Category: Warfare

Introduction

One of the historical pieces that embeds in people of Ohio is the Kent State University shootings in the south of Cleveland. The firings, commonly referred to as May 4 Massacre, involved a gunfire near the University, which claimed three lives instantly and an additional one during hospitalization (O’Hara 322). Additionally, the massacre injured nine other students, one being permanently paralyzed by the unfortunate event. The killings happened during a peace demonstration organized to oppose the expansion of the Vietnam War by the US military into Cambodia. The university students had held a peace rally that also purposed to eject National Guard presence on the campus (Grace “Kent State: Aftermath” 233). For the first time in the US, an incident of student killing in an anti-war meeting was reported making Ohio have a unique feature in the May 4, 1970 incident. Many people condemned the shootings, and the global humanitarian agencies and other students across the US and the entire world, pointed the finger at the US military’s way of executing the shooting.

Reactions to the Shootings

What happened to be a political-ideological difference turned to be a violent exposure that affected students’ lives and disorganized the learning programs in Kent and other institutions. It was reported that there were around 28 National Guard armed personnel that fired more than 67 rounds for 13 seconds killing Allison Beth Krause, Jeffrey Glenn Miller, Sandra Lee Scheuer, and William Knox, who was reported dead upon arrival at Robinson Memorial Hospital (Grace “Kent State: Epilogue” 88). On the following day, Tuesday, May 5, opinion polls would decide many candidates’ hopes into Senate. A message by Professor Ken Calkins dubbed ‘Don’t send a murderer to Senate’ saw a defeat for Governor Rhodes, who was notably behind the political tensions that had catalyzed the expansion of the Vietnam War (Broadhurst 285). As many influencers wished, Rhodes lost to Robert Taft despite many Ohio towns backing him.

The incident sparked a raft of reactions in Ohio and across the country. There were countless student protests in other States where many people started to condemn the shooting, which involved non-armed students (Grace “Kent State: Aftermath” 243). The government mobilized several US Marines and National Guard soldiers to contain the demonstrations, which saw a tough and heated opposition from the perpetrators and the majority. In New England, civil rights leaders such as Lance Buhl moved a rally opposing the killings in collaboration with other key parties like Roy Inglee and Bob Bresnahan (Grace “Kent State: Epilogue” 93). In a nutshell, the traumatic incident was not received positively in any of the country’s points. Many viewed that as the unnecessary imposition of War to the students who demanded to refrain of warfare.

In Oberlin College, students rushed to the administration block on the night that President Nixon was making a speech as one way of following what grounds had made the National Guard officers kill innocent lives. Other students became rogue to the extent of burning properties at Bowling Green State University (Broadhurst 303). Many students rekindled similar occurrences that led to the loss of lives for protestors in the learning environment at the hands of disciplined forces. In other parts of the southwestern section of the State, Miami University experienced the same fate as 1000 students demonstrated the Cambodian invasion by the US military, which led to the closing of the City’s streets (Grace “Kent State: Aftermath” 246). Generally, the May 4 Massacre caused mayhem in many parts of the US, which led to a state of tension in the country as many saw a lack of humanitarian approach towards solving political issues.

Root Cause of the Shootings: President Nixon’s Military Policies on Vietnam War

As mentioned in the previous sections, the massacre had been orchestrated by the policy by the US government through the military to invade Cambodia, a critical matter that many American intellects felt unnecessary. The Vietnam War, in this case, was the key factor that had allowed the thought of the Cambodian Invasion. In 1969, President Richard Nixon assumed office, and from his predecessor, he inherited the Vietnam War (Broadhurst 300). It is important to discuss the politics behind the May 4 Massacre so that a reader understands the basic concepts that had probed the decision to expand the War. Nixon had at one point announced the withdrawal of US troops from Vietnam, a decision that was termed as an intention to please the American populace (Grace “Kent State: Epilogue” 66). However, he continued to conduct secret bombings on the northern side of Vietnam, which passed through Cambodia. According to President Nixon, anti-war movements were unpatriotic despite being elected by many students to end the War.

It is vital to mention that many students were peaceful during President Nixon’s early months as the US president hence, giving him time to execute his policies to end the War. The challenge came due to Nixon’s craving to win in Vietnam. Thus, he could not withdraw from the War that easily due to political significance it had on his legacy. The president then enacted counterintelligence strategies to monitor the revolutionary and campus radicals who were opposing the War (Eszterhas and Roberts 23). At this point, Nixon had increased surveillance operations in April, a month prior to the May 4 Massacre. However, the military policies set by Nixon were widely accepted, but they did not seem to be realistic since he had announced the invasion of Cambodia to stop North and South Vietnam wrangles.

At the moment of invading Cambodia, many universities and colleges erupted in protest, among them being Kent State University, University of Maryland, University of Wisconsin, among others. Therefore, the political projections mentioned in this section were the key issues that made students protest against the military stand in the Vietnam War. The injured and killed students during the May 4 Massacre had their troubles rooted in these key agendas during President Nixon’s early term (Eszterhas and Roberts 73). If President Nixon had not initiated the plan to send US ground troops to navigate the War, the shootings would not have occurred. The reason is that students had hopes in diplomatic manifestos the leader had when it came to the War.

The Post-War Memory

The May 1970 shootings have never been forgotten in the US, as many people know what transpired that day. Each spring, Kent State University hosts memorial events during the week where May 4 falls. The retrospective ceremonies are intended to remember the University’s dark day and as one way of keeping the peace that will prevent such occurrences in the future. Since the Vietnam War era, the Kent State has changed as many people campaign for unity and historical reconciliation (Grace “Kent State: Fire in the City, Vigils on the Campus” 83). The victims of the shootings are no longer mourned but celebrated as one way of encouraging liberal-minded people in political, social, and economic matters. The framework of post-war memories is not ignoble as the US history is enriched with contributors to national agendas that drive the country in many perspectives (Eszterhas and Roberts 129). It is important to have the memory activities during the commemoration to preserve the unsettled aspects that cause conspiracy, renewal, and national progress.

Lessons From the May 1970 Incident

Through the incident, many people condemned President Nixon’s military plan to the Vietnam War, which saw moderation of the major happenings during the battle. At this point, the reader learns that triumph in intense political matters may be orchestrated by liberty to express oneself through key events that probe change of tactics towards a given event (O’Hara 308). The anti-war signs and the Kent Committee to end War in Vietnam enable the audience to understand that the humanitarian approach to warfare started a long time after the Second World War. Many efforts were made to end the Vietnam War, which means the shootings would not have happened; hence, no lives could be lost. People also learn that political significance necessitates decisions that alter the way issues are handled (O’Hara 311). Many political actions come to commence a journey towards changing the welfare of societies. It was inhumane to shoot innocent lives, unarmed and focused on anti-war, an issue which President Nixon’s tenure should have embraced.

Conclusion

The Kent State University May 1970 refers to the day-light shootings executed by the US National Guard, a section within the country’s military paraphernalia. Four students died, while nine others were critically injured as a result. The students were protesting against President Nixon’s military invasion of Cambodia to end the Vietnam War. There were many protests over the country where learning was disrupted in various universities and colleges from the incident. In a nutshell, the May 4 Massacre was orchestrated by political issues running in the country then. Those who got harmed and killed are part of the US celebrated personnel during the 20^th century, which marked the journey of political revolution that shaped America significantly.

Works Cited

Broadhurst, Christopher. “We Didn’t Fire a Shot; We Didn’t Burn a Building”: The Student Reaction at North Carolina State University to the Kent State Shootings, May 1970″. The North Carolina Historical Review, vol 87, no. 3, 2010, pp. 283-309.

Eszterhas, Joe, and Michael Roberts. Thirteen Seconds: Confrontation at Kent State. Gray & Company, Publishers Cleveland, 1970.

Grace, Thomas M. Kent State: Aftermath. University of Massachusetts Press, 2016.

Grace, Thomas M. Kent State: Epilogue. University of Massachusetts Press, 2016.

Grace, Thomas M. Kent State: Fire in the City, Vigils on the Campus. University of Massachusetts Press, 2016.

O’Hara, John Fitzgerald. “Kent State/May 4 and Post-war Memory”. American Quarterly, vol 58, no. 2, 2006, pp. 301-328.

Disciplined initiative is an aspect of Mission Command that implies that subordinates have to exercise discipline while following their commander’s orders as long as they find the realization of those orders appropriate in the situation. The situation may become unsuitable for the realization of the orders due to different reasons, such as new threats, opportunities, or other unforeseen circumstances. In this case, the subordinate leaders have to take initiative and adjust the course of action so that the commander’s intent can be achieved under the new circumstances.

An example that represents disciplined initiative can be found in the article on the 1983 Operation Urgent Fury and the U.S. Marines in Grenada. Before the beginning of the operation, the U.S. marines did not have enough information about the features of the shore. While “marine ground units normally use military maps”, they did not have any maps available in the case of Grenada (Spector, 1987, p. 2). Without grid lines and other important data, their actions could have had limited usefulness on the shore.

However, one of the leaders, Commander Richard A. Butler, the chief staff officer of the amphibious squadron, took initiative and conducted a superficial analysis of the main and most important features of the shore. In his past, he had had some experience as a yachtsman, which allowed him to note certain features of the coast, tides, surf, and beach (Spector, 1987, p. 2). Thus, using his knowledge of Grenadian waters, Commander Richard A. Butler was able to take disciplined initiative and help to develop a new plan of actions. This proved invaluable to Operation Urgent Fury, the execution of which could otherwise be jeopardized due to the lack of intelligence.

Reference

Spector, R. H. (1987). U.S. Marines IN Grenada 1983. History and Museums Division Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps Washington, D.C.

Introduction

Since the September 11 attack, the fight against terrorism has become an important area for the activities of the American army. Operation Anaconda is an important milestone in this struggle, during which many Al-Qaida and Taliban terrorists were destroyed. However, operations should be based on principles and regulations developed with experience. They include “Competence, Mutual trust, Shared understanding, Commander’s intent, Mission orders, Disciplined initiative, and Risk acceptance” (Headquarters, Department of the Army, 2019, p. 1-7). Using an example of an Anaconda operation, the current paper examines the application and violation of these principles. Even though the operation did not initially go according to plan and several principles were violated, the army was still victorious.

Mistakes in Intelligence

One of the critical features of Anaconda’s operation is that it was much more complex and with more significant losses than expected due to intelligence errors, which are associated with the principles of mission orders and risk acceptance. The original plan of the operation was built on the data that the enemy had little force. Consequently, friendly Afghan troops and the American Army expected to finish the operation three days after it began (Kugler, 2007). At the same time, following the principle of mission orders, orders must be formulated using intelligence data, which was done.

However, the troops met unexpected resistance, which shocked them, required a new action plan, and extended the operation to 17 days. Later, the command announced that intelligence is not a precise science and that there will always be cases when the military does not know what it will face (Geibel, 2002). This statement reflects the risk acceptance principle, meaning that operations can often go unpredictable (Headquarters, Department of the Army, 2019). As a result, the army sought to agree on an action plan to prepare for the operation, but it went unexpectedly, which is part of the risk.

Command Structure

The operational structure of Operation Anaconda reveals the disagreements between the two commands demonstrating that participants did not follow principles such as competition, mutual trust, and shared understanding. The issue was that they had to divide their forces between Coalition Forces Air Component Command (CFACC) and Coalition Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC), led by The United States Central Command (CENTCOM) (Kugler, 2007). In addition to these groups, control was also transferred to Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) Mountain and General Hagenbeck (Kugler, 2007). This situation threatened the operation’s success, although, at the planning stage, it was not considered a problem. In fact, after the start of the operation, it became clear that the bifurcated command was a mistake, as it interfered with the coordination of actions.

With Operational Control, superior officers can delegate tasks to their subordinates when doing so is crucial to the mission’s success. It is a helpful tool for quick command and control by commanders (Headquarters, Department of the Army, 2019). During Operation Anaconda, CJTF Mountain commanded over forces, with some exceptions, as mentioned above (Kugler, 2007). Consequently, the mission’s support and resources could have been more organized due to the conflicting reporting structures that showed no unified operation command. Following the Competency principle, it is essential to establish conditions and trust for the “ability to execute mission orders in a decentralized fashion at acceptable levels of risk” (Headquarters, Department of the Army, 2019, p. 1-7). This principle is intertwined with the principles of mutual trust and shared understanding. Since no high-level coordination was established during Operation Anaconda, the principles were violated, which led to problems.

Lack of Coordination between the American Army and Friendly Forces

The American army collaborated with friendly Afghan troops to improve the effectiveness of the operation. However, they had opposing priorities and authority to request and get support from a variety of the same assets (Geibel, 2002; Kugler, 2007). Moreover, due to the previously described problem of the command structure, there was not enough coordination between the units of these forces. The competition for resources puts much pressure on both commands because of the limited reconnaissance assets. For example, one commander might want to survey the Western part of the battlefield, the other might want to survey the Eastern part, and the theatre commander wants to survey the enemy’s position. With all these demands coming down the pipeline, the operation does not go as necessary (Kugler, 2007). The critical problem of such a situation is that the unity between forces is not present. Competing to get control of assets or for a battlefield survey is irrelevant, violating the principles of mutual trust and competence.

Conclusion

The battle of Operation Anaconda is just one example of the countless conflicts from which one can draw lessons about the infinite permutations and combinations of forces at play. Mission command is a well-structured philosophy developed from the previous iteration of command and control. All military operations can benefit from adhering to the seven tenets of mission leadership. Although Operation Anaconda had some flaws, it did not necessarily fail. The commanders still were ready to accept the risk and change the action plan, and the desired outcomes were achieved. However, leaders missed opportunities to recognize threats and put safeguards in place. Therefore, future commanders should thoroughly examine this case to formulate better-guiding principles that will, in turn, yield better results.

References

Geibel, A. (2002). Operation Anaconda, Shah-i-Khot Valley, Afghanistan, 2-10 March 2002. Military Review, 83(3), 72-77. Web.

Headquarters, Department of the Army. (2019). Mission command: Command and control of army forces. Army Doctrine Publication 6-0. Department of the Army. Web.

Kugler, R. L. (2007). Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan: A case study of adaptation in battle. National Defense University, Center for Technololgy and National Security Policy. Web.

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to give recommendations that could be adopted by domestic intelligence agencies in the case of an attack on the Hoover Dam by the Ansar al-Din terrorist group. Domestic intelligence agencies are quite capable as far as safeguarding the USA from attacks within the country. However, groups such as Ansar al-Din are a threat and may require domestic intelligence agencies to take bold steps to keep them at bay. This paper gives an overview of the Ansar al-Din movement including its motivations and capability as well as its hypothetical terrorist attack on Hoover Dam. Moreover, this paper goes over the intelligence analyst strategies that could be used by security agencies to collect information from a variety of sources. Finally, there is a description of the measures that the intelligence agencies can engage in to stop the plan by the Ansar al-Din group before it comes to fruition.

Introduction

An attack on an important infrastructural element of the USA by the Ansar al-Din terrorist movement would be hugely detrimental to the country, while earning the terrorist organization plaudits amongst entities with enmity with the USA. It is the mandate of intelligence agencies to uncover and foil such plots before they materialize. This paper would give recommendations to the domestic security agencies as regards how they can prevent such an attack from taking place on American soil.

Profile of the Terrorist Organization

Ansar al-Din enjoys support and fosterage from the more ill-famed Al Qaeda group under the umbrella of the Islamic Maghreb movement. It mainly operates in the Sahel region of Africa which traverses Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger amongst other states. Its major agenda is to forcibly impose Islamist governments in West and Central Africa. Ansar al-Din’s mainly Tuareg constituents espouse Salafist Islamic ideology that is extreme and characterized by deadly violence. Salafi is a purist form of Islam that inspires the name Ansar al-Din or “defenders of the faith”. It is headed by Iyad ag-Ghali, a Tuareg, whose profiled by the US government as a terrorist.

As a result of its extremist viewpoints, Ansar al-Din often undertakes acts of terrorism, mainly concentrated in the Sahel region. The movement has greatly destabilized West African states and constantly engages national armies and UN peacekeeping forces in the region. Over the past few years, its activities have resulted in the deaths of more than 4000 people. It administrates chunks of the countries whose forces it has subdued and imposes on these lands its mode of religion with disastrous consequences. Ansar al-Din often closes ranks with other Salafi movements in the Sahel region to effect changes in the political scene. Ansar al-Din’s viewpoints are very different from those of the USA. Due to its subscription to Islamist ideology, the movement is opposed to liberal views, including Western values of free speech and democracy. Additionally, one of the group’s objectives is to advance their version of militant Islam in African countries, which should be worrisome for all global citizens.

Similar to many other terrorist organizations, the Ansar al-Din terrorist group has significant resources. It often subdues state military bases in the Sahel region and obtains weapons that it uses to perpetuate war crimes and terrorist activity. Apart from receiving donations from sympathetic lenders, it kidnaps foreign nationals and obtains extortionate amounts of ransom for their release. It has smuggling networks through which it can raise money in the black markets of the world. Additionally, it uses its connections to larger terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda to gain a footing in the oil industry.

Brief Overview of the Hypothetical Attack

The hypothetical attack involves Ansar al-Din demolishing Hoover Dam in a campaign of terror and unprecedented aggression. Hoover Dam is one of the major pillars of commerce and agriculture in the USA. It is constructed across the Colorado River in a deep U-shaped canyon. Behind the massive wall that is the Hoover Dam lies Lake Mead. The waters of Lake Mead provide several important services to US residents. In one, they provide water for domestic, recreational, and industrial uses to the residents of major cities such as Las Vegas. Secondly, they are used in the generation of hydroelectric power, which is consumed by American households and industries. Additionally, the dam provides water for agriculture to farms in the downstream plains. Hoover Dam is one of the vital infrastructural elements in the USA.

By demolishing Hoover Dam, Ansar al-Din would send a strong message to the USA. Many lives and livelihoods would be lost downstream of the reservoir due to flooding and the destruction of vital infrastructural components such as roads, railway lines bridges, and large-scale farms. It is likely to cripple power distribution in many parts of the nation. It would take the USA significant time to recover after such a catastrophic event while at the same time giving Ansar al-Din a lot of notoriety and popular support among people who resent the USA and what it represents. The whole world would take notice of these events and there would be questions asked about the efficiency of the USA’s intelligence-gathering capacity.

Intelligence Analyst Strategies

Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Strategy

One of the major ways enemy groups communicate is through signals. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) must be adequately prepared to intercept any signals used by Ansar al-Din within the borders of the USA. Communications between militants often contain vital information regarding their attacks such as dates, methods to be used, locations, and participants.

Signals may be sent by militant groups such as Ansar al-Din in a variety of ways including phone calls, text messages, radio transmitters, and even weapons and radar systems. In some cases, the intercepted systems may reveal encrypted information that requires decryption before being acted upon by the security organs stated above. After obtaining information regarding Ansar al-Din’s plan to attack Hoover Dam, persons of interest should be identified and arrested to obtain more comprehensive details about the act of terrorism. Security agencies can be advised by the intelligence agencies on preemptive postures they can assume to prevent the attack.

Human Intelligence (HUMINT) Strategy

Intelligence on Ansar al-Din can be obtained through intelligence operatives going undercover and discovering information about the attackers and their plans. For this tactic to be effective, the specific agents deployed by the intelligence branches must be adept at spying and deception, which are important attributes in HUMINT strategies. For instance, they can take appropriate disguises such as recruiters or militiamen, and take up roles that bring them into contact with members of the Ansar al-Din who are involved in the attack on Hoover Dam. HUMINT is the best intelligence-gathering method once a base-level amount of data regarding the plan for Hoover Dam has been established.

It is the best way to identify the specifics of the plan that can help the intelligence agencies destroy Ansar al-Din’s plan before it is put into action. The FBI in the USA can employ its manpower in surveillance activities that monitor the activities of potential members of Ansar al-Din to establish their identities as such and understand their plans.

Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) strategy

Ansar al-Din can be thwarted if intelligence agencies use the OSINT strategy. In this case, the agencies would develop a comprehensive profile of Ansar al-Din from information available in existing publications such as newspaper articles and social media. It could use information about financial transactions undertaken by Ansar al-Din operatives in the USA, if any. Open-source information can reveal a lot about Ansar al-Din’s plans, including the items they are purchasing, what people perceive of them at any given time, any changes in leadership or strategy within the organization, and any the nature of their most recent terrorist activity. The information can facilitate intelligence agencies in understanding the most likely course of action Ansar al-Din are going to take and how to prepare for it. Additionally, security agencies can interrogate available footage from public areas to understand any movements made by personal entities affiliated with the Ansar al-Din movement.

Recommendations

A Centralized Intelligence Information Repository should be Established and made Accessible to all Internal Security Agencies

Sharing information on terrorist activities is an important step towards countering their activities. In the USA, several intelligence agencies protect citizens from acts of terror on American soil. One of these agencies is the NSA which is heavily involved in SIGINT analysis. The NSA uses a variety of covert methods such as wiretapping persons of interest, using viruses to hack and retrieve digitally stored information as well as tracking and recording attempts to infiltrate American information systems by foreign and terrorist organizations. On the other hand, the FBI is commonly involved in HUMINT and OSINT strategies that enable it to acquire personal and strategic information about terrorists that may be a threat to USA security. As such, each of the security agencies in the USA already possesses a lot of information on terrorists such as Ansar al-Din but they may not be sharing it at a time the organization poses a threat to national security.

This paper recommends that all the intelligence agencies pool together the data they have as it would enable them to share the information they already have thus increasing their capacity to gain more intelligence and at the same time, improving their ability to prevent the attack on Hoover Dam. Presently, organizations work in isolation and only share intelligence when mandated to do so or on a case-by-case basis (Bigo, 2019).

Sharing intelligence in a collaborative framework validates certain links between terrorist activities which reveals new insights into how terrorists operate. Intelligence sharing can reduce duplication of work between the agencies thus reducing costs and saving time which is crucial when working against terrorists. Notably, the data repository should only be accessed by privileged members of the contributing agencies to prevent it from being accessed by outsiders with adverse motives.

From the perspective of open-source intelligence, intelligence operatives should collaborate with civilians more

With the widespread use of the internet, civilians have unprecedented levels of information. Some of them may have information unavailable to intelligence agencies. The information could be sourced from social media interactions with strangers or stumbled upon in the course of research or entertainment. More importantly, such information may not be meaningful until it gets into the hands of intelligence operatives who can act upon it to protect American interests. Intelligence operatives such as DHS and the FBI are relatively insular and mostly engage with civilians when making arrests or during undercover missions whereby civilians cannot discover their identity. As such, it is relatively difficult for civilians to collaborate with security agencies on any matter.

To gather more intelligence, security agencies should collaborate extensively with civilians who may offer profound insights as regards operatives of groups such as Ansar al-Din. For instance, people working at the Hoover Dam may have noticed a new employee with peculiar tendencies or obvious red flags such as lacking a coherent personal history who may be gathering intelligence for the Ansar al-Din movement.

They may wish to report the individual to intelligence agencies but may lack a channel to reach them without raising suspicion. The DHS and the FBI in particular should take part in community projects where some of their agents interact with civilians and establish a working relationship that could be crucial in the long run. Additionally, intelligence and counter-intelligence operations necessitate that security agencies take every advantage they can to subdue the opponent. However, intelligence agencies must be very critical of any collaboration with members of the public as enemy intelligence operatives may use it as an opportunity to spy on intelligence agencies under the guise of collaborative citizens.

The Department of Homeland Security should Bait Terrorists with “Soft Targets” to Gain Information about their Organizations

The DHS may be aware that Ansar al-Din is planning an attack on the Hoover Dam. However, they may not have in-depth details of the attack and may be short of intelligence due to a variety of reasons including Ansar al-Din being shrewd in their operations. In such an event, the DHS can bait terrorists in the USA by creating a soft target for terrorists that can draw them out and thus give the DHS a starting point in their prevention plan. For instance, they may learn the modes of attack terrorists are likely to use, and the level of technology currently accessible by terrorist organizations among other important insights. Ansar al-Din is closely affiliated with many other terrorist groups and apprehending terrorists from one terrorist group may prove invaluable as they may have information regarding the plans of Ansar al-Din.

The plan to bait terrorists may come with a certain amount of risk as it may backfire and the DHS may not apprehend terrorists as expected. However, such a plan should have several in-built fail-safes such as ensuring that no civilians lose their lives if the plan backfires. Additionally, the plan to bait the terrorists may require intensive preparation to prepare the soft target as well as to raise interest among terrorist groups. A case in point is the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001, during which intelligence and surveillance agencies were completely blindsided by the Al Qaeda terrorist group (Cayford & Pieters, 2018). This recommendation should only be taken as a last resort at a point where security agencies are completely devoid of meaningful intelligence to avert a large-scale terror attack that is almost certain to happen.

Conclusion

Ansar al-Din is a terror group, with links to other extremist Islamic groups that have devastated African states. It takes hardline stances against liberal policies such as those taken by the US government. Ansar al-Din is affiliated with the Al Qaeda group which has in the past performed atrocities against US citizens. It is conceivable that the Ansar al-Din movement would undertake to demolish a critical piece of American infrastructure such as the Hoover Dam across the Colorado River. To offset such a possibility, intelligence agencies and mainly the DHS, FBI, and NSA would have to assume certain novel steps such as sharing information on the attack and Ansar al-Din as a whole on an unprecedented scale.

They could also take a deliberate effort to collaborate with civilians and particularly those associated with Hoover Dam. If they are completely unable to obtain the type of intelligence that could stop the plan by Ansar al-Din, they could bait the terrorists into an attack that enables them to gain the type of intelligence necessary to stop the attack quickly.

References

Bigo, D. (2019). Shared secrecy in a digital age and a transnational world. Intelligence and National Security, 34(3), 379–394. Web.

Cayford, M., & Pieters, W. (2018). The effectiveness of surveillance technology: What intelligence officials are saying. The Information Society, 34(2), 88–103. Web.

Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) annually releases reports on the Global Peace Index (GPI) by analyzing various criteria. This report presents data on 163 countries’ peacefulness, ranking them based on 23 various indicators of the states’ militarization and internal or external discord (IEP, 2022). The notion of peace can be negative or positive, where the former is the absence of wars while the latter is the nonexistence of cultural and structural conflicts (iDare, 2019). In fact, the idea of positive peace is covered in the following YouTube video. This year’s GPI seems to worsen compared to the previous years due to the ongoing domestic conflicts in some countries and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, affecting GPI and making positive peace impossible.

Although some indicators improved in many countries, some defining characteristics deteriorated in many states, driving the overall GPI score down. In 2022, GPI dropped by 0.3% due to the drastic decrease in peacefulness in 71 countries (IEP, 2022). The five least peaceful countries with ongoing conflicts and the number of deaths associated with them were found to be Somalia, Afghanistan, Russia, Yemen, and Syria (IEP, 2022). The five most peaceful states remain to be Iceland, New Zealand, Ireland, Denmark, and Austria (IEP, 2022). In terms of the militarization domain, Russia, the United States, North Korea, Israel, and France remain at the bottom of the ranking list since the percent of GDP spent on armament is higher than other nations (IEP, 2022). The terrorism indicator worsened in 44 countries and improved only in 29 countries (IEP, 2022). Lastly, the Russian invasion of Ukraine caused disturbance not only to their GPI ranking but also affected their and other states’ economies and safety, which in combination harms the positive peace of any country.

In summary, the 2022 Global Peace Index showed the overall deterioration of peace worldwide. The most prominent issue of 2022 appears to be the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Moreover, positive peace is a critical concept, which shows the importance of the absence of violence, exploitation, and discrimination in a country as well as the necessity of a well-functioning society and government. If I were to integrate the notion of positive peace into my life, I would primarily focus on fighting racial and gender bias, assisting low-income families improve household conditions and education, and helping local businesses. These strategies can reduce cultural and structural violence, creating positive peace.

References

iDare. (2019). Positive peace [Video]. YouTube. Web.

Institute for Economics & Peace. (2022). Global peace index 2022: Measuring peace in a complex world. Vision of Humanity. Web.

The Nazi death camps of World War II produced some of the most horrific atrocities ever recorded. History has seen many accounts particularly from the perspective of holocaust victims. However, not much attention has been paid to the emotional effects suffered by the individuals who worked in these death camps.

These individuals were not guards of SS troopers but rather individuals considered too impure to be part of the German society. Their impurity however was not of the extent that could warranty their execution upon arrival. These people were referred to as “Canadas” and it was their job to clean up after the executions and herd those considered sub-human to gas chamber commonly referred to as “the Canada”. Tadeuzs Borowski’s short story This Way for the Gas, Ladies and Gentlemen, is an account of a young man forced to work in the camps as a Canada.

While not directly responsible for the gassing of Jews himself, this young man definitely participated in the atrocities by helping the Nazis carry out mass murder. History is full examples of such circumstances where young men are forced to commit crimes failure to which they are either killed or bodily harm was inflicted on them. Individuals in such situations were forced to lose connection with their emotional side by ignoring humane attitudes directed towards the individuals being executed.

To stand witness to acts demeaning human life inevitably resulted in the individuals losing all compassion for their victims. To some extent, there is a possibility that these ‘handy men’ ended up hating those being exterminated. This lose of emotion got to a point where the persons involved were in a position of turning against fellow men and start viewing them as animal at the snap of a finger.

Those individuals who were constantly around killing fields had to develop adaptive measures to enable them cope with situation; this in current times is seen presented from the viewpoint of the soldiers’ involvement in the battlefields. They are constantly witnessing their comrades getting killed and maimed right in front of their eyes and hate begins to boil in their hearts directed at the individuals who inflicts these injuries.

With time, their emotional tolerance towards fellow human greatly reduces such that they find it relatively easy to kill a person they consider an enemy. It gets to a point where their sole objective is to merely survive irrespective of the means used to obtain this survival.

Such was the case with the young canada in Borowski’s story. The tolerance in this particular case develops as a result of the conditions in which he lives in as well as the rules that he is expected to follow. His task is to remove all the clothing and valuables from the Jewish prisoners and this has been clearly described in the essay. “Whoever takes gold, or anything at all besides food, will be shot for stealing Reich -property”.

In order to stay alive they must take the food from those condemned to death since the latter are allowed a few necessities required for survival. The Canadas are however forbidden from taking even the smallest article of clothing from the prisoners, as much as these could improve their living conditions and make their lives more bearable (Borowski 342).

Lack of basic essentials like shoes subjected the Canadas to painful moments that further served to enhance their resentment towards their victims. For example, the Canada’s feet developed painful sores and this further intensified their hatred to the Jews. The argument by the Canadas was that it was the Jews’ fault that they lacked shoes.

Aside from physical pain, the Canadas underwent extensive emotional pain. The Canada in Borowski’s story, had to develop ways of copping with shock occasioned by seeing hundreds of dead bloated babies on a daily basis. As Borowski describes the scene, “Naked little monsters with enormous heads and bloated bellies” (344). The sight of these dead bodies must have prompted him to develop a lot of hatred and anger. This kind of anger has to be re-channeled in order for the individuals to maintain some level of sanity.

Since it would have been imminent suicide to try and direct the anger towards Germans, that Canada instead chose to direct it towards Jewish prisoners. The Canada begins to question if he still is a good person after removing the babies in this statement to his friend, “Henri, are we good people? I am furious, simply furious with these people, furious because I must be here because of them. I feel n o pity. I am not sorry they’re going to the gas chamber. Damn them all!”(Borowski 345).

This anger, a direct result of witnessing the horrors around him, is directly attributed to his dislike for manual labor and his anger is particularly directed towards the Jews because in his eyes, it is they that get him out of bed to go and work. In reality, this anger is the direct consequence result of having to experience emotion-numbing ordeals.

The kind of emotional trauma experienced by this Canada demanded that for him to survive and still maintain some degree of mental control, he had to look at prisoners as non-humans and treat them as such. This became evident when the Canada was interacting with a certain Jewish prisoner, “I look at her without saying a word. Here, standing before me, is a girl, a girl with enchanting hair with beautiful breasts, wearing a little cotton blouse” (Borowski 348).

The Canada was in this particular instance staring at a stunningly beautiful girl but his emotional situation did not permit him to regard her as human. Instead he chose to view her as some sort of animal and treat her in the same way an astonished farmer would see one of his cows that somehow starts talking. The Canada was no longer in a position to view this girl as a human being on the mere pretext that doing so would have made her subject to humane consideration.

Unfortunately, fate demanded action when the Canada was faced with such a situation and in his case all he could do was kill the Jews irrespective of how any feelings he had towards them. this was a reasonable response and it definitely proves that no one can witness the events at death camps and still be able to sensibly live in society without viewing other people as sub-human.

When the Canada realizes that he can no longer continue working directly with the prisoners on the unloading ramp, he confides in his friend Henri of his intention to step back. It is at this instance that Henri looks at him puzzled and asks him for the reasons that force him to quit after just a few trips.

Henri cannot understand the Canada’s predicament since has worked the ramps for several months and has had millions of individuals pass through his watch. He has even witnessed some of his friends pass through the ramp, “The worst are the transports from around Paris, one is always bumping into friends” (Borowski 350).

The response that he (Henri) gave to the friends was suggested that they (the friends) would take a bath on the other side and relax. Henri however was fully aware that they were marching to their death but could not bring himself to entertain such thoughts. All senses of emotion had been suppressed to the extent that he viewed old friends as animals on their way to a slaughter house.

The atrocities of the death camps have left lasting impressions on mankind and this is more notable from individual who were forced to work in them. Both the Canada and Henri were forced to start regarding fellow humans as nothing more than animals; a consequence of having witness many people get sent to death. In order to survive without losing their minds, they had to block out all emotional feelings in the process changing how they viewed the rest of mankind.

Works Cited

Borowski, Tadeauzs. “This Way For The Gas, Ladies And Gentlemen.” The Mercury Reader:

Ideas That Matter: Readings For English 111. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2009. 336-352. Print.

Introduction

Terrorist acts include activities that pose a significant risk of death or serious injury to humans, damage or severely disrupt electronic systems, or cause substantial property damage. The Oklahoma City bombing that affected the Murrah Federal Building is one example of terror that resulted in several deaths and casualties and destroyed property within the affected area. The heinous act was planned and carried out by Timothy McVeigh with the help of Terry Nichols. McVeigh had no sympathy for retaliating against the government for the Waco siege and Ruby Ridge insurrection by bombing the Murrah Building while presuming the parking lot would absorb and spread damage.

Timothy McVeigh Decision to Bomb the Murrah Building

McVeigh considered the requirement that at least two federal law enforcement agencies employ the targets before choosing them. Despite his initial plans to target a government facility first, he finally determined that more casualties would have better results (Dang et al., 2021). McVeigh decided to attack the Murrah building because he believed the force of the detonation would cause the glass in front of the building to break. McVeigh reasoned that the adjacent open parking lot across the street might be able to absorb and distribute part of the energy, protecting the occupants of the close-by non-federal buildings from the incident’s aftereffects. McVeigh concurs that picking an Oklahoma City building as the assault’s objective was a form of retribution for the deaths of more than 70 people in Waco. He reasoned that the building’s size would provide more compelling picture opportunities for propaganda.

What Timothy McVeigh Hoped to Accomplish

McVeigh desired vengeance for the disaster at Ruby Ridge in 1992 and American foreign policy in the Waco slaughter in 1993. This massacre led to the deaths of 82 people, most of whom were children (Birchall & Knight, 2022). Therefore, Timothy McVeigh, a former soldier, carried out the act of retribution that entailed bombing the federal building in Oklahoma City. McVeigh believed that the government’s actions during the sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco were to blame for the deaths of several Americans. Following the bombing he committed at the United States Federal Building in Oklahoma City, McVeigh made this statement.

More than seventy members of the Branch Davidian sect lost their lives during sieges that were virtually comparable to those two years before the attack. The investigation conducted by the FBI found that McVeigh’s extreme beliefs had a part in his determination to attack the federal building.

Timothy McVeigh Feeling Regarding the Bombing

In prison, McVeigh did not express remorse for his deeds. More than a hundred people were killed, and hundreds more were injured due to these activities. He acknowledges that his motivation for assaulting a government facility and its staff was to make a statement to a hostile administration. He also admits that he wanted to convey a message to an administration that was becoming more hostile (Birchall & Knight, 2022). The American assault on the Murrah Government Building in Oklahoma City was akin to assaults on government buildings in Serbia, Iraq, or any other nation, both morally and tactically. McVeigh’s perception of government policy made him think that his actions were justified.

Contrary to what Americans frequently lob on the heads of others, he claims that what happened in Oklahoma City was not all that. As a result, he adopted and kept a clinically detached perspective on the circumstances. He contends that the Murrah building bombing was not a targeted assassination. When personnel of the US Air Force, Army, Navy, or Marine Corps bomb or launch cruise missiles at government buildings and their employees, McVeigh likens that attack to how it is not a personal attack.

Conclusion

In summation, Timothy McVeigh’s explosion was an act of retribution for the wrongful deaths of over seventy people in Waco, which he saw as the fault of others. Initially, he planned to target a government facility, but he soon concluded that killing more people would convey a greater message to the administration. Despite his fears that the government was involved in actions damaging the country’s population, he chose arson to voice his dissatisfaction with the administration.

He should be held accountable for his conduct, which injured and killed innocent bystanders, especially children. He had the expertise and experience as a former military man to fight for his nation and preserve the lives of the innocent civilians he murdered in the attack. Under any conditions, the bombing of Oklahoma City cannot be justified. McVeigh sought to level the playing field with the government by deploying a mediocre approach in response to the government’s poor policy decisions.

References

Birchall, C., & Knight, P. (2022). Do your own research: Conspiracy theories and the internet. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 89(3), 579–605. Web.

Dang, C. M., Lee, M. H., Nguyen, A. M., Diduck, A., Villareal, A., Simic, Z., Pollio, D. E., & North, C. S. (2021). Survivor narratives of the Oklahoma City Bombing: The story over time. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 30(1), 102–111. Web.

In his well-known address “Their Finest Hour,” Winston Churchill touched on many occasions from World War II. He was able to discuss some specifics, such as the British soldiers’ departure from Dunkirk. The Dunkirk pullback, also known as Operation Dynamo, occurred between May 26 and June 4, 1940, during the early stages of World War II (Churchill). It was a critical period for the Allies because of the German assault on France and the British advance toward the English Channel. With the help of an armada of small boats, the British Navy safely evacuated more than 338,000 soldiers from the Dunkirk coastline (Churchill). This battle was a crucial moment in the war’s history since it allowed the British troops time to regroup and prepare for the Battle of Britain. Churchill used this fact, the Dunkirk rescue operations, in his speech as a persuasive rhetorical device to uplift the moods of the British military and inspire them to continue battling the Germans.

The evacuation of Dunkirk was significant because it prevented the Allies from suffering a crushing defeat. If the German forces had captured and destroyed the British troops, it would have been a catastrophic defeat for the Allies and much more problematic to battle the Germans. After losing the battle of France for the first two weeks due to their lack of cannons and technical amenities, it was remarkable how the German army was severely weakened by the French army’s resistance, which turned the tide. Alternatively, the successful evacuation from Dunkirk allowed the British armies to regroup, and they subsequently took an essential part in the Battle of Britain. The British people displayed fortitude during the evacuation of Dunkirk by risking their lives to save the soldiers stranded on the beaches. The mood of the British population was greatly improved, giving them hope that they would still win the war.

Churchill supported his argumentative objective of boosting the trust of the British people in his speech by citing the Dunkirk evacuation. The evacuation, which he called a “miracle of deliverance,” was made possible by the British forces’ “skill and devotion” and the “heroism” of the people who came to their aid, according to Churchill’s account (Churchill). By highlighting the success of the Dunkirk evacuation, Churchill persuaded the British people that they could prevail despite overwhelming obstacles. The Dunkirk retreat, according to him, inspired the British army to keep fighting and have confidence in their capacity to win the war. Churchill used the Dunkirk evacuation to demonstrate how he supported his claims with facts. By highlighting the bravery and tenacity of the British people, he created a feeling of unity and purpose that benefited the British war endeavor.

In conclusion, the Dunkirk evacuation was a significant World War II development and considerably aided the Allies’ triumph. Churchill used the Dunkirk evacuation as a rhetorical device in his speech to boost the spirits of the British people and inspire them to continue the battle against the Germans. By highlighting the triumph of the Dunkirk evacuation and the bravery and fortitude of the British people, Churchill was capable of fostering a sense of camaraderie that aided the British war effort. The Dunkirk evacuation served as a homage to the strength of the human spirit and a reflection that there is invariably optimism for a brighter tomorrow, even in the most difficult circumstances.

Work Cited

Churchill, Winston. “Modern History Sourcebook: Winston Churchill: ‘Their Finest Hour.’” Internet History Sourcebooks: Modern History, Fordham University, 1940, Web.

The Second World War was a turning point in the history of warfare, with the widespread killing of civilians on both sides. The war was characterized by the indiscriminate bombing of cities, the massacre of civilians, and the displacement of millions of people (Taskinen, 2023). The bombing campaigns resulted in significant loss of life and widespread destruction of cities, affecting both military and civilian populations (Carpenter & Montgomery, 2020). The killing of civilians during the war was justified by both sides on the grounds of military necessity and retaliation for the actions of the enemy (Carpenter & Montgomery, 2020). According to Carpenter and Montgomery (2020), the norms of civilian immunity played a significant role in shaping the U.S.’s attitude toward the laws of war. Despite these norms, the U.S. still engaged in bombing campaigns that resulted in the death of civilians (Carpenter & Montgomery, 2020). These events demonstrate the devastating impact of war on civilians and the need to protect their rights and well-being during armed conflicts.

In my opinion, the arguments used to justify the killing of civilians during the Second World War are highly questionable from a moral and ethical perspective. The indiscriminate bombing of cities and the massacre of civilians directly violated the principles of international humanitarian law, which clearly prohibit the targeting of civilians and civilian objects. The devastating impact of these actions on the civilian populations affected by the conflict highlights the tragedy and inhumanity of such practices. When it comes to the question of whether killing civilians to win a war is ever justified, I would argue that the answer is a resounding no. The targeting of civilians goes against basic human values and principles of morality, and can never be justified by military necessity or retaliation. The loss of innocent lives and the widespread suffering caused by these actions cannot be justified in any context.

In conclusion, the widespread killing of civilians during the Second World War was a defining moment in the history of warfare. The arguments used to justify the killing of civilians were not morally or ethically justifiable and violated the principles of international humanitarian law. The indiscriminate bombing of cities and the massacre of civilians was a tragic and devastating event that had a profound impact on the civilian populations affected by the conflict.

References

Carpenter, C., & Montgomery, A. H. (2020). The stopping power of norms: Saturation bombing, civilian immunity, and U.S. attitudes toward the laws of war. International Security, 45(2), 140–169. Web.

Taskinen, I. (2023). Construction of the Finnish army in World War II database. Historical Life Course Studies, 13, 44–60. Web.

Introduction

The terrorist attacks on US soils in September 11, 2001 dramatically changed the world’s view of failing states. While the states had been left much to their own devices following the end of the cold war, the 9/11 attacks brought to sharp focus the significance of failed and failing states in terrorism perpetration.

This was the case since a failing state, Afghanistan, was identified as the location from which the terror attacks had been hatched and effectively executed by Osama’s Al-Qaida network.

The world therefore realized that that ignoring failing or failed states is a major risk for the rest of the global community since it is from such countries that act as launching pads for large scale terrorist attacks.

In light of this new found significance of failing and failed states in counterterrorism measures, this paper shall discusses the ways in which failed and failing states pose a threat to national security.

The paper shall proceed to perform an analysis of a failed state, Somalia, so as to reveal the threat that it poses to U.S. national security. A strategy that may be adopted to deal with this threat will also be documented.

Threats by Failed and Failing Sates

Failing and failed states provide safe havens for terrorist organizations some of which operate internationally. The September 11 attack was perpetrated through the failing state, Afghanistan.

This country served as the safe haven for Osama and Dempsey (2006) notes that prior to the 2001 invasion by US troops, Afghanistan was the operating base for Al Qaeda with numerous training camps in the country.

It was only after the invasion of Afghanistan and the establishment of a functional government that the country stopped serving as a hub for terrorists.

One of the means through which the strength and influence of terrorist organizations has been significantly curtailed is by cutting their finances. This has been through the freezing of bank accounts suspected to belong to terrorists and the imposition of measures to detect and stop money laundering by the terrorist organizations.

While these measures have had significant successes all over the world, failing and failed states continue to be hubs through which cash for terrorist activities and weapons can be smuggled through. This cash is then used to finance terrorist cells which can attack the US.

The citizens of failed states are most prone to radicalization by terrorist groups since they are mostly disillusioned and live in poverty. Stohl (2002) states that most Islamic terrorist groups are extremist in nature and aim to share their ideology with sympathizers.

The danger that results from radicalization is real since the new age of terrorism is characterized by fanaticism and religiously motivated groups which use any means including suicide bombs to achieve their ends.

It is difficult to neutralize terrorist organizations that operate in failed states as a result of limited human intelligence. Dempsey (2006) reveals that while military campaigns may be favored against certain terrorist targets that operate in failed states, the same is not possible as a result of limited or no intelligence.

In addition to this, most failed states lack communication infrastructure that makes it difficult for any assault on the terrorist organizations that operate from such countries.

Analysis of A failed State: Somalia

Rotberg (2004, p.85) characterizes failed states as being “tense, deeply conflicted, dangerous, and contested bitterly by warring factions. Somali is therefore a fully fledged failed state since it has for over two decades lacked a government and been characterized by bitter warring factions.

The government has suffered from its civil wars with numerous civilian causalities. This has resulted in Somalia posing significant threat to the national security of the US.

Hains (2008) states that while Somali was written off by the international community following the failed UN sanctioned US attempt to restore order in early 1990, the country has continued to pose escalating threats to the region in particular and to the world at large. With such realities in mind, the world can no longer afford to leave failed states to their own devices.

As a result of the lawlessness in Somalia, the country acts as a safe haven for terrorist groups. As a matter of fact, the Al Qaeda cell in East Africa is able to operate in Somali with the protection of the Islamic movement.

Stohl (2002) documents that Al Qaeda used failed states including Somalia for its training and safe haven and transit prior to the September 11 attacks in US.

In addition to this, Somalia is home to Al-Shabaab, an organization that has been designated by the U.S. government as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (Rollins, 2010).

This organization explicitly airs anti-Western sentiments and in fact applauds the infamous Somali pirates for their attacks on Western vessels.

Anti-money Laundering efforts are now well established in majority of the countries in the world and this regimes help to combat terrorist financing. Somalia which has no effective government lacks the capacity with which to implement AML efforts.

Giraldo and Trinkunas (2007) reveal that this lack of capacity by Somali has resulted in Somalia being used as a hub through with terrorists and terrorist finance flows through the region.

Terrorist organizations are constantly seeking to recruit new members to join their cause. Somali presents good grounds from which the organizations can gain supporters as a result of the vulnerability of the area and the increasing influence by Islamic militias.

The U.S. air strikes in Somalia following the 2006 invasion of Somalia by Ethiopia resulted in the radicalization of the population. As a result of this, the terrorism threat posed by Somali to the international community increased monumentally increased.

This invasion resulted in the involvement of Somali-born citizens in international terrorism demonstrating the influence that radicalization has.

Strategy for dealing with threat

To effectively deal with the terror threat that is brought about by failed states, it is necessary to recover the states. The recovery can occur through reversal of the conditions which resulted in the state failing. One of the causes of failed states is perceived inequality within the local populace.

It can therefore be reasonably assumed that a fair distribution of resources may result in a reversal of the situation. Hains (2008) documents that the fair distribution of emergency as well as development aid by the international donor community can reduce the likelihood of a recovering state failing

A nation’s justice system has a direct bearing on the perceived legitimacy of a government by its people. Hains (2008) states that the reason for this is that the nation’s citizens are more likely to cooperate with the security apparatus if they perceive that the justice system is effective and fair.

Failed and failing states are generally characterized by weak, ineffective or at worse non-existent justice systems.

The US can therefore offer aid and expertise to strengthen a country’s justice system. By doing this, the particular country will not pose a risk to the US since the government will be accepted by the people and will be unlikely to become a failed state.

Conclusion

This paper set out to discuss the ways in which failed and failing states pose a threat to our national security. To this end, the paper has outlined threats by failed states and proceeded to perform an analysis of one of the failed states, Somalia.

This paper has demonstrated that while Prior to the events of September 11, failed states were viewed more as humanitarian tragedies, the events of 9/11 led to the world seeing failed and failing states as major national security problems that must be dealt with if world peace is to be preserved.

The paper has shown that the US can no longer ignore the terrorist threat posed by Somali since there are indications that the country was used to train international terrorists and continues to fund terrorist organizations.

From this paper, it is evident that the only sure manner in which the threat posed by failed states can be removed is if the states are restored back to functional modes.

References

Dempsey, T. (2006). Counterterrorism in African Failed States: Challenges and Potential Solutions. Strategic Studies Institute.

Giraldo, J. K. & Trinkunas, A. H. (2007). Terrorism financing and state responses: a comparative perspective. Stanford University Press.

Hains, C. M. et al. (2008). Breaking the Failed-State Cycle. RAND Corporation.

Rollins, J. (2010). International Terrorism and Transnational Crime: Security Threats, U.S. Policy, and Considerations for Congress. DIANE Publishing.

Rotberg I. R. (2004). “The New Nature of Nation-State Failure.” The Washington Quarterly. Vol. 25 No 3, 2002: 85-96.

Stohl, M. (2002). Networks of Terror, Failed States and Failing Policies After September 11. Strategic Outreach Program.