The Issue of Counter Terrorism
To: Bill Graham, Minister, Department of Foreign Affairs and international Trade
From: Dario Di Napoli,
Re: The Issue of Counter Terrorism
Introduction
The issue that I wish to address is Canada's efforts concerning counter terrorism and Canada's contribution to the U.S.-led global War on Terrorism. Although Canada has responded well to the vulnerabilities that exist in our post 9/11 world through implementation of the Anti-terrorism Act (passed December 24, 2001) and other measures to be discussed later, it is evident that further policy modifications are still needed to improve Canada's efforts in this war on Terrorism. What further measures can Canada take in reference to the issue of Counter Terrorism? I recommend three main implementations that will improve Canada's efforts; 1) The creation of a department of Homeland Security, similar to the one existent in the United States of America. It is evident that those who wish to commit acts of terrorism against the western world have clearly outlined that they intend to attack those who support the U.S., and to those who share similar ideals; 2) An initiative to create a joint department of anti-terrorism with the USA, similar to NORAD. The necessity for an agency in which its employees may operate free of any borders is evident. For example, the diffusion of the attempt to transport explosives through the border on the West coast, which foiled a terrorist plot set to take place during millennium celebrations; 3) increased long-term diplomatic and political efforts in countries where terrorism grows and flourishes through direct relations with government officials. Many believe that it is not possible to negotiate with nations who harbor terrorism, but I believe that Canada, being known for its peacekeeping abilities, will be able to make a difference and prevent further attacks.
The Issue
Terrorism is a defined as a political act. Its purpose is to induce political change that the proponents have determined cannot be accomplished in ways other than the application of terrifying violence1. Al Qaeda, the main terrorist group being pursued by the United States, has two main political goals in which they use terrorism as their method for accomplishment. These two goals are the eviction of all Americans from Islamic holy lands, notably Saudi Arabia, and American abandonment of Israel2. The problem at hand is obvious. Although terrorism has existed for decades, Canadians now face a direct threat after the events of September 11th. Al Qaeda has explicitly mentioned Canada as a possible target for future acts of terrorism. The issue is how to prevent this from happening. Many measures have been taken, such as Anti-Terrorism Act, which was made to give law enforcement increased ability and improved tools to pursue suspects of terroroism3. Another preventative act passed is the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which was created to allow for easier deportation and prevention of immigration by those who are seen as security threats4. Such measures are a great start for Canada, but much more has to be done.
It has become evident that terrorist cells exist within our borders. For example, the terror cell that was apprehended near the Canadian border in upstate New York. Also, many terror suspects have been arrested in Canada for having direct ties to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. These facts make it important for Canada to consider improving its counter terrorism efforts. According to Eli Udell, a political science student at the University of Western Ontario, there are four key spheres that need to be addressed when compiling a strategy for improved counter terrorism. They are the physical sphere, the political/diplomatic sphere, the intelligence sphere, and the finance control sphere5. With my implementations, each of these aspects will be improved. Udell presents a model in which co-operation and interrelation between these aspects will increase the success of counter terrorism efforts. Within the physical sphere, it is essential to have those who are fighting terrorism (for example the FBI and Army Special Ops) to cooperate and complete joint objectives where possible. Also, the sharing of technology and military equipment is essential to provide for the best methods of apprehension, regardless of who is completing the task. Such propositions will be possible with the implementation of my recommendations. Having a joint department between Canada and and the US will allow for such objectives to be completed with the utmost efficiency.
The second sphere that Udell addresses is that of intelligence. The sharing of information is vital. The miscommunication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency in the United States proved to be detrimental to pre 9/11 counter terrorist's efforts, and allowed for the fatal attack to occur. The creation of a homeland security department was the solution to this. Now, all information that relates to terrorism will pass through here, which allows for complete organization and assessment of a possible threat. It is necessary for Canada to have a similar system, which will be outlined in detail at a later point in this report. Also, a joint department between Canada and the US would allow for information to be processed efficiently, which could ultimately lead to the prevention of a violent attack.
Another aspect that Udell addresses is the political/diplomatic effort. It is clear that many nations in the middle east do not favor the policies of the United States, which often involve US intervention in the region. Because of this, many nations do not co-operate with American objectives concerning terrorism. This allows for terrorist camps to have a safe-haven to accumulate recruits and military equipment, as well as the possibility of acquiring much more harmful agents such as chemical weapons. Udell believes that it is essential for co-operation to exist on the diplomatic level. I believe that Canada can play an essential role in regards to this aspect. Canadians are known for their commitment to peace and the use of diplomatic measures to resolve conflict, as can be seen in Canada's decision to abstain from the military conflict in Iraq. Canada's possible role will be discussed in the recommendation section of this report.
The final aspect of Udell's model is finance control. He believes that it is essential for nations to co-operate when attempting to determine where terrorist groups are receiving funds. Most money that terrorists receive cross many borders, and so it is key for countries to work together in order to confiscate these funds when possible, as the money often moves very quickly from one location to another. A joint department between Canada and the US would allow access to each other's information concerning the transferring of funds from North America to nations abroad.
Recommendation #1
After reviewing the importance of the issue of counter terrorism in Canada, and addressing Udell's model to increase efficiency in the realm of counter terrorism, it is now possible to explain my policy options that I strongly advise the department of defense to consider. Once again, the three recommendations are to create a department of homeland security in Canada, to initiate the creation of a joint department of counter terrorism between Canada and the US, and finally, to devise a diplomatic approach to address directly the nations in which terrorism flourishes. The reasons why I believe that Canada should create a department of homeland security are similar to the reasons why the US has already created one. Fortunately, Canada has not yet experience a major terrorist attack since Al Qadea has made the recent threats. However, this does not give reason to believe that it will not occur. In statements made by members of Al Qaeda, and bin Laden himself, Canada has been mentioned as a possible place for an upcoming terrorist attack. It is essential therefore to create a body of government that deals with all aspects of terrorism, such as counter terrorist forces, as well as border control, airline security, the protection of power plants, and hazardous materials, and so on. Canada's resources are vast, and its borders are porous due to their immense size. An agency that works to protect all aspects of Canadian life is the best way to address the issue of counter terrorism. With one single agency in charge of protecting Canada, any miscommunication that would occur between different agencies would no longer exist. For example, if a suspect is being tracked within Canada's borders, rather than having the immigration services and police forces both attempting to track him down, having a single agency with agents involved in both these aspects will allow for direct communication, which could lead to faster apprehension, and could be the difference between a successful attack or a diffusion of the terror plot. The new department of Homeland security would have separate branches; one for border patrol, immigration, airline security, tactical forces, and protection of resources and hazardous materials. Terrorism is an issue that needs separate attention, apart from other issues that threaten the Canadian people. For example, having agents on the borders that are solely devoted to preventing terror suspects from entering the country would allow for optimal prevention, as opposed to having border patrol who have many other threats to handle, such as drug smuggling, and illegal immigration. This example explains the need for a separate department of homeland security in the sense that terrorism is such a widespread problem that a department solely devoted to dealing with terrorism is needed. Having agencies fight terror, while dealing with many other issues, as is the current situation, is much less efficient than having a department dealing solely with terrorism. This is the best way for Canada to protect itself from future attacks, and therefore an immediate creation of this department will make Canada a safer place.
Recommendation #2
The second recommendation to improve Canada's counter terror efforts is to initiate a joint department with the United States, similar to NORAD. Norad was creating during a time where both Canada and he United States were under threat of attack from communism, which almost occurred when Russia sent missiles to Cuba. This agency has had much success, and currently, NORAD is still working to protect North America from any possible aerial assault. The success of this agency reveals that joint operations between Canada and The US can work efficiently. Combining efforts and co-operating is essential in the fight against terrorism, as Udell clearly mentioned. In order to create this department, meetings must take place between Canadian and US officials, in which details such as funding, organization, and department structure will be discussed.
Next, the creation of a main headquarters is necessary. It is vital to keep all information flowing through the same location, and also to keep the decision making under one roof, to allow for optimal efficiency when executing a plan of apprehension. Another aspect of this new department that would be created is a joint special forces team, in which both Canadian and American soldiers are a part of. Operating without the constraints of border will allow for quick and efficient execution of operations. Also, the sharing of military equipment and training methods will result in best possible task force, operating in all parts of Canada and the United States, without be constrained by borders or issues of jurisdiction. For these reasons, I believe that Canada should initiate the creation of a joint department of counter terrorism with the United States.
Recommendation #3
The final recommendation is to create a long-term approach to become diplomatically involved in countries where terrorism exists. This recommendation is obviously the hardest to accomplish, but I believe it is the only way to completely stop terrorism in the future. As mentioned previously, Canada is known for its peacekeeping abilities, and its commitment to solving disputes through diplomatic measures. In countries where the policies of the US are not welcome, such as in Syria, Iran, and Egypt, it is necessary for Canada to approach these nations to discuss the issues of terrorism. One possibility is to create a team of diplomats devoted to traveling to these countries and attempting to resolve any hatred that is felt towards western culture by providing solutions that are separate from any US involvement. It is clear that in countries such as Syria, terrorist groups do exist and are somewhat safeguarded by its government. It is crucial that Canada becomes involved with these countries, helping them realize that terrorism is a tool of evil that results in the death of innocent civilians. Although this recommendation will be a long, tough process, it is necessary that Canada stays committed to working with countries where terrorism exists, and to influence them to crack down on terrorism. One possible method to get these nations to co-operate is to offer incentives for apprehending and dissolving terror cells, such as foreign aid and increased trade relations.
Conclusion
The issue at hand is a very serious one. The threat of terrorism exists more now than ever, and it is essential that Canada continue their current efforts, as well as pursue new methods to improve their counter terrorism capabilities. I believe that Canada is currently handling the situation well, for example, through the creation of many new laws that relate to terrorism, such as the Anti Terrorism Act of December 2001. However, Canada must not stop there. I believe that my recommendations can further help the fight on terrorism. The creation of a Canadian homeland security department will increase the safety of Canadian people. A joint department of counter terrorism will further protect our vast continent. By sharing information and military capabilities, the war on terror within our borders will be easier to win. Finally, by pursuing long term diplomatic relations with countries where terrorism is known to exist could possibly lead to the end of terrorism altogether, which is the ultimate goal of the current global war on terrorism.
Endnotes
Snow, Donald M. Cases in International Relations. Addison, Wesley, Longman, Inc. New York, 2003. P. 293
Snow, P. 293.
"Canada's Actions Against Terrorism Since Sept. 11th" www.canadianembassy.org/border/backgrounder-en.asp P.3
"Canada's Actions Against Terrorism Since Sept. 11th" www.canadianembassy.org/border/backgrounder-en.asp P.5
Udell, Eli. Perspectives on Counter Terrorism. Presentation at University of Western Ontario. March 5, 2003.
|
