Bureaucracy Structure

Introduction Today, the United States and other Western allies are attempting to combat terrorism across the world, especially in Africa, and around the Middle East. First, there is a need to define terrorism. Terrorism can be defined as being, “the repeated use of politically motivated violence with coercive intent, by non-state actors” (Badey). With that definition in place many government officials are attempting to eradicate terrorist organizations through military force, intelligence and the attempt of infiltrating these terrorist organizations, in hopes of declaring the war on terrorism won. Across the world, acts of terrorism are wreaking havoc against anyone who tries to go against a specific ideology. The war on terrorism does not …show more content…
A common structure is known as the bureaucracy structure. In this structure a terrorist organization has specific rules on how issues are handled in the organization. There are clear lines of departmental boundaries, where there are definite lines authority. Each department has their own jobs to focus on that better serves the entire organization. An example of a terrorist organization that has a bureaucracy type structure is Hezbollah (Kilberg). This group has a dense command structure that is elaborate and centrally controlled. The power flows down from top to certain sub-groups. Hezbollah relies on complex informal associations to recruit, mobilize, plan, resource, and execute operations largely outside of reach of legitimate government control. Another common type of organizational structure is referred to as, “all channel.” In an all channel organizational structure the terrorist group is more widespread. This structure requires multiple lines of communication that can be called on quickly when needed. In this structure, there is the ability to coordinate and take action across vast distances, at first it was nearly impossible. All channel …show more content…
The issue with military force is that it is not always feasible. Another issue, especially when using military force to counteract terrorism, is it can backfire and cause more of a disturbance than a solution. The issue of using military aid to fight terrorism is that sometimes that the money or equipment, given as aid, ends up in the wrong hands. United States military equipment has ended up with the enemy countless times. The inability to control terrorist organization with military force is a substantial reason on why the war on terrorism is not close to being defined as won. Jibey Asthappan, professor at the University of New Haven, states, “The military may be used as a tool to reduce terrorism, but it could also cause a counter-intuitive result, with even more violence” (Asthappan). Asthappan is absolutely right, when a country confronts a problem with military force, it should be expected violence is going to be returned. The violence that is being returned is usually coming from terrorist organizations, who oppose western interference. Military force has become a liability to countries fighting terrorism. It is a liability because terrorist Organizations, such as ISIS, Boko Haram, and Al-Qaeda, have all returned with violence when met with military force. ISIS and Al-Qaeda, who the United States Army has been