisions in the civil war. Using its Arabic magazine, martyrdom videos, poetry and popular songs, al-Qaeda has endeared itself to the local Sunni people and Yemen’s powerful Sunni tribal leaders (Taylor, 2019).
Osama Bin Laden was a remarkably difficult target for the US forces. In any case, the measure of time and exertion required to search for a leader puts a limit on the aptitude of U.S. forces to lead operations swiftly Given the quantity of high value targets out there and the struggle of arresting each one, a plan to disrupt, demolish and defeat terrorist networks that relies, exclusively on such targeted raids is bound to fail. Terrorist networks like Al Qaeda, can recharge their initiative quicker than we can target them. It was difficult to find Bin Laden in Pakistan; it is even more difficult to find terrorist leaders in lawless countries such as Somalia and parts of Yemen where they progressively prosper (Bergen, 2019).
The 9/11 attacks obscure the limits between the national and international. The terrorist attack was committed by an international terrorist organisation in the USA. Some of these men were American citizens. The demonstration of terrorism defines a transnational crime. This is due to the fact that, the attack was arranged and committed in America by ‘Americans’, yet al-Qaeda association is found in Afghanistan. This has indicated the obscuring of limits between the countries, and how society works.
The perception of terrorism is controversial at an international level as there is no exceptional definition of this crime under customary international law (Halawi, 2017). Therefore, many believe that terrorism is better examined and prosecuted at the national level. The criminalisation of terrorism instigated at the national level where several nations constituted against terrorist acts and those responsible for such acts before their courts.
It is essential to take note of that in the domestic context, criminal law is viewed as a noteworthy component in verifying estimations of harmony and security. There is a justifiable hesitance by certain judges and law specialists to permit outer contemplations, for example, outside statute, to have any influence in local arbitration (Lovecy, 1987). In any case, progressive Security Council goals exhibit a consistently expanding worldwide worry in connection to terrorism as comprising a risk to global harmony and security and in this way captivating its outstanding purview under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations (Lovecy, 1987).
George W. Bush commenced the US’s ruthless and thoroughly counter-productive “war on terror” in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, which involved authorising the CIA to set up a secret detention and torture program, establishing a prison outside the law at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, establishing deportation and surveillance programs within the US, invading one country (Afghanistan) in response to the attacks (Common Dreams, 2018).
This was the justification for holding detainees neither as criminal suspects or as prisoners of war, yet as a third classification of person, with no rights, which was disturbing enough, however it additionally prepared for the utilisation of torment, as individuals without any rights at all had no insurance against torment and misuse, and to this end the most disturbing section in the reminder is the President’s case that ‘regular Article 3 of Geneva doesn’t have any significant bearing to either al-Qaeda or Taliban prisoners in light of the fact that, among different reasons, the important clashes are worldwide in extension and normal Article 3 applies just to ‘equipped clash not of a universal character” (Worthington, 2018).
President George Bush claimed that the prisoners would be “treated humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva” (Worthington, 2018), but it was a pointless accumulation. By refusing to accept that everyone seized in wartime must be protected from torture and abuse, and by removing the protections of common Article 3 from the prisoners, which prohibit “cruel treatment and torture”, and “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment” (Worthington, 2018).
This became public to society as well as worldwide by the news media and in declassified documents, however the constitution venture report includes numerous new subtleties. Human Rights Watch, report that Libyan aggressors were likewise associated with the C.I.A, at the Guantanamo Bay Prison, and how deceptive abuse of detainees. The Human rights Watch found that not exclusively did they waterboarded detainees, yet beat them into walls, anchored them in painful positions for a considerable length of time, stripped them of garments and kept them conscious for a long time.
Overall, 9/11 was a staggering crossroads in history which was cautiously co-ordinated by radicals for the sake of al-Qaeda with an end goal to threaten the United States of America. The demonstration of fear cannot be characterized by one reason however rather a huge number of components which propelled Osama Bin Laden to wage a war on America. Bin Laden features US support for Israel, the improper conduct of US society, Iraq sanctions and the immediacy of the US military in Saudi Arabia as the main components which caused the assaults which happened on 9/11 (History.com, 2019). In any case, looking back, others point to a strict inspiration just as globalisation as contributors. Within this essay it has likewise been established that Bin Laden had a long-haul plan for the fear assaults which was to incite a war with the US. The results of 9/11 were similarly as decimating as the real occasion, with social, monetary and political impacts.
- Bergen, P. (2019). September 11 attacks | Facts & Information. [online] Encyclopedia Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/event/September-11-attacks [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].
- CNN US. (2019). September 11 Terror Attacks Fast Facts. [online] Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11-anniversary-fast-facts/index.html [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].
- Engel, P. and Ioanes, E. (2019). What happened on 9/11, 18 years ago. [online] Business Insider. Available at: https://www.businessinsider.com/what-happened-on-911-why-2016-9?r=US&IR=T [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].
- Feltes, J. (n.d.). Terrorist Group: Al Qaeda Weapons Use | Counter-Terrorism Ethics. [online] Counter Terrorism Ethics. Available at: http://counterterrorismethics.com/the-past-present-and-future-weapon-use-of-al-qaeda/ [Accessed 11 Dec. 2019].
- Halawi, R. (2017). Terrorism, International Criminal Tribunals & the Role of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. [online] Leidenlawblog.nl. Available at: https://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/terrorism-international-criminal-tribunals-the-role-of-the-special-tribunal [Accessed 14 Dec. 2019].
- History.com. (2019). September 11 Attacks. [online] Available at: https://www.history.com/topics/21st-century/9-11-attacks [Accessed 14 Dec. 2019].
- History.com. (2019). The War on Terror. [online] Available at: https://www.history.com/topics/21st-century/war-on-terror-timeline [Accessed 11 Dec. 2019].
- Lovecy, I. (1987). A review Article: Writing about academic librarianship. Journal of librarianship, [online] 19(4), pp.270-274. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/19/3/533/425891 [Accessed 14 Dec. 2019].
- Mowatt-Larssen, R. (2010). Al Qaeda Weapons of Mass Destruction Threat: Hype or Reality? [online] Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Available at: https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/al-qaeda-weapons-mass-destruction-threat-hype-or-reality [Accessed 29 Dec. 2019].
- Taylor, C. (2019). Al-Qaeda is stronger today than it was on 9/11. [online] Public Radio International. Available at: https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-07-02/al-qaeda-stronger-today-it-was-911 [Accessed 13 Dec. 2019].
- Worthington, A. (2018). Exactly 16 Years Ago, George W. Bush Opened the Floodgates to Torture at Guantánamo. [online] Common Dreams. Available at: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/02/07/exactly-16-years-ago-george-w-bush-opened-floodgates-torture-guantanamo [Accessed 15 Dec. 2019].