UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Fortune Green-Amakwe
1403277
SC557-7-SP Critical Perspectives on Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism
Pete Fussey
Americas War on Terror
Organized Crime, Terrorism & Security 2014-15

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Abstract
After the events of September 11 a miasma of paranoia hung over the skies of the United
States. To the American government, this was an attack on democracy with its promises
of liberty, justice and peace. The Bush Administration declared a War on Terrorism to
render the world unsafe for all who perpetuate such heinous acts. Hereafter, the war on
terror became the justification for the worst forms of aggression and repression by the
United States thus other nations followed suit. In this paper I analyze the criminal nature
of Americas war on terror and its implications on human rights, international law and
intergovernmental bodies.

Introduction

Terrorism is often heard in political rhetoric of this turbulent times and the media further
accentuate the phenomena with there theatrical coverage that plays right into the cards of
the terrorists whose sole purpose is to instill fear and invoke a general sense of public
anxiety. Despite the fact that there are more recorded homicide related deaths than
terrorism related deaths (IEP, 2014), the latter gets much more media coverage. This
could stem from the forms in which terrorism manifests blowing up the world trade
center and its aims crippling state sectors or coercing national governments to
achieve a certain goal. In response to these terrorist threats, governments are often found
guilty of utilizing heavy-handed approaches many experts agree contravene both
domestic and international law. However, to rationalize their actions, national
governments are quick to point out that combatting terrorism is a peculiar problem that

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

requires exceptional treatment. A perfect example to illustrate with would be the United
States of America who assumed ultimate power after the fall of the Soviet Union. This
paper looks at Americas war on terror as it contravenes both domestic and international
law and questions the capacity and independency of established intergovernmental
bodies.

Turbulent Middle East

Following the tragic events of September 11 was a febrile, paranoid and vindictive
atmosphere that played right into the cards of a right regime whose political gambit has
centered on indirect imperialism. George Bush, flabbergasted and overwhelmed by recent
events that occurred under his watch, pushed for greater powers in congress claiming that
the proposed legislations would bolster states powers with the goal of preventing further
terrorist activity and prosecuting those suspected of planning, abetting or undertaking it
(Thomas, Margaret, & Goering, 2004). Congress accorded government sweeping powers
many believed immediately transformed the American nation to a police state.
Desperate to further its influence in the Middle East and control of regions energy
resources as well as supply routes of oil and gas (Rahman, 2010) the United States have
perpetuated the most aggressive acts antithetical to the democratic principles they claim
to espouse. The geopolitical reality of the Middle East has changed since Afghanistan and
subsequently Iraq, got a taste of American military strength. The region has seen no
peace plagued with conflicts; sectarian violence and chaos orchestrated by armed groups
whose inherent existence are resultants of American aggression. Inevitably, the vacuum

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

of power ensuing the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq,
paved the way for the ascendancy of armed groups espousing extreme Islamic ideologies
and fed up with western hegemonic influence and secular attitudes that to them, were
perverting Islamic nations.
Since the US-led invasion in 2003, nearly half a million people have died from warrelated causes in Iraq (Kerry, 2014); there has been theft and destruction of cultural
heritage, corruption and corporate profiteering throughout occupation and widespread
human rights abuses (Barbara & Walters, 2009). The last convoy of U.S. soldiers pulled
out of Iraq on December 18th, 2011 ending nearly nine years of war (Joseph, 2011).
However victory chants were not heard owing to the fact that Iraq was left in a state of
perpetual anarchy. The country is still rife with violence and political instability, swelling
numbers of refugees and internally displaced persons as well as the presence of a weak
government incapable of restoring normalcy to a war torn country.
The new world order became saturated with Islamic revivalism and anti western
sentiment. Armed groups sprung out like weeds across the Middle East and Africa. This
growing Islamic resistance was not just to the physical occupation of territory but also to
growing influence of western policies on the political and social struggles of Islamic
nations. Americas imperialistic intention that was hidden behind a faade of
humanitarian intervention was a ruse that many Muslims were beginning to see through.

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Drone wars

State sovereignty has been one of basic tenets of international law since the 17th century.
It meant a states independence from and legal impermeability in relation to foreign
powers on the one hand and the States exclusive jurisdiction and supremacy over its
state territory and inhabitants on the other (Swartz, 2014). Hardt and Negri (2000) have
argued that the notion of state sovereignty has lost much of its viability in the
contemporary world. A argument that can be proven by the United States audacity to use
force on any country it deems fit.
Against the backdrop of the war on terror, has been soaring dependence on the use of
unmanned defense systems. Pentagon planned to acquire 700 medium- and large-size
drones at a cost of nearly $40 billion over the next 10 years (Peter, 2011). Drones are
arguably a very convenient means of warfare. There is no direct engagement and no risk
of return fire; its easily controlled like a video game. This is a phenomenon that gets a
lot of coverage in the news but this kind of warfare is fraught with massive civilian
casualties. Nevertheless, the American government view drone capacities as efficient in
combat and an essential utility in counter insurgency and irregular warfare operations
despite the colossal collateral damage that accompanies it.
U.S. defense and intelligence agencies employ drones for surveillance, reconnaissance
and also engaging terrorists positions almost on a daily basis; this happens a lot
especially in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia in Africa. Despicably, when covering these
stories, American national media fail to acknowledge the huge number of civilians caught

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

in drone strikes; instead, the dead women and children are conveniently labeled
suspected terrorists.
In their attempts to fight terrorism, The United States has become terrorists themselves.
On august 5, 2009, the life of the Pakistani Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud ended
abruptly when an American Predator drone strafed his house in northwest Pakistan.
Pakistanis typically condemn similar drone strikes due to the civilian casualties they
cause. In Mehsuds case, it took sixteen strikes, fourteen months and between 207 and
321 additional deaths to finally kill him (Callam, 2010). The number of civilians caught
in drone strikes has been chafing the international community and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), calling into question the efficacy of US governments counter
terrorism strategy. The United States is disregarding international humanitarian law
especially the crucial principle of proportionality that prescribes that belligerent parties
in war not inflict collateral damage that is excessive in relation to the military advantage
they seek with any hostile action such as an air strike (Janina, 2010).
Altogether, not only is the United States intrusion in independent states sovereignty,
ultra vires, indiscriminate attacks arbitrarily killing civilians is also a violation of Article
6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): every human
being has the inherent right to life. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life
(Amnesty International, 2013). Residents residing in areas regularly bombed by
American drones, live in a perpetual state of fear and anxiety.
Putting international law aside, releasing hell fire missiles on individuals without absolute
certainty of their identity or regards for surrounding civilians is doubly callous of the
United States and tantamount to the terrorist acts perpetuated by armed terrorist groups.

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

The inhumanity of terrorists in their attacks utmost disregard for civilians is

comparable to the United States attack on suspected terrorist positions at the expense of
high civilian toll. Clearly stated in the United Nations Charter in 1945, the best guarantee
for international peace and security is the utmost respect for human rights. If not a
legislative one, a moral imperative the American government has ignored in its global
war on terror

The Surveillance State

Signals intelligence: the surveillance of individuals, organizations and countries is

becoming a global phenomenon in the context of combatting international terrorism and
such methods are generally practicable. The glaring question would be how transparent
not compromising national security could these agencies be in a democratic society?
The American people have always been aware of the existence of spooks and security
agents who play very vital roles in ensuring national security. They have been exhausted
by the apocryphal War on Terror; the toll it has taken on their psychological well being
and to an extent, economical. However, they were in for a big surprise with the
revelations of Edward Snowden who subsequently became the most wanted man in
America.
The events that led to the whistle blowing, Snowdens personality, characteristics or
expertise are beyond the scope of this paper and are extensively covered in myriad
publications. Nevertheless, Snowdens revelations about the activities of the National
Security Agency (NSA) doubly pertain to the aspects of the War on Terror that is

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

criminal. The former NSA contractor released thousands of classified documents about
the US and the United Kingdom creating a surveillance monster after the tragic event of
9/11. These top-secret documents revealed the existence of a mass surveillance program
that automatically tracked, monitored and stored emails and text messages of millions of
phone users. It revealed that the program possessed backdoor access to siphon mass
volumes of user data from various popular social media platforms such as Facebook and
Twitter to Tech companies like Microsoft and Apple. Metadata, call registry, itinerary,
name it, it amassed it all. In fact, it is believed that the program was also being used by
the NSA to intercept communications signals of leaders around the world. It was fairly a
totalitarian instrument that rendered every electronic communications permeable to the
prying eyes of the NSA.
As the leak inundated media, President Obama was very quick to rectify that he was not
privy to the surveillance on foreign leaders but was in complete support of the mass
surveillance of major U.S. Internet service providers which he reiterated were measures
necessary to thwart terrorist attacks, he said, It is important to recognize that you can not
have 100 percent security and also then 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience
(Lara & Darlene, 2013). An issue that should be addressed here is that, If Obamas claim
of being incognizant of the surveillance monitoring on foreign leaders is genuine, and not
an apt attempt to contain a full-scale diplomatic crisis over espionage directed at allied
countries (Paul & Oltermann, 2013) then this should be a clarion call for lawmakers to
address the unhealthy autonomy of intelligence agencies as they are becoming a state
within a state beyond effective scrutiny and oversight of parliament (David, 2015).
Nevertheless, Obamas spiel to quell opposition and convince the American people of the

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

essentiality of NSAs program has failed to yield fruits. Critics remain skeptical of the
programs purposes especially as the leaked documents divulge that foreign leaders were
being monitored even close American allies such as German Chancellor, Angela
Merkel. It is highly plausible that an ulterior motive of the surveillance program hides
behind a smokescreen of national security. The apocryphal war on terror has been perfect
fodder for furthering imperialistic goals of the United States and in the name of fighting
terrorism, Intelligence gathering which is an indispensible factor in ensuring human
security, is otherwise used for political and economic security.
Still in the United States, the NSA is not the only sector of government guilty of overly
intrusive surveillance on citizens after the 9/11 attacks. At the city level, police and law
enforcement increased surveillance on areas they referred to as High risk communities.
Unfortunately for moderate Muslims living around the world, extremists who adhere to a
literal interpretation of the Quran have tainted the religion of Islam. As the September 11
attacks were somewhat religiously inspired, Muslim communities began to bare the
brunt; authorities have intensified the policing of communities predominated by Muslims.
Such over-policing practices have been proven to be counter-productive, and also feed
the propaganda of jihadists who preach that the U.S. Government is at war with Muslims.

The straw that breaks the camels back

As the American people grappled with the reality of living in a surveillance state another
cruel secret is revealed. From his campaigning stages, Barack Obama has always
condemned torture in its entirety and fervently advocated the utmost respect for human

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

rights all over the world. And to demonstrate this standpoint, at his inception into office,
he signed a series of executive orders abrogating controversial practices inherited from
the Bushs administration. They included banning torture, shutting down the CIAs
network of secret prisons, and the closure of the US Guantanamo Bay prison within one
year. Initially, the orders were well received by the human rights communities that spent
the Bush-years fighting those policies. But after a few months into the nascent
administration, the endeavor increasingly became bleak.
Some of these practices had been deeply embedded into detention procedures making it
difficult for government officials to effortlessly dislodge. An example of that is the
extraordinary rendition a practice in which U.S. forces pick up terrorist suspects from
anywhere in the world and take them to countries with less rigorous regulations for the
humane treatment of prisoners, for interrogation program, which the Obama
administration maintained would continue in the meantime.
According to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, an international
treaty signed and ratified by the U.S., state parties have an obligation to take positive
measures to ensure that private persons or entities do no inflict torture or cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment on others within their power (OHCHR, 2008).
Although the United States is party to this international law, detainees the U.S. refer to
as non-combatants are illegally held without charges and treated worse than animals
in various detention facilities, calling such methods Enhanced Interrogation Techniques
necessary to elicit vital information for national security.
In the winter of 2014, the senate intelligence committee released declassified reports
describing methods employed by the CIA during the interrogation of suspected terrorists,

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

at the wake of the September 11 terror attacks. The reports reveal unimaginable
conditions detainees were subjected to: rectal feeding without medical necessity, forced
to stand on broken limbs for hours, kept in complete darkness, deprived of sleep for up to
180 hours, sometimes standing, sometimes with their arms shackled above their heads
(Oliver, 2014). The report details cases of severe beating, forced nudity, stress
positioning and in an incident, the death of suspected afghan militant Gul Rahman. He
was detained in a CIA prison called the Salt pit in Kabul, Afghanistan. Inside a chilly
cell, the man was shackled and left half-naked. He was found dead, exposed to the cold,
in the early hours of Nov. 20, 2002 (Adam & Kathy, 2010). This report describes far
more shocking practices than previously disclosed in 2009 when Obama released topsecret documents that revealed the extent of C.I.A.s interrogation techniques (Ewen,
2009) in which he ruled out any notion of prosecuting involved CIA operatives who were
only working within the rules set by the Bush Administration.
In the War on Terrorism, it seems the democratic principles of liberty and justice are
tacitly ignored. The worst human rights violations are being carried out on inmates
suspected of being terrorists. It is important to note that these heinous violations of
human rights still occur in the present administration. Though, Obama vehemently denies
his administrations countenance to torture, promising to run the most transparent white
house in history with swift and certain justice for captured terrorists, quite the opposite
seems to be happening. There are still thousands of U.S. detainees protractedly held in
military prisons around the world and denied access to lawyers and human right groups.
In fact, recent findings affirm the existence of a CIA black site replica, situated in
Chicago, operating an off-the-books interrogation compound, rendering Americans

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

unable to be found by family or attorneys (Spencer, 2015) perhaps finally bringing

home, so to speak, James Madison's great caution against foreign military entanglements:
"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become instruments of
tyranny at home (Aleksandar & Dickson, 2011).

Foreign policy

The war on terrorism has been adopted by other national governments when deemed fit
and utilized as a justification for brutal aggression on forms of dissent. Americas nationchild, Israel, has analyzed the heavy-handed and unsanctioned invasion by the American
military and seen it as a befitting tactic to be employed on Palestinians who resist the
occupation of their lands.
Since the 1981 Memorandum of Understanding on strategic cooperation and the Reagan
administrations designation of Israel, in late 1987, as a major non-NATO ally (Helena,
1989) both countries have had very strong diplomatic ties. Successive regimes have
maintained this cooperation for strategic reasons. The United States have perceived Israel
as an indispensible ally, vital for maintaining and securing U.S. interest in a region prone
to volatility while Israel can be assured that the veto welding powers of the U.S. in the
United Nations Security council would preempt any opposition or boycott of the Israeli
nation. This partisan relationship between the hegemonic US and comparatively small
Israel has bolstered the Middle Eastern nation, given it the audacity to flagrantly violate
international law with the claims of possessing the right of preemptive strikes for

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

bringing freedom (Rahman, 2010) and the right to defend its territory against armed
groups who threaten Israels safety and territorial integrity.
Since the 1967 six-day war in which the Palestinian territories were captured by Israel,
massive protests have intermittently erupted across the occupied territories. Millions of
Palestinians stage peaceful protests demanding an end to the Israeli occupation and the
Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) often confronts this uprising with brutal aggression.
Although it is explicitly written in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: All
human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights, recent events in the occupied
Palestine territories clearly illustrates that liberty has been denied to the people of
Palestine. Generations of Palestinians have had no experience other than the Israeli
occupation. The human suffering of the land, sea and air blockade imposed on the 1.75
million Palestinians living in one of the most densely populated and impoverished areas
of the world has been devastating (UNHR, 2013). Compounding the plights of the
Palestinian people and flagrantly violating Geneva Conventions, Israel inflicts collective
punishment by demolishing the houses of families whose member partakes in violent
protests; in some cases the Israeli government went as far as deporting Palestinians from
their own land. Israels recent violation is the continuous construction of illegal
settlements in the occupied territories.
This sordid attitude of Israel towards Palestine is quite similar to apartheid system that
occurred in South Africa in which the black population were deliberately marginalised
and oppressed. With anger and resentment festering over the unending tyranny, a form of
militant resistance grew. An Islamic armed group emerged, stating there primary
objective as the destruction of the state of Israel. It is important to know that Hamas is

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

designated a terrorist organisation by countries such as Israel perceiving Hamas as a

threat to its existence, the US, Japan and EU. Since 2005, Israel has conducted 3 military
incursions in the dense Gaza strip with the objective of neutralising the capabilities of
Hamas. Each successive campaign caused massive civilian casualties than the previous.
The most recent of the Israeli invasion was in July 2014, codenamed Protective Edge.
The 52 days war resulted in 2127 deaths in Gaza and 72 deaths in Israel (Elihu, Talkya,
Alex, & Tamar, 2015), 75% were civilians. Israel was condemned by the international
community for not adhering to International Humanitarian Law by acting proportionately
to avoid civilian casualties. In the name of fighting terrorists, Israel disregarded the
precarious circumstance of Gaza, knowing fully well that a ground assault would
inevitably result to high civilian casualties.
As these events unravel, the US publicly condemns Israels disregard for civilians but
contradictorily restocks their dwindling ammunition (Paul & Harriet, 2014) thus
sustaining the campaign. When such double standards are questioned, the U.S affirms
Israels right to self-defence and illustrates its fervent support for the nation by vetoing
any bid for Palestinian statehood brought before the United Nations Security Council.
These policies are often the harbingers of American adversaries. They give credence to
the narratives of Jihadists that America is at war with the Muslims.

The Future of International Law and United nations

It is important to understand that the United States invasion of Afghanistan to topple the
Taliban regime that was harboring Al Qaeda the orchestrators of the bloody September

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

11 Attacks was legally backed by the unanimous support of the United Nations and all
relevant stakeholders. But the following proposal, for a direct military action in Iraq for
allegations of Saddam Husseins government possessing weapons of mass destruction
(WMD) that might eventually be used against the United States, either directly or through
terrorist networks (Ronald & Raymond, 2005) was met with significant opposition.
This proposal contravened article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, all Members shall
refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with
the Purposes of the United Nations (UN, 1945), thus with the remits of ensuring
international peace and security, it was imperative the United Nations Security Council
pre-empted this simmering issue from escalating into an armed conflict and proceeded by
giving no legal authorisation for such an invasion that had no reasonable justification.
The fact that firm opposition and disagreement of the Security Council the apex
decision maker of security matters on the international level could not militate against
the US invasion of a sovereign nation portends an ominous future for the international
community. Not only does it call into question, the capacity of the United Nations to
uphold international law and maintain peace and security, it portrays that the worlds
superpowers have invariably written their own rules; others go along because they have
no choice (Lichtenberg, 2004). On the former, similar arguments have been made on the
inability of the United Nations to prevent the Bosnia conflict, the Rwandan genocide as
well as the Kosovo conflict. With a no-so-good track record, how can the international
community continue to depend on the United Nations as a competent mediator for peace
and security? Furthermore, this unilateralism has rung the death bell of international law.

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

In other words, international law that was once sacrosanct has been proven by the United
States, that it could be flouted with impunity, a trend other nations can follow.

Subservient judiciary institutions

So it is now glaringly clear that the US violated international law by invading Iraq, yet as
thousands of Iraqis continue to die and survivors suffer penury, no one has been
subpoenaed for this fragrant abuse of power. The war crimes committed by the US falls
within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) whose remit is to
persecute persons warranted for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide when
state judiciaries fail to do so. Nevertheless, the ICC is yet to arraign George Bush and his
pro-Iraq-invasion cohorts and many would wonder why, but President Barack Obama
helps us to answer that question with an excerpt from his 2010 National Security
Strategy:

From Nuremberg to Yugoslavia to Liberia, the United States has seen that the end of
impunity and the promotion of justice are not just moral imperatives; they are stabilizing
forces in international affairs. The United States is thus working to strengthen national
justice systems and is maintaining our support for ad hoc international tribunals and
hybrid courts, those who intentionally target innocent civilians must be held accountable
we are engaging with State Parties to the Rome Statute on issues of concern and are
supporting the ICC's prosecution of those cases that advance U.S. interests and values,
consistent with the requirements of U.S. law ( National Security Strategy, 2010).

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Many would agree that the US policy towards the ICC has been an ambivalent one, since
the Clinton Administration reluctantly signed the Rome Statute on December 31, 2000,
only for it to be oddly unsigned by the bush administration by May 2002. Yet as a nonmember, it is surprising that the US still steers the ICC towards American interest, more
surprising is the manner in which Obama explicitly states it, bereft of diplomatic
languages that sound equivocal to conceal that the ICC has been a tool for advancing US
interests.
It would be quite difficult for the ICC to debunk notions of its obsequiousness towards
the west as its track record of cases pretty much affirms it. Since its inception in 1998, the
ICC has easily indicted Africans for crimes against humanity. According to its website,
about 9 cases are currently before the ICC and all are against Africans. Amongst this
cases are indictments of (ex) Presidents, they include Kenyas Uhuru Kenyatta, whose
charges were recently dropped Sudans Omar Al Bashir, Libyas Muammar Gaddafi
who was bombarded by NATO forces and eventually killed October, 2011 and Ivory
Coasts Laurent Gbagbo. They all had strained ties with the west. However this is not to
say that these individuals were unjustly indicted, but if similar crimes against humanity
were perpetuated in other continents like the stark case of Iraq why havent the
perpetrators been brought to book.
The fact that the US refuses to be accountable before the ICC by not being signatory to
the Roman Statute raises question on its true position on ensuring international peace and
justice. Furthermore if, the hyperpower a nation with great economic and military

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

strength (United States) has control over supposedly independent judiciary bodies, like
the ICC, this renders the US above the law and a threat to all sovereign states.

Conclusion

This paper empathically refused to address the alternate narrative; the narrative that
would countenance that certain drastic measures are necessary to contain the peculiar
problem of terrorism. On the premise of democracy, there should be no justification for
any form of repression in meeting an end. The war on terrorism was initially portrayed as
a fight to defend democracy, but has thus far been used to restrict civil liberties and
contravene domestic and international laws. There is definitely a threat of terrorism but
that does not justify the undemocratic measures that are adopted to tackle it. Ingrained in
Americas war on terrorism is the marginalization of human rights and a sudden
transformation from victim to aggressor. Authorizing indefinite detention without charge,
together with the designation of the Guantanamo detainees as non-combatants, rather
than prisoners of war under the Geneva conventions, have raised doubts the capacity of
the U.S to promote human and civil rights while fighting terrorism (Thomas, Margaret,
& Goering, 2004).
In addition, although keeping key practices in the shadows, it is argued, is a necessary
condition for sustaining the effectiveness of counter-terrorism measures (Martin &
Thiel, 2011), recent events indicate that these intelligence agencies have the tendency to
cross the boundaries of legitimacy and actively circumvent aspects of human rights
(Thiel, 2009). Many people have become increasingly concerned about the overreach of

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

surveillance and its lack of accountability; the oversight mechanisms are weak and
ineffective thus long fought for freedoms are being eroded in the name safety and
security.
Furthermore, One thing for sure is that the war on terror has exerted colossal damage on
economical, political and security stability of the Middle East, which has reverberated
over the world today. The security climate the emergence of non-state actors with
extreme exegesis of religion has inadvertently impelled national governments to divert
resources normally allocated to social programmes and development assistance to the
security sector affecting the economic, social and cultural rights of many (OHCHR,
2008)
For the international community, the war on terror has tainted the image of the US who is
now looked at with great suspicion in all matters of security and human rights. Her
domestic and foreign policies with regards to terrorism and international security, which
is keenly watched by many nations, has set a bad precedent with severe implications. It
has renewed a sharply ideological vision of national security and a sense among some
that human rights could be ignored in its defense (Thomas, Margaret, & Goering, 2004)
The war has become the new paradigm for legit aggression by many other nations: Israel
continues to bombard Palestinians in Gaza with impunity. The recent case of Aljazeera
correspondents imprisoned in Egypt for more than a year placed the spotlight on rising
journalist persecutions on the grounds of combatting terrorism. Malaysia passed a new
Prevention of Terrorism act which accord government authorities power to detain
terrorism suspects without charge (theguardian, 2015) joining the growing list of
countries whose counter terrorism measure are blows to democracy.

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

The real question that begs answering would be how to make hyperpowers accountable
before the law. International law has unfairly had its influence disproportionately strong
on the weakest countries. The US has become more unilateral and unaccountable before
international law. It is necessary to establish stronger intergovernmental institutions
resistant to clout in other to effectively prevent conflicts from occurring in the first place
and oversee the use and abuse of power by states.
Taking a pessimistic stance, the war on terrorism has been spread to all nooks and cranny
of the world, thus this battle, reiterated by several national governments, is likely to be
sempiternal especially if reductionistic approaches continue to be adapted to the very
complex phenomenon of terrorism. However, the onus is on policy makers, analysts,
sociologists and thinkers to impose pressure for the change of this status quo and force
governments to develop effective counter terrorism strategies void of human rights
infringements.

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Works Cited
National Security Strategy. (2010, May). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from whitehouse.gov:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf
Adam, G., & Kathy, G. (2010, March 28). Death shed light on CIA 'Salt Pit' near Kabul.
Retrieved March 20, 2015, from nbcnews:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/36071994/ns/us_news-security/t/death-shed-light-cia-saltpit-near-kabul/#.VQx2mRCsUTAleksandar, J., & Dickson, T. (2011, December 19). A Year Of Living Lawless .
Retrieved March 20, 2015, from swans.com:
http://www.swans.com/library/art17/ajokic09.html
Amnesty International. (2013). "Will I be Next"? US Drone Strikes In Pakistan. Amnesty
International. London: Amnesty International Publications.
Barbara, H., & Walters, R. (2009). Criminology and The War on Terror. The British
Journal of Criminlogy (5), 603 - 608.
Callam, A. (2010). Drone Wars: Armed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Retrieved March 15,
2015, from iar-gwu.org: http://www.iar-gwu.org/node/144
David, M. (2015, February 24). Spy Cables. Aljazeera.
Elihu, R., Talkya, M., Alex, B., & Tamar, P. (2015, January 30). Retrieved March 22,
2015, from israelbehindthenews.com: http://israelbehindthenews.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/02/Gaza-Protective-Edge-Final.pdf
Ewen, M. (2009, April 16). Obama releases Bush torture memos. Retrieved March 20,
2015, from theguardian: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/apr/16/torture-memosbush-administration

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Helena, C. (1989). The U.S.-Israeli Relationship in the Reagan Era. The Journal of
Conflict Studies , 9 (2).
IEP. (2014). GLobal Terrorism Index. Institute for economics & peace . Institute for
economics & peace .
Janina, D. (2010). Applying the Principle of Proportionality in Combat Operations.
Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict. University of Oxford .
Joseph, L. (2011, December 18). Last U.S. troops leave Iraq, ending war. Retrieved
March 14, 2015, from reuters.com: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/18/us-iraqwithdrawal-idUSTRE7BH03320111218
Kerry, S. (2014, January 23). Iraq Death Toll Reaches 500,00 Since Start Of U.S.-Led
Invasion, New Study Says . Retrieved March 12, 2015, from Huffingtonpost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/iraq-death-toll_n_4102855.html
Lara, J., & Darlene, S. (2013, July 08). Obama Defends NSA, Says America Has To Make
Choices Between Privacy and Security . Retrieved March 19, 2015, from Huffingtonpost:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/07/obama-defends-nsa_n_3406448.html
Lichtenberg, J. (2004). Pre-emption and exceptionalism in U.S. foreign policy . In W.
Thomas, C. Margaret, & J. Goering (Eds.), Wars on Terrorism and Iraq (pp. 61-72).
Routledge.
Louise, S. (2010). Human Trafficking. New York, US: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, I., & Thiel, D. (2011). Policing Terror. In T. Newburn (Ed.), Handbook of
Policing (pp. 553-579). Taylor & Francis.
OHCHR. (2008). Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism. Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights . Geneva : United Nations.

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Oliver, L. (2014, December 9). How thw CIA tortured its detainees. Retrieved March 20,
2015, from theguardian : http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/09/cia-torturemethods-waterboarding-sleep-deprivation
Paul, L., & Harriet, S. (2014, July 31). US condemns shelling of UN school in Gaza but
restocks Israeli ammunition. Retrieved April 11, 2015, from theguardian.com:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/30/us-firm-condemnation-shelling-unschool-gaza
Paul, L., & Oltermann, P. (2013, October 27). NSA denies discussing Merkel phone
surveillance with Obama. Retrieved March 18, 2015, from theguardian :
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/27/barack-obama-nsa-angela-merkelgermany
Peter, F. (2011, December 23). Rise of the drone: From Calif. garage to multibilliondollar defense industry. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from washingtonpost:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/rise-of-the-drone-from-califgarage-to-multibillion-dollar-defense-industry/2011/12/22/gIQACG8UEP_story.html
Rahman, K. (2010). Contemporary Middle East Global Politics and Regional Issues.
Policy Perspectives , 7 (1), 1-3.
Ronald, K., & Raymond, M. (2005, April 19). War, Aggression And State Crime. British
Journal of Criminology , 449.
Spencer, A. (2015, February 24). The dissapeared: Chicago police detain Americans at
abuse-laden 'black site'. Retrieved March 20, 2015, from theguardian:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/24/chicago-police-detain-americansblack-site

UP:20/04/2015-23:41:10 WM:20/04/2015-23:41:13 M:SC557-7-SP A:14a1 R:1403277 C:5EF61E08B3309D8244BE26FDA3BFD4E6F34D908D

Swartz, N. (2014). State Sovereignty and Environmental Law. European Journal of

Business and Social Sciences , III (8), 34-44.
theguardian. (2015, April 7). Malaysia passes new detention without trial law, raising
human rights fears. Retrieved April 15, 2015, from theguardian.com:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/07/malaysia-passes-tough-new-terrorismlaw-raising-human-rights-fears
Thiel, D. (2009). Policing Terrorism: A Review of the Evidence . The Police Foundation.
Thomas, W., Margaret, C., & Goering, J. (2004). Wars on Terrorism and Iraq. New
York, U.S.A: Routledge.
UN. (1945). United Nations Charter. Charter of The United Nations. San Francisco:
United Nations.
UNHR. (2013, June 14). Collective punisment in Gaza must end: Israel's blockade enters
its 7th year - UN Special Rapporteur. Retrieved March 22, 2015, from ohchr.org:
http://www.ohchr.org/en/newsevents/pages/displaynews.aspx?newsid=13455&langid=e