Global Terrorism

The world-wide challenge of today

By: Bev Goldman

Paul Wilkinson’s 2006 book Terrorism Versus Democracy: The Liberal State Response provides some much needed criteria for distinguishing between terrorists and freedom fighters and explains the uses of terrorism as a political, social, religious, and criminal weapon. Wilkinson, an advisor to the UK government, and a terrorism expert, was dubbed “Britain’s leading academic specialist in the study of terrorism”. He defined four types of terrorism: Criminal terrorism (uses terror for material gain); psychic terrorism (uses terror for mystical, religious, or magical ends); war terrorism; and political terrorism.

Broadly, terrorism aims to destroy human rights, democracy, and the rule of law; destabilise governments; undermine civil society; jeopardise peace and security; and threaten social and economic development. It uses violence or intimidation to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives, and among its arsenal of weapons are hijackings, hostage takings, kidnappings, mass shootings, car bombings, and, frequently, suicide bombings. And terrorism financing also plays a role in the spread of global terrorism, as terrorists use the funds for weapons, travel, accommodation, and to plan and execute attacks.

Based on historical, political, cultural, and socio-economic contexts, terrorism, as an ever-evolving global challenge, has prompted varied responses from nations and regions. In today’s world, the Middle East is perceived far more than any other region as both a source and a target of terrorism of the most dangerous kind; and as a result, it has employed counterterrorism strategies that differ significantly from those of other regions such as Europe, North America, Africa, and Asia. The international community works tirelessly to formulate comprehensive global policies against terrorism, but without understanding these regional differences, solutions will not be easy to devise.  Responses to the threats include military intervention, intelligence sharing, community engagement, and diplomatic effort, but because the regional manifestations of terrorism are shaped by specific historical grievances,  socio-economic inequalities, and geopolitical dynamics, there is definitely no one-solution-fits-all resolution to this insurmountable obstacle.

The unique geopolitical landscape of the Middle East includes protracted conflicts, authoritarian regimes, and sectarian divides. One of the dominant counterterrorism strategies employed there is military action, where states such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Syria have launched large-scale operations to neutralise terrorist threats. ISIS found fertile ground during the Syrian Civil War, which resulted in domestic and international military responses including intense combat operations in cooperation with the USA. Intelligence sharing is pivotal among Middle Eastern countries, and many often collaborate with global powers such as the US, the EU, and Russia. Jordan and Israel, for example, have developed sophisticated intelligence mechanisms to pre-empt terrorist attacks. When, earlier in 2024, Iran was preparing for an assault on Israel, the US persuaded several countries to share intelligence, thus “enabling a comprehensive defensive shield to be put in place … Several Gulf States, among them Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt, passed on intelligence about Iran’s plans to attack Israel, providing vital information that was key to the success of the air defence measures that almost entirely thwarted the massive assault.” As a result the IDF, backed by the US and other allies, could confirm that “some 99% of the incoming threats were downed, and the handful that made it through caused only minor damage”.

Authoritarian regimes in the Middle East frequently use counterterrorism as a justification for suppressing dissent. Countries like Egypt have enacted broad anti-terrorism laws that curb civil liberties, often blurring the lines between genuine threats and political opposition. Interestingly, some Middle Eastern countries have implemented de-radicalisation programmes aimed at rehabilitating former militants. Saudi Arabia’s “Counselling Program”, for example, offers psychological and religious guidance to detainees, aiming to reintegrate them into society. Whether or not this has been successful, however, has not been widely shared with the international community.

Africa’s responses differ somewhat markedly from those in the Middle East, focusing instead on combating insurgent groups through regional and international collaborations. Terrorist groups like Boko Haram and al-Shabaab have been confronted with military interventions and coalitions from, for example, the AU (African Union) and regional bodies like ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States). A long-term counterterrorism strategy on the continent is addressing poverty and inequality, though the results of this too remain to be seen. And African nations too rely on external funding and expertise from, for example, France’s Operation Barkhane, France’s largest overseas operation, with a budget of nearly €600m per year, which engaged in everything from combat patrols and partner militias to intelligence gathering and training to local development activities. Despite this range, French officials insisted that its priority was counterterrorism, and they operated there with their allies by implementing specialised air and ground technologies across the Sahel.

Asia, too, confronts diverse security challenges, especially because of the very different cultural and economic situations existing in the various states. Countries like China and Myanmar, both with extremely authoritarian governments, employ heavy-handed measures, often suppressing minority groups under the guise of counterterrorism. Regional cooperation exists in organisations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), which facilitates joint counterterrorism exercises among member states, while the community-based programmes in, say, Indonesia, and recognised as “de-radicalised initiatives”, integrate religious leaders to counter extremist ideologies. The UN has provided many Asian nations with technical training courses on a range of topics, including combating the use of the internet in terrorist recruitment. It has also developed e-learning resources, such as the Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism in Central Asia course; and in addition it has a Multi-Year Appeal for Counter-Terrorism that funds projects that address technical needs and human rights concerns. Japan has worked to strengthen international solidarity against terrorism by engaging in diplomatic relations with the USA, Afghanistan, some Islamic states, and Asian countries to strengthen international solidarity against terrorism. Japan has also provided technical assistance to Afghanistan to help the country transition away from poppy cultivation, a source of funding for the Taliban. In addition, Japan has provided airport security training, immigration control seminars, and customs official training in Southeast Asia.

The counter-terrorism strategies in most European countries tend to eschew military measures, emphasising instead multilateral cooperation and community engagement and thus creating as far as possible a balance of security with civil liberties. Through mechanisms like Europol and Eurojust, EU member states share intelligence beneficial to them. In the Netherlands, a founder member of the EU, the Hague is home to the International Court of Justice and the Permanent Court of Arbitration, both part of the UN. The Netherlands is also home to many other international legal bodies, which has earned it the title of the world’s international legal capital, and could be one reason that Europe often employs the judiciary to prosecute suspected terrorists, ensuring adherence to international human rights norms.

The USA and Canada, ie. North America, work closely together in the area of terrorism and prioritise homeland security and international collaboration. After the 9/11 attack in the USA, the government established the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to consolidate counterterrorism efforts by enhancing enhanced airport security and passing the controversial USA PATRIOT ACT, or Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. The USA has frequently been involved in military interventions abroad, having conducted extensive military operations in the Middle East as part of its targeting of al-Qaeda and ISIS. At the same time, the government stresses community policing across the country with programmes like Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) which involve local communities in identifying potential threats.

There are key differences between implementing counterterrorism measures in the Middle East and in other regions. The Middle East’s geopolitical landscape is marked by sectarian divides and foreign interventions which make counterterrorism efforts more complex. In contrast, regions like Europe operate within a more stable framework of regional cooperation. In the areas of governance and civil liberties, Middle Eastern regimes often prioritise regime stability over individual freedoms, using counterterrorism laws to suppress opposition. Western nations, though, face greater scrutiny to uphold civil liberties while combating terrorism. The involvement of international players in the Middle East is more pronounced due to the region’s strategic importance and oil resources. Western military interventions, for example, have both countered and exacerbated terrorism in the region.

Finally, while community involvement in counterterrorism is more prevalent in regions like Europe and Southeast Asia, where grassroots programmes aim to prevent radicalisation, such efforts in the Middle East are often overshadowed by state-centric approaches. Yet, despite regional differences, several common challenges hinder global counterterrorism efforts. Democracies struggle to implement effective measures without infringing on rights; terrorist networks operate across borders, requiring unprecedented levels of international collaboration; addressing socio-economic inequalities and political grievances remains a long-term challenge; and with the unprecedented growth in technological advancements, terrorists exploit social media and encrypted communications, complicating surveillance.