Terrorism in the United States: A National Security Policy Position (Research Paper Sample)

Terrorism in the United States: A National Security Policy Position Letter of Transmittal Sender’s Name Sender Address Recipient’s Name Recipient’s Title Recipient’s Organization Recipient’s Address City, state, zip code Dear Mr/Mrs/Miss First & Last Name In this national policy position discussion, you will find a detailed description of the problem, background information, policy alternatives, and recommendations. My review captures the scope of terrorism as it affects the United States, which explains why the problem needs immediate action. I have sought the opinions of different researchers to gain different perspectives on the terrorism issue in the U.S. You will find a detailed outline of my discussion for your review. Thank you for entrusting me with this responsibility, and I appreciate the opportunity to pursue such a venture in the future. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions concerning the discussion on the national security policy position. Email Phone Sincerely Signature First & Last Name Executive Summary Presently, concerns about domestic terrorism have attracted the attention of security agencies in the United States. Internal terrorists, which include extremists, and other actors like anti-fascists, threaten national security (Darden 2019, 18). Therefore, according to the FBI, these internal actors cause more terror attacks when compared to foreign actors. For instance, the FBI determined in 2020 that supremacists in the U.S instigated about 67% of the recorded terror attacks (Jones et al. 2221, 11). This statistic explains why domestic terrorism is a priority for the U.S government in its effort to improve national security. More so, it demonstrates that the issue of terrorism has evolved since 9/11. Then, foreign terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda threatened the public (Darden 2018, 19). However, the new age has proven that citizens can be more dangerous to domestic security, and their proliferation makes it more challenging to manage. This discussion stresses the need to firm policy action to change the public confidence in the security agencies. The policies in use can do so much, but improvements can be achieved should the policymakers make better considerations (Asongu et al. 2019, 9). Nevertheless, to realize this objective, they need to consider the public interests. Without this consideration, then it would be difficult to implement a policy without deviating from its primary agenda (Asongu et al. 2019, 9). Similarly, there is a need to use the right strategic approach in mitigating terrorism in the U.S. Considering the delicate nature of this issue, policymakers should make a point of investigating domestic terrorism to comprehend the breadth of the issue (Jones et al. 2021, 12). In that way, they can develop comprehensive policies that will position security agencies ahead of domestic terrorism. National Security Challenges Cybercrime is one of the primary concerns associated with the prevalence of terrorism in the United States. The digital landscape has proven to be an effective tool for manipulating masses through communication to skew their perspectives (Gadarian 2010, 18). Therefore, by infiltrating networks, cyber attackers motivated by terrorist agendas target individuals, which starts the process of radicalization. In that case, one of the public’s concern about the rising threat of cybersecurity is the regulatory role of federal institutions (Gadarian 2010, 18). The people with knowledge about the dynamism of cyber technologies perceive the interventions of the federal government as slow. As a result of this inadequacy, more Americans are vulnerable to terrorism (Campos & Martin 2009, 32). Others feel that by creating a regulatory culture to comply with federal regulations and a false perception of security, cyber attackers become more agile, clever, and motivated to cause terror attacks. Similarly, proliferation is a national security concern, which the federal government is yet to manage. In some cases, state enemies take an indirect approach to stir aggressive actions, which can take time to be noticed (Gadarian 2010, 16). The idea of proliferation is especially dangerous concerning the advancement of weapons and radical agendas. As a result, hostile parties masking in proliferation disrupt state security from within. This approach is synonymous with extremists, anti-fascists, and lone actors. It allows them to make adequate plans to enhance their capacities (Gadarian 2010, 17). Thus, when they launch their attacks, national security in the U.S suffers destruction. Notably, it does not matter whether the terrorists use weapons, technology, or other means (Jones et al. 2021, 13). Proliferation provides them with the perfect cover to operate under the nose of the federal government, and the actions of such actors come as a surprise to many Americans. The prevalence of terrorism in the U.S elicits various Christian worldviews. Firstly, the perpetrators of terror indicate the depravity of God’s love and fear. Therefore, terrorists commit all sorts of atrocities to attract the attention of their enemies (Darden & Trisko 2019, 22). The ultimate objective for Christians is to serve God by living according to his instructions. On the contrary, their advocacy for antiterrorism in the United States is yet to address the problem. Thus, extremists and other terrorists who feel the need to revenge against the misdeeds of the federal government violate God’s warning. Romans 12:19 says, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, Vengeance is mine, says the Lord [ESV].” Nobody according to the Bible has the right to avenge against atrocities committed against them. Instead, Christians are invited to plead with God for protection against the dangers of terrorism in the U.S. Secondly, the involvement of Christians in mitigating terrorism is insufficient, and this burden is left to the federal government. Therefore, while some individuals may feel obligated to distance themselves from terrorism, the Bible says in Romans 3:23, “…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God [ESV].” Thus, the involvement in finding countermeasures against rising terrorism will not in any way make Christians lesser in God’s eyes. The plan, in this case, is to bolster national security by creating a safe space for everyone to live their lives. On the contrary, the dormancy of the Christian society demonstrates their failure to steer the leadership of the U.S in the right direction. This ideology is reflected in Isaiah 1:17, which says, “Learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause [ESV].” That is the right way for Christians to mitigate terrorism in the U.S. Background In the United States, the war in terror officially began after the September 11, 2001 attack. Initially, Americans viewed the issue of terrorism as a foreign affairs issue, and therefore, it was not a significant concern to them (Jager 2018, 8). Before then, terrorist attacks were rare but citizens felt a sense of invulnerability. However, the events following the September 11 attack changed the perception of Americans. As a result of the new reality of terror, security agencies had to reassess past events to understand and find clues leading to possible tragedies in future attacks (Jager 2018, 9). Since then, the United States government equates the issue of terrorism to that posed by extremist groups such as Al Qaeda. Therefore, the lethality of terror threats to the country has become inflamed by the 9/11 attack. The country is under constant fear of the evolving nature of terrorism using advanced technologies to instigate attacks. Despite the terror threat imposed by global franchises and al Qaeda, the United States' perception of terrorism remains egocentric. Therefore, the country’s focus lies in finding intelligence about the next terror attacks (Mahmood & Michael 2020, 15). As a result of this new role in managing the war on terror, the government is under constant watch for signs of possible attacks on its soil. This role is largely executed by its investigative branches like the FBI. The government is driven by the need to comprehend the severity of possible attacks and employ countermeasures where possible (Mahmood & Michael 2020, 15). However, the main challenge in addressing terrorism is the lack of a comprehensive approach to solving terrorism. Resultantly, the risks to national security become unmanageable when the country becomes blind to probable attacks (Darden 2019, 10). Thus, the war against terror is a promise to the citizens of the government’s commitment to counterterrorism. Notably, despite the common misconceptions about terrorism, the phenomenon is not new in the U.S. Also, it is not only comprised of domestic and foreign attacks and isolated cases of rage (Ding et al. 2017, 14). Instead, terrorism features a wave of violence, which lies under the shadows of militarism. In that regard, the 9/11 terror attack despite its magnitude was not new. Previously, Al Qaeda operatives had established secret cells in the country motivated by the need to cause economic, transportation, education, financial, and technological havoc (Ding et al. 2017, 14). For instance, some of the terrorists were driven by the fantasies of thieving technologies from the U.S and utilize them in destroying other enemies. Similarly, radical groups have been a cause of terror in the United States over the years. Their motivation lies in divisive political ideas and technological developments giving them an edge over the targeted government agencies. Although different arguments have been developed concerning the motivation to engage in terrorism, it is difficult to determine the actual drive of the instigators. One thing for sure, terror...