Combating Terrorism in the 21st Century

1522 Words4 Pages

The coordinated attack September 11th 2001 on the United States resulted in a prolonged war on terror; that is still active today. Many people are asking how this could happen. Others want to know how to prevent it from happing again. Some wonder if world peace will ever be possible. The United States does not think peace can be possible until the threat of terrorism becomes obsolete. There is no clear answer to the questions and concerns over terrorism although there are several schools of thought on how to respond to terrorism. This paper will discuss; realism, liberalism, and structuralism in an attempt to find a solution. I will offer Foreign Policy recommendations based on these theories; an examination regarding the application of these theories will show advantages and disadvantages of each, as well as how the United States applies them to combat and eliminate the threats of terrorism today.

Recommendations applying the Realist theory include sending a strong message to nations that harbor or support known terrorist. This strong message should include an increase of military power, sanctions and if necessary a pre-emptive strike. Recent threats from within our country for example, the plot to blow up the White House calls for a close look at immigration. The department of homeland security therefore, should review records of immigrants who are in America, focusing on those whose visas have expired yet remain in the states illegally. Advantages to following these recommendations are offense, increased security, and avoidance of a potential repeat of 9/11. Key beliefs in realism support these recommendations because security of state is the number one priority. Our military is the best in the world and feared b...

... middle of paper ...

...sm to combat terrorism. Realism is by far the method of choice in recent years. Thus far, the United States has avoided a repeat of 9/11 yet still has a long way to go to ensure security from terrorism in the 21st century.

Works Cited

Doyle, M. W. (2010). Liveralism and World Politics. In M. K. Viotti Paul, International Relations Theory (p. 159). New York: Longman.

Galtung, J. (1982). A structural Theory of Imperialism. In V. John, Classics of International Relations (p. 266). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

JR, J. S. (n.d.). Hard and Soft Power in American Foreign Policy.

Machiavelli, M. (n.d.). On the Princes and the Security of Their State.

Viotti Paul, K. m. (2011). international relations theory. New York: Longman.

W., D. M. (2011). Kant, Liveral Legacies, and Foriegn Affairs. In R. J. Robert J. Art, International Politics (p. 115). Boston: Longman.

Open Document