The War On Terrorism And Its Impact On The 21st Century

Since the 9/11 attacks on U.S. soil at the outset of the twenty-first century, western states have enacted vast changes in the way that they deal with terrorist groups and terrorists. Due to the fact that civilian casualties have escalated as a result of terrorist acts, western polities have steered away from a punitive paradigm that criminalizes terrorist acts and aims at penalizing individuals who perpetrate such acts. Instead, there has been a dramatic shift towards a preventative approach in which terrorist acts are prevented prior towards any manifesting and inflicting harm on innocent victims. In Jonathan Shapiro’s “An Ounce of Cure for a Pound of Preventive Detention: Security Certificates,” published in Queen’s Law Journal in 2008, discusses the paradigm shift in Canadian foreign policy as it pertains to terrorism through a cogent discussion of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). The IRPA authorizes the government to detained suspected terrorists amidst deportation proceedings. However, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision that the Charter was provisionally violated by certain provisions of the Act, which is the central point of contention Shapiro has in this article. Indeed, he critiques the approach of the Supreme Court in the Charkaoi v. Canada decision, positing that the security certificate process violates several of the liberty and equality

As the nature of conflict has changed from that of interstate conflict to transnational attacks, the world must discuss how to effectively combat terrorism in a way that minimizes harm. Throughout the following paper, I will summarize four contrasting responses to terrorism, included in a document adapted from Terrorism: How Should We Respond, of the Choices Program at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University. I will then discuss why I believe Canada’s most effective response to terrorism would be a unique combination of Options Two and Four. I believe that Canada should embrace relations with the international community, and seek solutions to terrorism as a global issue. This response would satisfy

Between 1960's to present day terrorism has occurred many times in Canada. To start off, specifically in the 1960's when Quebec was holding a Quiet Revolution. This was a social change happening in Quebec. To continue, during this time president of France Charles de Gaulle came to Montreal Quebec where he would say a speech effecting Canada forever. " Vive le Quebec Libre" was the ending statement to his speech, this statement would be scribbled on the wall on the site of the very first bomb of the FLQ. The FLQ was a group of was a separatists in Quebec. They believed in using weapons and violence to receive there demands and were responsible for numerous bombings in Quebec during the 1960's. Finally, the FLQ was responsible for the worst crisis since World War Two which was the October Crisis. This horrifying event was lead by the

The post-Cold War international system has elevated human security issues, global issues and economic competitiveness to be leading concerns. Nonetheless, 9/11 and the ensuing war in Afghanistan have ensured that the high politics of peace and security take precedence. Canada’s interest in Afghanistan was a direct result of the terror attacks of September 11th in the World Trade Center in the United States (Readings in… 117). This not only signified an outbreak of war on Canada’s neighbour, but it was symbolic of a fight against the entire Western World, undoubtedly including Canada. Over twenty-four Canadians were killed as victims of the attack. Essentially, Canada entered Afghanistan to fight terrorism abroad in order to maintain safety domestically; in a sense it was retribution for the lives lost in 9/11 and an active mission to eradicate the possibility of terrorist attacks in Canada. Secondly, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1368 which classified the terrorist attacks as a threat to international peace and security and recognized the “inherent right of individual or collective self-defence”(“Security Council…”). Arguably, three main factors led to Canada’s intervention in Afghanistan. Firstly, Canada chose to fight terrorism internationally as a reaction to 9/11, displaying the country’s complex neorealist agenda that

While not perfect, if Canada did allow its law enforcement agencies to use torture to extract time sensitive information, it might help reduce and prevent terrorism, but the negative backlash from Canadians and the international community may be too great. As well as running the risk of actually increasing the rate of terrorism by providing terrorist organizations with propaganda for their recruitments. In terms of immigration, by having an open immigration system, other countries may view Canada as being a safe haven for terrorist (McCoy & Knight (p.255), especially with our pro-human right policies. Nonetheless, by having a multi-cultural approach to immigration and fair and just immigration systems, it does reduce the potential push for people towards

The “War on Terror” is a term used to describe the military action taken by America and Canada after the events of September 11, 2001. This phrase is symbolic of the justification of acts that varied in legality and morality as a means to safe guard the security of the nation. These actions were perceived as necessary, top priority and essential but in actuality striped individuals of their rights, were unconstitutional and based not of factual information but racism and bigotry. The justifying of such intrusive acts in the name of protecting the nation is not a new phenomenon but can be dated back to the mid nineteen hundreds and is still used today. Canada prides itself as a multi-cultural, open and accepting nation. However, the presence

Canada’s counter-terrorism strategy is failing. From the 2014 attack on Parliament hill to the January massacre at the Quebec city mosque, it is clear that terrorism is an imminent threat, both to Canada and to the world. Backlash against Western culture provides ammunition to extremist Islamic groups globally, which is only exacerbated by the West’s disproportionate military responses to legitimate and perceived threats through drone strikes or other military operations. Anger towards domestic policy decisions fuels far-right white supremacists, and government’s unwillingness to label the violence perpetrated by these groups as terrorism only provides them with impunity. The lack of lack of multilateralism and international

The war on terrorism in the United States began after the September 11 attacks on the United States. Following the war was a series of military campaigns carried out to destroy terrorist organizations in the Middle-East. Led by the George W. Bush administration, America made goals for the war on terror to defeat main targets and terrorist leaders such as Osama bin Laden. The invasion of the Middle-East was supported by the American people at first. After three more years Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction no longer existed. Multiple terrorist forces fighting Al-Qaeda were taken down. However, America has maintained its military presence in the region until present day. According to Will Fight for Oil by Ted Koppel, if production of oil from the Persian Gulf stopped the American economy would be devastated. The american economy runs on oil; a large percentage of the oil we use comes from the Middle-East. The United States invaded Iraq in 2003 has not left yet because of the possible dangers of a Middle-East without American military presence. Without American supervision the regional instability of the Middle East could be very bad for oil production. To protect the American interests in the region military forces have not been removed. The people at home are all aware that we have American soldiers in the region. American civilians are used to living in a country at war. The constant period of America at war starting in 2003, has made America always prepared for

The beginning of “The War on Terror”. “The appeal of justice and liberty in the end, is greater than the appeal of hatred and tyranny in any form.”(Bush).Bush’s comment was referring to “The War on Terror” because he was in presidency during this year so this quote said by him means that he wants freedom for everyone.The solution to the “U.S.’s War on Terror” is ITA researchers, Antiterrorism Assistance Program, The Institute for the Study of War and The Critical Threats Project.

Anti-terrorism policy has become a more important legislative issue since the September 11th incident in 2001. Prior to this event, North American countries felt the need to implement new policy that would protect their citizens from criminal activity associated with acts of terror. In Canada, anti-terrorism policy consists of three main components identified in the literature: 1) The criminal code and relevant violations; 2) Anti-Terror Legislation; and 3) policy in practice. In this briefing note, all three will be analyzed based on whether or not the current policy is sufficiently protecting Canadians while ensuring that civil liberties are not being violated.

After the events of September 11, 2001, the United States had a unique dilemma. America was engaged in what would be called a “War on Terror”. This new conflict was unlike any in American history. Previously, in the context of war the United States had always fought a nation or group that had defined boundaries as to where they resided. This new conflict went away from these rules of the past. Terrorist groups were not bound to a region, but were instead united by an ideal. September 11 marked the first time in which terrorism would rise to the forefront of the nation’s agenda. This emergent wave of conflict required a different strategy than the those of the past because of the unorthodox nature of the opponent. One of the major innovations fostered by the “War on Terror” was the expansion of torture. The dramatic rise in terrorism sparked the unethical advancement of interrogation techniques in order to more effectively acquire information. The emergence of the “War on Terror” required government officials acquire intelligence in a new way thus spawning the emergence of “enhanced interrogation” methods, however, the morality of these techniques would come into question as they were revealed to the public.

The world has been changed forever since the tragic attack on September 11, 2001. An observer described the atrocity by saying, "It just went 'bam,' like a bomb went off. It was like holy hell (CNN 1). " The new world will be different from what any American has known before. A new war has arisen, not against a foreign country or a major region of the world, but rather against a select group of people who have the capabilities to destroy the lives of so many. The war against terrorism which the United States is now forced to wage will not be an easily won battle. This war will not be fought solely on scattered battlefields in certain countries. It will instead permeate through every aspect of life as we

Bill C-51 also known as the Anti-terrorism Act, 2015, is a bill that was first tabled in Parliament in January 2015. It was introduced to enhance Canada’s original anti-terror laws which were created shortly after the terrorist attack on September 11th 2001 in the United States of America. Moreover, the need to revise and amend these laws became even more evident after recent attacks both in Canada and abroad. In doing so the government recognized the need to adopt a more preventative approach to dealing with internal and external threats. However, there are a large number of individuals, groups and institutions which opposed this bill. This was evident in March of 2015 when political protests were held and over fifty-five rallies took place across Canada (Lepore, 1). The majority of those opposed to the new anti-terror legislation expressed concerns with three major components of the bill and the vagueness; to privacy concerns with the new information sharing between agencies, new amendments to the Criminal Code surrounding terrorism offences and the increased powers provided to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS); specifically their perceived lack of oversight. Although this piece of legislation is crucial to the safety and security of Canada against acts of terrorism it requires some amendments in order to ensure proper oversight and respect for Canadian values. This paper will argue that changes need to be made to the CSIS act, specifically regarding

The Global War on Terror is a military campaign led by the United States and the United Kingdom and supported by other NATO members. It was originally against al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them. This paper discusses how the Bush Administration handled the War on Terror as well as different aspects of it, including its terminology, its objectives, its military operations and criticism against it.

Over the years there have been significant changes in how terrorism is carried out. With the changes in how terrorism is carried out there have also been dramatic changes in how countries counter terrorist attacks. The modifications in the way a country counters these terrorist attacks affects international relations of these countries. These issues bring about the question of how have counter terrorism methods affected international relations. To answer this question several things must be addressed which are, methodology, history of terrorism, and a literature review of multiple authors that have discussed this subject.