The United States and the Threat of Terrorism

The United States has overreacted in their response to the threat of terrorism and as a result has incurred great costs. Therefore, the U.S. needs to reduce military action such as the use of drone strikes because of the costs and international controversy surrounding them. This international controversy has made them extremely unpopular. While drone strikes have been successful and taken down top level al- Qaeda operatives, the costs associated with drone strikes outweigh the benefits. Another possible approach to assess and respond to the threat of terrorism the U.S. can take is the use of public diplomacy.

OVERVIEW

The United States overreacted to the terrorists attacks on September 11. In the long run, this overreaction claimed more lives than the terrorist attack itself. It resulted in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which caused many Americans to perish. Furthermore, “the direct economic losses of 9/11 amounted to tens of billions of dollars, but the economic costs in the United States of much-enhanced security runs to several times that amount” (Muller 2010, 117). While traditionally the use of military force entails human combat, it now consists of using unmanned aerial vehicles called drones. This is a problem because of the costs, controversy and risks associated with them. They have given the U.S. a negative public image and one way to erase it is by reducing military action and stopping drone strikes. This image negatively impacts the U.S. because it prohibits it from gathering international support against al-Qaeda. In fact, in the Middle East, al-Qaeda enjoys a “core of popular support” whereas the U.S. popularity has remained negative overall (Krause and Van Evera 2009). Therefore, stopping drone strikes will make ...

... middle of paper ...

...negative public image and one way to erase it is by reducing military action and stopping drone strikes. The other way to assess and respond to the threat of terrorism the U.S. can take is the use of public diplomacy.

Works Cited

Audrey Kurth Cronin, “Why Drones Fail,” Foreign Affairs (July/August 2013).

Daniel Byman, “Why Drones Work,” Foreign Affairs (July/August 2013).

John Mueller, “Action and Reaction: Assessing the Historic Impact of Terrorism,” in Jean E. Rosenfeld (ed.), Terrorism, Identity, and Legitimacy (New York: Routledge, 2011); http://politicalscience.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller//RAPBOOK.PDF

Peter Krause and Steven Van Evera, “Public Diplomacy: Ideas for the War of Ideas,” Harvard Kennedy School, Belfer Center Working Paper, September 2009; http://belfercenter.hks.harvard.edu/files/9.2009.Public%20Diplomacy.Ideas%20for%20the%20War%20of%20Ideas.pdf