9/11 Attack And The Response Of George W. Bush
International society has no single meaning and can be defined in many ways. Some say it’s a society of states that have a common interests and values and in their relations have a similar set of rules and institutions. Others say it’s a global order with universally accepted rules, norms and institutions and are agreed upon by state and non-state actors. International society has norms, rules and institutions. Norms are the understandings states have on the behaviour that’s accepted and shared and rules are the ways that classes of people must act and behave in a prescribed manner. These norms include: order, justice, human rights and state sovereignty. These values are ways in which International Society influences sovereign states in handling global terrorism. An example in which this can be show is the United States’ post 9/11 actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Terrorism has no real definition as it changes over time and location. At this current time, terrorism can be defined by 3 factors: violence, intimidation and violation of international society’s rules and norms. Motives for terrorism can often be religious, political and ideological.
Order in international society requires a constraint on how states use force. An example of this is the rules and norms regarding sovereignty. Terrorism violates these rules and norms, and thus undermines the security of states. The key objective of states in regard to counter-terrorism, is to restore and maintain security. Post 9/11 actions by the United States, for example, can be understood in these terms in regards to their actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, which in their view is self defence. Only one week after the September 11 attacks, the Bush administration signed a joint resolution authorising the force of against those responsible for the attacks. This was their rationale for using force in Afghanistan. This however, in itself broke the rules, norms and institutions and the US were scrutinised for their unilateralism threatening the one thing that will be most effective in stopping terrorism; global governance. The military force also resulted in the thousands of innocent civilian deaths at the hand of the US government. This undermining of norms however, can be explained by the United States’ actions in terms of sovereignty and necessity for self defence after 9/11 (this will be expanded upon in the sovereignty paragraph). Military is an option for many states as long as they adhere to the norms and values. These values include: respect for human rights, responsive governance, respect for privacy, balancing security and transparency and uphold rule of law. With the risk of innocent bystanders being killed, military action can only be used know that the rules and norms won’t be broken. 'Determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression” (Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, Article 39) and can take military action using armed force to 'restore international peace and security”. Order is needed in terms of the goals of International Society. Without order, International Society would not be preserved and their would be no peace. Byers (2002) however, argues that Bush’s response to the 9/11 attacks as “encouraging”.
Furthermore, International Society’s basic value of justice is maintained through international laws that help mitigate terrorism. During 9/11, the law felt dumbfounded as the events did not fall under any established categories. The term terrorism really wasn’t defined before this event and laws related more to specific activities such as hijacking, bombing, kidnapping and assassination. Post 9/11, Australia put in place The Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002. This Act created an offence to anyone who knowingly provides funding and financial support to aid terrorist activities. By doing this, Australia is making it harder for terrorists to complete its activities, where money is essential in completing their plans. Similarly, ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) amended the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 where Australia implements the UN Security Council which sanctions dealing of arms, travel sanctions, trade bans on certain commodities and financial restrictions. These sanctions are implemented under the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 where regulations such as Customs (Prohibited Exports) Regulations 1958, Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956, Migration Regulations 1994, Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 and Air Navigation Regulations 1947 are in place to sanction the aiding of terrorism previously mentioned. The United Nations is an institution in relation to International Society, by many nations following the Charter of the United Nations Act (1945), it shows that several states are following the same norms and rules. After 9/11, Resolution 1373 was adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. All 15 members of the Security Council agreed with the anti-terrorism measure and it means that all members of the UN must share their intelligence of terror groups and assist in combating them. Resolution 1373 also calls on all states to adjust their national laws to change to the international conventions on terrorism so that as many states as possible are under the same rules and norms. Resolution 1566 followed 1373 and aimed to tie up the resolution with a more suitable definition of terrorism. This resolution has proved useful as on the 1st of April 2014, the Sri Lankan government signed an order which released the knowledge that there is 16 organisations functioning as terrorist fronts. Their assets were frozen and economic uses in aiding terrorism were stopped using the resolution.
Human rights is another basic value of the International Society that is adhered to by the UN Counterterrorism and humanitarian aid forces and groups are used by sovereign states to eliminate and defeat terrorism. One example of this is the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF), which was brought upon by the United Nations in 2006 by consensus. The counter-terrorism task force consists of 38 international bodies all following the same rules and norms. By having these bodies, it means no one country is in control and they are all one body. An aim for the CTITF is to work to adopt such measures as may be necessary. The UN also helps in humanitarian effort in the Middle East and war torn countries. The UN declared at a meeting on the Rule of Law in order to improve those affected by armed conflicts and military forces in war stricken states. Similarly, former Russian foreign minister Andrei Kozyrev stated that when threats to human rights occur that the international community must come together and stop this from happening. Terrorism occurs more prevalently in places with little to no human rights, justice and democracy. By these institutions of International Society aiding the prevention of these injustices, it helps mitigating and handling terrorism in these countries and states.
State sovereignty is a vital value within International Society. This is the power a governing body has on its state and means that other interference from outside sources is not allowed unless certain actions occur. Post 9/11, Bush (the US president at the time) gave the Taliban and ultimatum give up Osama Bin Laden, or else. This did not happen so the US joined force with United Kingdom in creating ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’. On the seventh of October, 2001, George W. Bush announced that airstrikes will be targeting Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. This resulted in killing many terrorists the aim of the program. Unfortunately, it also resulted in thousands of innocent civilian deaths which go against International Societies rules and norms. This action can be explained however, as the US is protecting the security of its state and reacted in self defence. The act came under the Bush doctrine that states that the US can secure itself against countries that harbour or give aid to terrorist groups. The justification was pre-emption. The act of air-strikes was done so that it can preemptively stop any attack by Al Qaeda and the Taliban to the United States. This similar action occurred by Bush’s father George H. W. Bush after the Gulf War. Iraq had a potential military threat that could harm the sovereignty of states. Bush ordered American military forces to be stationed in surrounding countries. In 1998, Iraq banished the United Nation weapons inspectors at this time, national defence critics began to publicly argue for the forced removal of Saddam Hussein due to his dangerous and potential use of weapons of mass destruction.
Under George W. Bush’s government, in 2002, United Nations adopted a resolution that stated that Iraq was in 'material breach' of previous U.N. resolutions. This meant that Iraq were to immediately disarm themselves of any weapons of mass destruction and fully cooperate with weapons inspectors or 'face serious consequences.” Iraq agreed and weapon inspectors returned to the country. The inspectors issued three reports, saying that they had not found weapons of mass destruction. It stated that Iraq was not cooperating with forces to their full capability. Lack of cooperation was used as a material breach of the U.N. resolution, where the United States pressed for a way to use military against Iraq. The US then acted with a group of allies to remove these weapons of mass destruction. These forces invaded Iraq in a war that lasted several weeks and took down the Saddam Hussein government. The National Security Strategy was put in place after controversy towards the Bush Doctrine. It had three main points which lead to what occurred in Iraq. Preemption, act alone if necessary and extend freedom which is what Bush did to aid in securing the US from further acts of terror.
