SEARCH THE HSDL
Searching for terms: ALL (Domestic AND (U.S.) AND Terrorism) in: title or summary
Set an Alert to get future results
Results 91 - 120 (of 661) sorted by relevance sort by date
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Suicide Bombing in the COE"This handbook is one in a series of supplements to TRADOC DCSINT Handbook No. 1, A Military Guide to Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century, which is a basic terrorism primer prepared under the direction of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence-Threats. The terrorist threat confronting our military spans foreign and domestic threats of nation-states, rogue states with international or transnational agent demonstrations, and actors with specific strategies, tactics, and targets. A major tactic used by many terrorist groups is the use of suicide attacks. Although suicide terrorism is covered in the capstone terrorism handbook, this supplement provides more detail and insight. This informational document supplements the basic terrorism handbook and supports operational missions, institutional training, and professional military education for U.S. military forces in the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). This document provides an introduction to suicide terrorism, and addresses the history of the phenomena, how terrorist organizations recruit potential suicide bombers, motivations for use of suicide, characteristics of suicide bombers, various weapons and TTPs used by suicide bombers, and finally, the specific threats to the military."United States. Army Training and Doctrine Command2005-08-15
-
Analysis of Australia's National Strategy in the War against Terror"Australia has long valued its close relationship with the United States, and it is the principal relationship in Australia's National Security Strategy. For many years, successive Australian governments have sought to develop defense self-reliance within the framework of this bilateral relationship. The strength of this relationship has been increasingly evident since September 2001 as Australia has, among other actions, deployed military forces to support the United States in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Australia's strategy in the War Against Terror has included an absolute commitment to the United States; however, this has drawn strong criticism both domestically and from the international community toward Australia. Regardless of this criticism and hindsight, it is too late for Australia to reverse its strategic direction, and therefore Australia's future is linked closely to that of the United States. This paper identifies significant Australian political and military responses to international terrorism since September 2001. It considers the impact of terrorism on the Australian economy and the country's resource capacity to maintain its current strategy in the War Against Terror. The analysis of Australia's strategy in the War Against Terror draws conclusions about the Government's assessment of the strategic risks associated with Australia's strong alliance with the United States. The paper concludes that Australia's strategy in the War Against Terror has been successful so far; however, a number of strategic risks are identified. Finally the paper includes four broad recommendations that focus on Australia maintaining its broad support for the United States in the global war on terror while restricting its commitment in economic and military areas, and asserting itself more aggressively in regional issues."Army War College (U.S.)Slater, Michael D.2004-05-03
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [March 26, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. […] A modern trend in terrorism is toward loosely organized, self-financed, international networks of terrorists. Another trend istoward terrorism that is religiously- or ideologicallymotivated. Radical Islamic fundamentalist groups, or groups using religion as a pretext, pose terrorist threats of varying kinds to U.S. interests and to friendly regimes. Some nations facing difficult challenges include Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, and, to a certain extent, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Looming over the entire issue of international terrorism is a trend toward proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For instance Iran, seen as the most active state sponsor of terrorism, has been aggressively seeking a nuclear arms capability. Iraq is thought to be stockpiling chemical and biological agents. Also, indications have surfaced that the al Qaeda organization attempted to acquire chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons. As a result, stakes in the war against international terrorism and its supporters are increasing and margins for error in selecting appropriate policy instruments or combinations of them to prevent terrorist attacks are diminishing correspondingly."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-03-26
-
Pakistan-U.S. Anti-Terrorism Cooperation [Updated March 28, 2003]"Pakistan is a key front-line ally in the U.S.-led anti-terrorism coalition. After September 2001, Pakistani President Musharraf ended his government's ties with the Taliban regime of Afghanistan and has since cooperated with and contributed to U.S. efforts to track and capture remnants of Al Qaeda and Taliban forces that have sought refuge inside Pakistani territory. Pakistan's cooperation has been called "crucial" to past and ongoing U.S. successes in the region, but there is growing concern that the bilateral relationship is fragile and may be undermined by potentially disruptive developments in the areas of weapons proliferation, democracy-building, and Pakistan-India relations. This report reviews the status of Pakistan-U.S. anti-terrorism cooperation in the areas of law enforcement, intelligence, and military operations. U.S. arms transfers to and security cooperation with Pakistan are also discussed. A following section addresses the major domestic repercussions of Pakistan-U.S. counterterrorism efforts, the ways in which such efforts are perceived by newly-empowered Pakistan Islamists and their followers, and the possible effects these dynamics may have on future Pakistan-U.S. cooperation in this realm. The final section assesses the overall status of Pakistan-U.S. anti-terrorism cooperation and key points of U.S. concern. Broader discussion of bilateral relations and relevant legislation is found in IB94041, Pakistan-U.S. Relations. This report will be updated periodically."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceKronstadt, K. Alan2003-03-28
-
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP), Volume I: Overview and Doctrine [Revised May 2004]"The National Strategy for Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Act of 2002 identify the 'prevention of terrorist attacks within the United States' and 'the reduction of vulnerability of the United States to terrorism' as national priorities, and call on first responders to 'minimize the damage and assist in the recovery from terrorist attacks that do occur within the United States.' The Homeland Security Act also transferred the Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and assigned ODP 'the primary responsibility within the executive branch of government to build and sustain the preparedness of the United States to reduce vulnerabilities, prevent, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism.' Although effective approaches to planning, training, and exercises have been developed to mitigate the effects of natural and manmade disasters, homeland security professionals at all levels of government and in all types of communities must prepare to prevent and respond to new threats to public safety from terrorism involving the use of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive (CBRNE) weapons or cyber or agricultural hostility."United States. Department of Homeland Security. Office for Domestic Preparedness2004-05
-
Domestic Terrorism: Is America Prepared?Within the United States' National Security Strategy, December 1999, Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and their possible use by terrorists are listed as a vital interest to our nation's security. Excluded from this vital interest are terrorist acts that involve the use of conventional bombs and weaponry. The United States is focused on a Nuclear/Biological/Chemical (NBC) terrorist attack; but it should be equally prepared for the more likely domestic terrorist attack using conventional bombs. A main focus of United States counter terrorism policy is the terrorist use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The Environmental Protection Agency's definition of WMD is: "Weapons or devices that are intended, or have the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people, through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic poisonous chemicals; disease organisms; or radiation or radioactivity." Governmental focus on deterrence, prevention, and managing the consequences of WMD is a vital national interest, but not at the expense of remaining equally dutiful in the war against terrorist conventional bombings that are not mentioned in the EPA's definition of WMD. In light of the global fear of WMD, terrorist use of conventional bombs may not receive the consideration it requires thus increasing America's vulnerability. The United States' government must strike a balance between combating the domestic terrorist use of WMD and conventional bombs. An equally vigilant posture against homeland bombings is America's greatest protection against domestic terrorism in the 21st century.Marine Corps Command and Staff College (U.S.)Russell, Michel M., Sr.2001-04
-
Return of Foreign Fighters to Central Asia: Implications for U.S. Counterterrorism Policy"Central Asia is the third largest point of origin for Salafi jihadist foreign fighters in the conflagration in Syria and Iraq, with more than 4,000 total fighters joining the conflict since 2012 and 2,500 reportedly arriving in the 2014-2015 timeframe alone. As the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) continues to lose territory under duress from U.S.-led anti-ISIL coalition activities, some predict that many may return home bent on jihad and generating terror and instability across Central Asia. Yet several factors indicate that such an ominous foreign fighter return may not materialize. Among these factors are that a majority of Central Asians fighting for ISIL and the al-Nusra Front in Syria and Iraq are recruited while working abroad in Russia, often from low-wage jobs under poor conditions making the recruits ripe for radicalization. In addition, many of those heading for jihad in Syria and the Levant expect that they are on a 'one way journey,' some to martyrdom but most for a completely new life, and do not plan a return. Most Central Asian states face their greatest risk of domestic instability and violent extremism as a reaction to political repression and counterterrorism (CT) policies that counter-productively conflate political opposition and the open practice of Islam with a domestic jihadist threat. If improperly calibrated, greater U.S. CT assistance to address foreign fighter returns may strengthen illiberal regime short-term focus on political power consolidation, overplay the limited risks of foreign fighter returns, and increase the risks of domestic unrest and future instability."National Defense University. Institute for National Strategic StudiesLynch, Thomas Francis, 1960-; Bouffard, Michael; King, Kelsey . . .2016-10
-
Designating Domestic Terrorist Individuals or GroupsFrom the thesis abstract: "Terrorism is a crime committed by individuals with a political or social agenda designed to influence a government or its population. The U.S. government, state and local law enforcement agencies have, as a priority, the mission of protecting the homeland from the threats of terrorism-domestic or foreign. However, the U.S. government has not effectively defined what constitutes a domestic terrorist with the same processes and vigor used to identify international terrorists, gang members, or sex offenders. The lack of a workable definition and validation process for identifying a 'domestic terrorist' places law enforcement and homeland security agencies in a position of having to balance the need to protect constitutional rights and the need to protect against the nation's security threats. To this end, this thesis will identify the problems associated with a lack of a comprehensive definition, address the safeguards required in a definition to ensure constitutionally protected rights are not impinged, and will offer a working definition and designation process."Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.). Center for Homeland Defense and Security; Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)Heller, David E.2010-09
-
Judgement Day: Prosecuting Jihadist Terrorism as a Criminal Enterprise Under the Military Commissions ActFrom the thesis abstract: "What if the Coalition captures Osama bin Laden? What if the United States charges him with the capital crime of terrorism under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA)? What if the United States prosecutes bin Laden for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, as the head of Al-Qaeda's criminal enterprise? This dissertation argues that the United States should prosecute Osama bin Laden for the terrorist attacks of 9/11, as if he had crashed the four hijacked planes himself. As head of Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden can and should be held legally responsible for the capital crime of terrorism, under the legal theory that Al-Qaeda is a criminal enterprise. For decades, American criminal enterprise prosecutions have targeted organized crime, while international tribunals have prosecuted mass atrocities of size and structure similar to 9/11. Part II delves into the MCA's unique jurisdictional and substantive requirements to prosecute a terrorism charge. Al-Qaeda's 9/11 attacks seem to fit this definition in form and substance. Part II closes by exploring jihadist symbolism as an aggravating factor inherent to the merits and sentencing of a terrorism case like 9/11. Next, Part III compares and contrasts the American criminal enterprise model, an association-in-fact, with the international criminal enterprise model, a mass atrocity. Part III reconciles these enterprise models in a MCA context and applies them to 9/11. Part III closes by proposing that the Secretary of Defense adopt a hybrid approach to the use of criminal enterprise in the Manual for Military Commissions (MMC), which would unify the current American association-in-fact model and the international mass atrocity model, to fit the dual nature of terrorism as a domestic and international offense. Part IV considers potential defense objections to criminal enterprise liability for the MCA crime of terrorism."Judge Advocate General's School (United States. Army)Diaz, Ricardo J.2007-08-20
-
Terrorism and National Security: Issues and Trends [Updated September 8, 2005]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a serious foreign and domestic security threat. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. As the 9/11 Commission report released on July 19, 2004, concludes, the United States needs to use all tools at its disposal, including diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. A modern trend in terrorism is toward loosely organized, self-financed, international networks of terrorists. Another trend is toward terrorism that is religiously- or ideologically-motivated. Radical Islamic fundamentalist groups, or groups using religion as a pretext, pose terrorist threats of varying kinds to U.S. interests and to friendly regimes. A third trend is the apparent growth of cross-national links among different terrorist organizations, which may involve combinations of military training, funding, technology transfer, or political advice. Looming over the entire issue of international terrorism is a trend toward proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For instance, Iran, seen as the most active state sponsor of terrorism, has been secretly conducting a longstanding uranium enrichment program, and North Korea has both admitted to having a clandestine program for uranium enrichment and claimed to have nuclear weapons. (See CRS [Congressional Research Service] Issue Brief IB91141, 'North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program'.) On December 19, 2003, Iran signed an agreement allowing international inspections of nuclear sites; on December 21, 2003, Libya announced similar intentions. Indications have also surfaced that Al Qaeda has attempted to acquire chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons. As a result, stakes in the war against international terrorism are increasing and margins for error in selecting appropriate policy instruments to prevent terrorist attacks are diminishing."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael2005-09-08
-
Terrorism and National Security: Issues and Trends [Updated June 8, 2005]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a serious foreign and domestic security threat. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. As the 9/11 Commission report released on July 19, 2004, concludes, the United States needs to use all tools at its disposal, including diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. A modern trend in terrorism is toward loosely organized, self-financed, international networks of terrorists. Another trend is toward terrorism that is religiously- or ideologically-motivated. Radical Islamic fundamentalist groups, or groups using religion as a pretext, pose terrorist threats of varying kinds to U.S. interests and to friendly regimes. A third trend is the apparent growth of cross-national links among different terrorist organizations, which may involve combinations of military training, funding, technology transfer, or political advice. Looming over the entire issue of international terrorism is a trend toward proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For instance, Iran, seen as the most active state sponsor of terrorism, has been secretly conducting a longstanding uranium enrichment program, and North Korea has both admitted to having a clandestine program for uranium enrichment and claimed to have nuclear weapons. (See CRS [Congressional Research Service] Issue Brief IB91141, 'North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program'.) On December 19, 2003, Iran signed an agreement allowing international inspections of nuclear sites; on December 21, 2003, Libya announced similar intentions. Indications have also surfaced that Al Qaeda has attempted to acquire chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons. As a result, stakes in the war against international terrorism are increasing and margins for error in selecting appropriate policy instruments to prevent terrorist attacks are diminishing."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael2005-06-08
-
Terrorism and National Security: Issues and Trends [Updated February 22, 2005]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a serious foreign and domestic security threat. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. As the 9/11 Commission report released on July 19, 2004, concludes, the United States needs to use all tools at its disposal, including diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. A modern trend in terrorism is toward loosely organized, self-financed, international networks of terrorists. Another trend is toward terrorism that is religiously- or ideologically-motivated. Radical Islamic fundamentalist groups, or groups using religion as a pretext, pose terrorist threats of varying kinds to U.S. interests and to friendly regimes. A third trend is the apparent growth of cross-national links among different terrorist organizations, which may involve combinations of military training, funding, technology transfer, or political advice. Looming over the entire issue of international terrorism is a trend toward proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For instance, Iran, seen as the most active state sponsor of terrorism, has been secretly conducting a longstanding uranium enrichment program, and North Korea has both admitted to having a clandestine program for uranium enrichment and claimed to have nuclear weapons. (See CRS [Congressional Research Service] Issue Brief IB91141, 'North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Program'.) On December 19, 2003, Iran signed an agreement allowing international inspections of nuclear sites; on December 21, 2003 Libya announced similar intentions. Indications have also surfaced that Al Qaeda has attempted to acquire chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons. As a result, stakes in the war against international terrorism are increasing and margins for error in selecting appropriate policy instruments to prevent terrorist attacks are diminishing."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael2005-02-22
-
Morocco: Current Issues [May 27, 2011]"The United States government views Morocco as a moderate Arab regime, an important ally against terrorism, and a free trade partner. Congress is particularly interested in Morocco because it is a recipient of considerable U.S. foreign assistance to help it combat terror and to develop. Morocco is also a significant purchaser of U.S. arms. King Mohammed VI retains supreme political power in Morocco, but has taken some liberalizing steps with uncertain effects. Since 2005, several elections have met international standards. The government has focused on economic reforms that could alleviate poverty as a way to prevent radicalization and terrorism. It also has begun several major renewable energy projects to lessen dependence on foreign sources. Domestic politics are currently focused on a developing rivalry between the Party for Authenticity and Modernity (PAM), established in 2008 by a former classmate of the king, and the moderate Islamist Justice and Development Party (PJD), which previously had been on the rise. The government is greatly concerned about terrorism because, after 9/11, Morocco experienced several devastating terror attacks and Moroccan nationals have been implicated in attacks and plots overseas. Morocco takes a comprehensive approach to countering terror, involving security measures, economic reforms, control of religious outlets, education, and international cooperation. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), considered the greatest threat to the North African region, has not mounted a successful attack in Morocco. However, individual Moroccans have joined AQIM outside of the country and the group has attempted to use Moroccan territory as a transit point for transnational smuggling operations."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceArieff, Alexis2011-05-27
-
Agroterrorist Attack: DoD Roles and ResponsibilitiesThis is a book from the United States Air Force Counterproliferation Center. Chapters include: [1] "Military's Role in Combating Agroterrorism: Introduction"; [2] "Recent Disease Outbreaks and National Exercises"; "Department of Defense Response Planning"; "Military Manpower Assessment"; "Plant and Crop Response"; "Carcass Disposal"; and "Summary, Shortfalls, and Recommendations." The particular focus is on chapter 1; Here is a synopsis: "The United States agricultural industry is extremely vulnerable to attack. One source states that 280 documents dealing with agroterrorism were found in Afghanistan caves. In fact, 'hundreds of pages of U.S. agricultural documents had been translated into Arabic. Al Qaeda's interest in American agriculture was more than academic, according to government officials. A significant part of the group's training manual is reportedly devoted to agricultural terrorism-the destruction of crops, livestock and food processing operations.' […] Agriculture is a key component of the U.S. economy, comprising over 15% of America's jobs and 11% of the gross domestic product. Billions of dollars worth of agricultural products are exported monthly resulting in over $50 billion exported annually. If the U.S. loses its ability to maintain its agricultural exports through an act of agroterrorism, at least three primary consequences will ensue: cessation of food production, loss of vital export markets, and near-term food shortages. Many potential adversaries either have or can easily obtain an agroterrorism capability that could cause catastrophic economic effects in the U.S. The economic impact of the September 11, 2001, attacks on America has been estimated to be well over $100 billion, but the effect of a successful multipoint agricultural attack could surpass this and lead to long-term, perhaps unrecoverable damage to the agricultural export industry."USAF Counterproliferation CenterDavis, Jim A.; Pravecek, Tasha L.; Noah, Donald L. . . .2006?
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [January 8, 2003]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael; Lee, Rensselaer W., 1937-2003-01-08
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [July 10, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-07-10
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [November 4, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael; Lee, Rensselaer W., 1937-2002-11-04
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [December 3, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-12-03
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [October 18, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-10-18
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [September 3, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael; Lee, Rensselaer W., 1937-2002-09-03
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [December 12, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServicePerl, Raphael; Lee, Rensselaer W., 1937-2002-12-12
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [May 30, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-05-30
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [August 6, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to unconventional weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. counterterrorism policy, organizational structure, and intelligence capabilities is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-08-06
-
Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy [February 25, 2002]"International terrorism has long been recognized as a foreign and domestic security threat. The tragic events of September 11 in New York, the Washington, D.C., area, and Pennsylvania have dramatically re-energized the nation's focus and resolve on terrorism. This issue brief examines international terrorist actions and threats and the U.S. policy response. Available policy options range from diplomacy, international cooperation, and constructive engagement to economic sanctions, covert action, physical security enhancement, and military force. The September 11th terrorist incidents in the United States, the subsequent anthrax attacks, as well as bombings of the U.S.S. Cole, Oklahoma City, World Trade Center in 1993, and of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, have brought the issue of terrorism to the forefront of American public interest. Questions relate to whether U.S. policy and organizational mechanisms are adequate to deal with both state-sponsored or -abetted terrorism and that undertaken by independent groups. Terrorist activities supported by sophisticated planning and logistics as well as possible access to chemical, biological, or nuclear weaponry raise a host of new issues. Some analysts' long-held belief that a comprehensive review of U.S. terrorism policy, organizational structure, and preparedness is needed has now become a mainstream view."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceLee, Rensselaer W., 1937-; Perl, Raphael2002-02-25
-
Reducing the Threat of Nuclear Terrorism - a Report Card on the Obama Administration's EffortsFrom the thesis abstract: "This thesis seeks to explain if President Barack Obama's efforts to reduce nuclear terrorism have had a meaningful impact. Key areas of observation include how well efforts have been implemented and how effectively the president has fostered domestic and international support. Early in his presidency, President Obama declared to the world that the United States would lead a concerted effort to reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism. Combined with the Nuclear Security Summits, the president's efforts quickly established reducing the threat of nuclear terrorism as a top priority for his administration. Over the ensuing eight years, President Obama diligently supported nonproliferation measures by enhancing the domestic and international nonproliferation architecture. The president's integrative approach wove nonproliferation efforts together that had, traditionally, not been used to reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism. The findings of this thesis indicate that most of the programs were successful but problems remain, particularly in areas linked to further arms reductions and international nonproliferation. The next president can further these efforts by continuing the integrative approach, crafting a more cooperative relationship with Congress and expanding threat reduction activities beyond Russia."Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)Hargraves, Drew P.2016-12
-
Saudi Arabia: Background and U.S. Relations [Updated May 22, 2008]"The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, ruled by the Al Saud family since its founding in 1932, wields significant political and economic influence as the birthplace of the Islamic faith and by virtue of its large energy reserves. Since 2005, King Abdullah bin Abd al Aziz Al Saud has sought to strengthen Saudi relations with European and Asian counterparts and has worked to build and lead an Arab consensus on regional security issues such as Lebanon and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Recent domestic reforms have codified royal succession rules, begun restructuring the justice system, and updated some educational curricula and practices. An Al Qaeda-inspired terrorist campaign inside the kingdom appears to be ebbing as security improvements and anti-extremism campaigns are implemented. However, the threat of domestic terrorism remains. Robust energy export revenues and investment-friendly reforms continue to strengthen the kingdom's regional and global economic position. A close Cold War-era relationship between the U.S. Government and the ruling Al Saud family was built on shared interests in securing Saudi oil production and in combating global Communism. In the post-Cold War period, the emergence of the Al Qaeda terrorist threat and volatile regional security conditions in the Middle East have tested U.S.-Saudi relations. The direct participation of 15 Saudi nationals in the terrorist attacks of 9/11 2001, and the identification of several Saudi nationals as alleged supporters of terrorism have called into question Saudi Arabia's reliability as an ally. Increased official counterterrorism cooperation and shared concerns about Iranian foreign policy have provided a new strategic logic for U.S.-Saudi security relations since 2003."Library of Congress. Congressional Research ServiceBlanchard, Christopher M.2008-05-22
-
Review of Domestic Sharing of Counterterrorism Information"In response to a request from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Offices of Inspector General (OIG) of the Intelligence Community (IC), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) conducted a review of the domestic sharing of counterterrorism information. The OIGs concluded that the partners in the terrorism-related Information Sharing Environment - components of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), DHS, DOJ, and their state and local partners - are committed to sharing counterterrorism information. The partners' commitment to protecting the nation is illustrated by the actions taken before, during, and following terrorism-related incidents, as well as by programs and initiatives designed to improve sharing of counterterrorism information. However, the OIGs also identified several areas in which improvements could enhance information sharing. To share information effectively, the federal, state, and local entities actively involved in counterterrorism efforts must understand each other's roles, responsibilities, and contributions, especially with the involvement of multiple agencies, such as the DOJ's Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and DHS' U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in complex investigations. […] Our review resulted in 23 recommendations to help improve the sharing of counterterrorism information and ultimately, enhance the Nation's ability to prevent terrorist attacks. We discuss our findings in detail in the Findings and Recommendations section of the report."United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence2017-03
-
Airpower versus Terrorism: Three Case Studies"This study analyzes the effectiveness of airpower versus terrorism using three case studies. The first case study is Operation El Dorado Canyon, America's response to Libyan state-sponsored terrorism. The second case study is Operation Infinite Reach, America's cruise missile response to the 1998 al-Qaeda bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The third case study is the Israeli use of airpower versus the second Palestinian intifada of September 2000. The case studies address multiple common questions: What was the context?; Why was airpower selected?; How was airpower employed?; What were the objectives and were they achieved?; and, finally, What were the lessons learned? Additionally, each case study looks at the impact of military action on domestic opinion and third-party opinions. Overall, these three case studies reveal a spectrum of responses with which states can respond to terrorism. Operation Infinite Reach shows that when a nation is unwilling to commit itself seriously against an enemy, the message it sends is one of timidity and inertia. Operation El Dorado Canyon showed Muammar Gadhafi that his support of terrorism would not come without cost. Further, Libya offered multiple high-value targets that could be destroyed -- thus revealing a major weakness of states that sponsor terrorism. The Israeli use of air and ground power to combat terrorism has been effective, but this case also shows that military power alone cannot stop terrorism; at some point diplomacy must prevail."Air University (U.S.)Phinney, Todd R.2007-03
-
Domestic Counterdrug Mission: Increase DoD Support?"There is no question the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 changed our national security environment. The operational tempo of the United States military, as a result of the Global War on Terrorism and other international contingencies and deployments, is at an all-time high. At the same time, drug trafficking and use inside our borders continue to have an extreme negative impact on our communities and neighborhoods. Although some experts argue the United States has made progress in the war on drugs, illegal drugs continue to be a threat to our national security. In fact, there are those throughout our country that believe drug trafficking and addictions pose a greater threat to national security than terrorists do. More importantly, the two threats become closely related, or integrated, when terrorists become involved in drug trafficking both to gain addicts to raise profits to fund their terrorist network and to weaken our will to resist them. What more can our federal government do to combat this cancer to our society? Should the Department of Defense (DoD) increase its support to the domestic counterdrug mission, or is DoD stretched to the point in which it cannot provide more support to this vital mission as it has done in the past? This analysis considers the alternatives and risks of whether or not the U.S. military should provide more support to the domestic counterdrug mission. It will also review the current U.S. national drug policy objectives as they pertain to DoD involvement and the employment of the U.S. military. It considers the methods the military can use in the domestic war on drugs."Army War College (U.S.)Dumoulin, John E.2004-05-03
-
Compendium of Weapons of Mass Destruction Courses Sponsored by the Federal Government"The U.S. Army Soldier and Biological Chemical Command (SBCCOM) was designated as the Program Director for Domestic Preparedness to coordinate, integrate, and execute a program to enhance domestic preparedness to nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) terrorism. The purpose of this program is to provide for training of state and local emergency responders in the event of a terrorist incident involving nuclear, biological or chemical (NBC) weapons of mass destruction. The Domestic Preparedness program is providing the train the trainer courses to only the first 120 cities by population. This program cannot address the training needs of the entire nation, although it does greatly enhance the nation's current state of preparedness. The federal agencies recognize this and have prepared this compendium of other federal courses which relate to the performance objectives developed for the Domestic Preparedness Train-the-Trainer courses."United States. Federal Emergency Management Agency2000-08