فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک

فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک

تبیین تغییر اولویت تهدید و تاثیر آن بر راهبرد مبارزه با تروریسم آمریکا

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده
استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، ایران.
چکیده
میزان احساس و درک از تهدید، منجر به اتخاذ رویکردی متناسب با سطح و جنس آن تهدید از سوی کشورها و بازیگران می­گردد. در این راستا، با گذر زمان، میزان احساس تهدیدِ تروریسم برای آمریکا کاهش یافته و هم اکنون، بزرگترین تهدیدات آن ناشی از بازیگران دولتی می باشد. لذا این کشور اقدام به تطبیق راهبردهای دفاعی و امنیتی خود متناسب با این نوع از تهدید نموده است. در این راستا پژوهش حاضر در پی پاسخ به این سوال است که تاثیر تغییر میزان اهمیت تهدید تروریسم بر راهبرد مبارزه با تروریسم آمریکا چگونه بوده است؟ فرضیه نیز آن است که کاهشِ تهدیدِ تروریسم، آمریکا را به سمت کاهش حضور مستقیم نظامی، تاکید بیشتر بر فناوری و اتخاذ راهبرد موازنه از دور سوق داده است. مقاله حاضر با استفاده از روش توصیفی تحلیلی و جمع آوری داده کتابخانه‌ای و بهره‌گرفتن از رویکرد واقع‌گرایی تهاجمی و مدل ارزیابی تهدید دیوید سینگر، به این نتیجه رسیده است که همزمان با کاهش تهدید تروریسم، آمریکا قصد خود مبنی بر نابودی تروریسم را تغییر داده و در حال حاضر به دنبال مهار و یادگیری روش زندگی با آن است. مهمترین عناصر رویکرد آمریکا نیز شامل تقویت راهبرد ردپای کمرنگ، تقویت چندجانبه­ گرایی و دیپلماسی، افزایش نقش تکنولوژی و شبکه­ ای کردن سیستم ­ها و اطلاعات، تشدید استفاده از راهبرد موازنه از دور و فرای افق،‌ آموزش/ تجهیز و فعال­ سازی شرکا و متحدین و ... می­ شوند.
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Investigating Changing Priority of the Threat and its Impact on US Counter Terrorism Strategy

نویسنده English

Taha Akrami
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran.
چکیده English

Extended Abstract
Introduction
With the increase in the threat of terrorism after September 11, the issue of terrorism became the first concern of the American security and defense strategy. This led to the United States sending its military forces to the West Asian region for this purpose, and from that year until now, it has been involved in the fight against terrorism. However, America's approach in the field of fighting terrorism has not always been stable and has undergone changes and transformations, the reduction of military forces or their withdrawal from Afghanistan can be examples of this transformation.
Threat Perception level causes to the adoption of an approach, appropriate to the level and type of the threat by different countries and actors. In this regard, US did increase the priority of terrorism threat but as time went on, after 2016 and with the new emphasis on great power competition, the threat posed by state actors are again at the top of the list. This can also be seen in US military withdrawal from Afghanistan.
In this regard, the current research seeks to answer the questions; firstly, to what extent has the importance of the threat of terrorism changed in US? Secondly, how has the aforementioned change affected the US strategy to fight terrorism? The hypothesis is that the importance and priority of the threat of terrorism has decreased and it is no longer at the top of the country's security threats and the priority of its action. This understanding has led US to reduce direct military presence, emphasize more on technology, adopt offshore balancing strategy, and emphasize more on empowering and using the capacity of partners and allies.
In order to investigate the issue and hypothesis, the article first examines the change in the threat of terrorism in American documents. After that, the causes of this change have been discussed and then attention has been paid to the change of strategy according to the change in the level of threat and the elements of the current approach in the fight against terrorism.
Research Questions
In this regard, the current research seeks to answer the question; How the changing priritization of the threat of terrorism has impacted US counter-terrorism strategy? The hypothesis is that the importance and priority of the threat of terrorism has decreased and it is no longer at the top of the country's security threats and the priority of its action; which leds US to reduce direct military presence, emphasize more on technology, adopt offshore balancing strategy, and emphasize more on empowering and using the capacity of partners and allies.
Methodology
Present article uses analytical-descriptive method combined with content analysis and library-based data collection to investigate the change in threat perception and the relationship between the mentioned perception with US counterterrorism strategy.
 
Conclusion
It is concluded that while reducing the threat of terrorism, the United States has changed its intention to eradicate terrorism and is now seeking to curb and manage it and learn how to live with it. According to the assessment of its own strength and that of its enemies, the United States has come to the conclusion that in the current era, state actors (especially China) pose a greater threat than non-state actors, and the threat of terrorism though it is serious, but not a vital threat against US interest. In other words, although there is still an incentive among terrorists to strike and attack America, they do not have the ability to do so. It is also found out that in US point of view, terrorism is no longer concentrated in the West Asia region and has spread geographically and has gained a strong presence in different regions of the world, especially in Africa.
Therefore, US made changes in its military strategy and the type of confrontation with terrorism. As a result, the United States completely withdrew its military forces from Afghanistan. We have also seen some transfers of troops and equipment at the regional level. On the other hand, we are witnessing the increasing presence of technological elements such as drones in the region and increasing their role in carrying out American military operations. This is also the proof and evidence of changes in US military strategies and tactics.
The most important elements of current counterterrorism strategy include strengthening light footprint approach, strengthening multilateralism and diplomacy, increasing the role of technology and networking systems and information, preventing access to a safe haven for training, and intensifying the use of offshore balancing and over the horizon strategy, training/equipping and enabling partners and allies, armed surveillance program, extending and deepening security cooperation.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Terrorism
Counterterrorism Strategy
Strategy
Threat
U.S
  1. Abdullah Khani, A. (2013). The Theories of Security. Tehran: Abrare Moaser Cultural Institute on International Research and Studies, (ISCS). [In Persian]
  2. Afshord, E; Shifrinson, J. (2018). Trump's National Security Strategy: A Critics Dream. Texas National Security Review. Retrieved March 15, 2024, from https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/63984/Ashford%20&%20Shifrinson%20TNSR%20Vol%201%20Issue%202%20.pdf?sequence=2
  3. Air Force. (2020). Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 Budget Estimates. Department of the Air Force. Retrieved March 14, 2024, from https://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/Portals/84/documents/FY21/PROCUREMENT_/FY21%20Air%20Force%20Aircraft%20Procurement%20Vol%20I_1.pdf?ver=2020-02-10-145310-973.
  4. Akrami, T. (2021). The Evolution of US Base Strategy: The Case Study of West Asia. Foreign Relations, 13(2), 309-336. [In Persian]
  5. Asey, T. (2021). Atlantic Council. Retrieved February 10, 2024, from RESISTANCE 2.0 – A military framework to deter a Taliban military takeover and engage the United States and the region on counter-terrorism and peace for Afghanistan: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/southasiasource/ resist- ance-2-0-a-military-framework/.
  6. Baumann, Z. (2021). Biden’s National Security Strategy: Domestic Threats Take Centre Stage. Retrieved Februaru 10, 2024, Internaional Center for Counter-terrorism: https://icct.nl/publication/bidens-national-security-strategy-domestic-threats/
  7. Biden, J. (2021, April 14). The White House. Retrieved March 14, 2024, from Remarks by President Biden on the Way Forward in Afghanistan: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/04/14/ remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-way-forward-in-afghanistan/.
  8. Biden, J. (2021, August 31). Remarks by President Biden on the End of the War in Afghanistan. Retrieved March 15, 2024, from The White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/08/31/ remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-end-of-the-war-in-afghanistan/.
  9. Biden, J. (2021, July 08). Remarks by President Biden on the Drawdown of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan. Retrieved March 15, 2024, from The White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/07/08/ remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-drawdown-of-u-s-forces-in-afghanistan/
  10. Biden, J. (2021,March). Interim National Security Strategic Guidance. Whashington, D. C: The White House. Retrieved March 15, 2024, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/NSC-1v2.pdf.
  11. Brands, H. (2017). The Unexceptional Superpower: American Grand Strategy in the Age of Trump. Survival, 59, 7-40. doi:10.1080/00396338.2017.1399722.
  12. Brands, H. (2021, April 14). The war on terrorism isn’t over — it’s moved to Africa. Retrieved April 21, 2024, American Enterprise Institute: https:// www.aei.org/op-eds/the-war-on-terrorism-isnt-over-its-moved-to-africa/.
  13. Brands, H; O’Hanlon, M. (2021). The War on Terror Has Not Yet Failed: A Net Assessment After 20 Years. Survival, 63(4), 33-54.
  14. Byman, D. (2021, May 04). Don’t expect an al-Qaida reboot in Afghanistan. Retrieved from Brookings: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/05/04/dont-expect-an-al-qaida-reboot-in-afghanistan/.
  15. Byman, D. (2021, October). The Good Enough Doctrine: Learning to Live With Terrorism. Retrieved January 2, 2022, from Foreign Affairs: https://www. foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2021-08-24/good-enough-doctrine.
  16. Clapper, J. (2016). Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community. Washington, D. C.: Director of National Intelligence. Retrieved October 26, 2022, from https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/SASC_pdf
  17. Clarke, C. (2021). Trends in Terrorism: What's on the Horizon in 2021? Retrieved October 26, 2022, from Foreign Policy Research Institute: https://www.fpri.org/article/2021/01/trends-in-terrorism-whats-on-the-horizon -in-2021/
  18. Coats, D. (2019). WORLDWIDE THREAT ASSESSMENT of the US INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY. Washington, D. C.: Director of National Intelligence. Retrieved October 26, 2022, https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/ documents/2019-ATA-SFR---SSCI.pdf.
  19. Coats, D.R. (2017). Worldwde Threat Assesment of the US Intelligence Community. Washington, D. C.: Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Retrieved October 24, 2022, from https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ Newsroom/Testimonies/SSCI%20Unclassified%20SFR%20-%20Final.pdf.
  20. Darvishi , F; Hatamzadeh, A. (2013). The Process of US and EU Confrontation with Terrorism from Different Perceptions to Collaboration. Geopolitics Quarterly, 9(30), 136-160. [In Persian]
  21. Darvishi, F; Jalilvand, A. (2010). Impacts of U.S. Military Presence in the Arabic Countries of Persian Gulf: Security Shield or Reduce of Legitimacy. Geopolitics Quarterly, 6(4), 167-180. [In Persian]
  22. Debis, N.G. (2021). Security diplomacy as a response to Horn of Africa’s security complex: Ethio-US partnership against al-Shabaab. Cogent Social Sciences, 1-19. doi:10.1080/23311886.2021.1893423
  23. DIA Strategy. (2021). DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY STRATEGY 2021. Defense Intelligence Agency.
  24. DOD Directive 5132.03 . (2016). DOD POLICY AND RESPONSIBILITIES RELATING TO SECURITY COOPERATION. Washington, D. C.: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
  25. Dombrowsk, P; Reich, S. (2018). Beyond the Tweets: President Trump's Continuity in Military Operations. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 12(2), 56-81.
  26. Dominguez, G. (2021). Janes. Retrieved January 14, 2022, US looking at ‘over-the-horizon' options for counter-terrorism ops in Afghanistan: https:/ janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/us-looking-at-over-the-horizon-options-for-counter-terrorism-ops-in-afghanistan.
  27. Everstine, B. (2021). Air Force Magazine. Retrieved June 19, 2021, SOCOM Selects 5 Armed Overwatch Prototypes: https://www.airforcemag.com/socom-selects-5-armed-overwatch-prototypes/.
  28. Felbab-Brown , V. (2021). How to counter right-wing armed groups in the United States. Retrieved December 15, 2022, from Brookings: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/01/21/how-to-counter-right-wing-armed-groups-in-the-united-states/.
  29. Franklin, R. (2021). U.S. 5th Fleet Launches New Task Force to Integrate Unmanned Systems. Retrieved July 22, 2024, from U.S. Naval Forces Central Command: https://www.cusnc.navy.mil/Media/News/Display/Article/276846 8/us-5th-fleet-launches-new-task-force-to-integrate-unmanned-systems/.
  30. Friedman, U. (2016). Learning to Live With Terrorism. Retrieved March 26, 2024, from The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/ archive/2016/08/terrorism-resilience-isis/493433/.
  31. Gambrell, J. (2021). US Navy launches Mideast drone task force amid Iran tensions. Retrieved April 12, 2024, from Defense News: https://www.defensenews.com/flashpoints/2021/09/08/us-navy-launches-mideast-drone-task-force-amid-iran-tensions/.
  32. Glaser, C. (1995). Realistes As Optimists Cooperation As Self Help. International Security, 19(3), 50-90.
  33. Helvey, D. (2021). U.S. Department of Defense. Retrieved May 23, 2024, from Defense Officials Explain U.S. Policy, Strategy in Afghanistan: https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2605090/defense-officials-explain-us-policy-strategy-in-afghanistan/.
  34. Inbar, E; Shamir, E. (2014). ‘Mowing the Grass’: Israel’s Strategy for Protracted Intractable Conflict. Journal of Strategic Studies, 37(1), 65-90. doi:10.1080/01402390.2013.830972.
  35. Jamshidi, M; Yazdanshenas, Z. (2020). Power Cycle Theory and Changes in The US Relative Power; A Context for Analyzing Foreign Policy Behavior. Geopolitics Quarterly, 16(59), 52-82. [In Persian]
  36. Jenkins, B. M. (2017). The Origins of America's Jihadists. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND Corporation.
  37. Joint Publication 1. (2021). DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. Washington, D. C.: Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  38. Joint Publication 1-02. (2010). Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. Washington, D. C.: Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  39. Kimball, J. (2021). Brown University. Retrieved April 12, 2024, from Costs of the 20-year war on terror: $8 trillion and 900,000 deaths: https://www.brown.edu/news/2021-09-01/costsofwar.
  40. Kurtz-Phelan, D. (2021). Who Won the War on Teorror? Retrieved May 21, 2024, from Foreign Affairs: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/issue-packages/2021-08-24/who-won-war-terror.
  41. Mahshie, A. (2021). France Stresses Need for Continued American ISR in African Sahel. Retrieved January 10, 2024, from Air Force Magazine: https://www.airforcemag.com/france-stresses-need-for-continued-american-isr-in-african-sahel/.
  42. Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.
  43. Mills, C. (2017). ISIS/Daesh: the military response in Iraq and Syria. UK Parliament. Retrieved January 11, 2024, from https://researchbriefings. files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06995/SN06995.pdf.
  44. Mossalanejad, A. (2018). The Middle East Security and Donald Trump’s Grand Strategy. Geopolitics Quarterly, 13(4), 20-52. [In Persian]
  45. Mossalanejad, A. (2020). Geopolitical Shift in Power and Security in Southwest Asia. Geopolitics Quarterly, 16(59), 1-28. [In Persian]
  46. (2018). Summary of the National Defense Strategy of the United States of America: Sharpening the American Military's Competetive Edge. Washington, D. C.: Department of Defense.
  47. (2014). The National Intelligence Strategy of the United States of America. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Director of National Intelligence; United States Intelligence Community.
  48. (2017). National Security Strategy of the United States. Washington, D. C.: White House.
  49. Office Of The Under Secretary Of Defense . (2020). Defense Budget Overview: Irreversible Implementation of the National Defense Strategy. Washington, D. C.: Department of Defense.
  50. Pain, R. (2010). The New Geopolitics of Fear. Geography Compass, 226-240.
  51. (2014). The 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
  52. Rolington, A. (2013). Strategic Intelligence for the 21st Century: The Mosaic Method. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  53. Romaniuk, S; Grice, F. (2017). The Future of US Warfare. New York: Routledge.
  54. Rosenthal, D; Schulman, L.D. (2018). Trump's Secret War on Terror. Retrieved April 13, 2024, from The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/ archive/2018/08/trump-war-terror-drones/567218/.
  55. Savvel, S. (2021). United States CounterTerrorism Operations, 2018-2020. Brown University. Retrieved April 12, 2024, from https://watson.brown. edu/costsofwar/papers/2021/USCounterterrorismOperations.
  56. Singer, J.D. (1958). Threat-perception and the armament-tension dilemma. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(1), 90-105. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/ 002200275800200110.
  57. Starr-Deelen, D. (2018). Counter-Terrorism from the Obama Administration to President Trump. Kensington, MD: ‎ Palgrave Pivot.
  58. Stevenson, J. (2019). Right-wing Extremism and the Terrorist Threat. Global Politics and Strategy, 233-244. doi:10.1080/00396338.2019.1568059.
  59. SWAN, B. W. (2020, September 04). DHS draft document: White supremacists are greatest terror threat. Retrieved April 11, 2024, from Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/white-supremacists-terror-threat-dhs-409236.
  60. Tecott, R. (2021). Why America Can’t Build Allied Armies: Afghanistan Is Just the Latest Failure. Retrieved April 11, 2024, from Foreign Affairs: https:// www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2021-08-26/why-america-cant-build-allied-armies.
  61. Thrall, A; Goepner, E. (2017). Step Back: Lessons for U.S. Foreign Policy from the Failed War on Terror. Retrieved May 23, 2024, from CATO Institute: https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/step-back-lessons-us-foreign-policy-failed-war-terror#appendix-1-regression-analysis.
  62. Vickers, M. (2021). Military Times. Retrieved May 23, 2024, from MQ-9 Reaper: The only option for SOCOM’s ‘armed overwatch’ role: https://www. militarytimes.com/opinion/commentary/2021/05/15/mq-9-reaper-the-only-option-for-socoms-armed-overwatch-role/.
  63. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. New York: Random house.
  64. Wolfe, F. (2021). Defense Daily. Retrieved May 23, 2024, from SOCOM Requests $170 Million for Six Armed Overwatch Aircraft: https://www. defensedaily.com/socom-requests-170-million-six-armed-overwatch-aircraft/ uncategorized/.
  65. Woolsey, J. (1998). Testimony of The Honorable James Woolsey. U.S. House of Representatives Committee on National Security. Retrieved April 12, 2024 from https://fas.org/irp/congress/1998_hr/h980212w.htm.
  66. Zenko, M. (2018). US Military Policy in the Middle East An Appraisal. London : The Royal Institute of International Affairs Chatham House./
  67. 50 S. Code Title 50— War And National Defense . (n.d.). Retrieved February 3, 2024, from Cornell Law School: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50
  68. .…(2021). Annual Threat Assesment of the US Intelligence Community. Office of The Director of National Intelligence.
  69. …..(2017). Country Reports on Terrorism 2016. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of State. Retrieved October 24, 2022, from https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/crt_2016.pdf.
  70. …..(2021). DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. Washignton, D. C.: Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  71. ……(2013). Joint Publication 3-27: Homeland Defense. Washington, D. C.: Joint Chiefs of Staff.
دوره 21، شماره 3
پاییز 1404
صفحه 75-110

  • تاریخ دریافت 29 مرداد 1403
  • تاریخ بازنگری 20 دی 1403
  • تاریخ پذیرش 04 بهمن 1403