Argument Against Counterterrorism

The world we live in is a beautiful but violent place. Whether it be war, genocide, torture, or mass killings, nowhere seems to be able to avoid these and other violent acts committed by both the state and its civilians. As such, a great deal of research has gone into understanding this violence, where it comes from, and how best to combat it in an attempt to free this world of its grip. One said violence that is at the forefront of this research today is terrorism, and how best to combat it. The fight against terrorism--also known as counterterrorism--is crucial to examine as it can either increase or decrease the ferocity and number of terrorist attacks depending on the kind of counterterrorism used by the state. First, it is important to understand and identify why actors are electing to use terrorism. The reasoning behind terrorism has long been a heated debate for political scientists, as well as …show more content…
One such variation is the idea that modern terrorism has entered a new and more violent realm than ever before. A.J. Coates in his chapter on Counterterrorism indicates the starting date of this new level of terrorism to be the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers (Coates 2016). The reason being, that “this was a movement intent upon destroying the existing state system and replacing it, step by step, region by region, with a universal caliphate. The aim was global supremacy and the fulfillment of a historic religious destiny” (Coates 2016, 349). Because of this new definition, we also see a new take on how to best combat terrorism and form a successful counterterrorism policy. This new method, similar to Miller in that it requires a mix of policies, differs in its strict necessity for the state to retain its ethical grounds during the enactment of the policy (Coates