Answer to Question #148556 in History for savannah

Question

How should the World deal with terrorists that are non-State actors? And, how should the world deal with States that harbor non-State terrorists?

Answer 1

 Terrorism and Non-State Actors

Introduction

Terrorism is and has always been an atrocious act that leads to the death of many for no particular reason. Many states have been affected by it and have been combating terrorists and terrorism for decades. Those who pursue terrorism have distorted ideologies, hence they opt for terror as the main way of imposing their ideas on the rest of the world. Terrorism is an act that is unlawful, it involves the use of violence or force against others in a bid to intimidate them to conform to them to a terrorist political or social ideology. On the other hand, non- state actor is a term used to describe states that do not have an organizes government which holds institution power. States that do not have an organized ruling government tend to perpetuate terror acts on states that have a system of governance. Hence, what steps can the world take against non-state terrorists and the countries that give shelter to non-state terrorists.

Terrorism and Non-State Actors

Terrorists movements and international organized movements are both non state actors as each of them can influence international relations considering that they wield great powers. Nonstate actors are a vital part of the international community as they influence public opinion at the national and global level. They also have the crucial role of making foreign policy in states and influencing the behaviors of states in regards to foreign policy. Philipsen (2019) argues that violent non state actors should be included I n peace keeping process. He goes further to argue that Armed Non- state actors ANSAs are hardly included in long term peace strategies., rather they are used to prove security in conflict areas then discarded. Thus, states are recommended to do the following to handle non state actors; firstly, they should form diplomatic skills that are able to interact with ANSAs, to discuss on what roles these Non-state actors can play in international peace building. Secondly, they should establish dialogue with local actors using diplomacy. Finally, they should expand the ‘local agreements strategy’ that has worked successfully in some states (Philipsen, 2019).

On the other side of the coin are nations that harbor terrorists non state actors. Some states do aide terrorist intentionally or without their knowledge through some activities such as offering asylums and finance. Some of the countries that are known to support terrorists should be kept on the list of state sponsors till the day they cease supporting terrorist. Additionally, these states could be sanctioned and receive no help from other states. Also, sanctions should be placed on indirect sponsors to deter them from supporting terrorists.

Conclusion

It is not only the states duty to counter terrorism, each individual ahs the duty to try and mitigate factors that may lead to terrorism. It should be noted that terrorism is an extremely violent act that has the ability to destroy millions of lives. Evidences show that many people are affected directly or indirectly by terrorism, hence the need for change. Interestingly, the world has dealt with terrorist and their terror acts for years, yet terrorism acts are still thriving. Additionally, the advancement of technology is a double-edged sword as terror weapons are advancing along with it, thus the need for a new perspective. Indeed, maybe if terror groups felt they were a part of the international peace keeping mission, they would turn towards terrorism as their m ode of expression.

References

Philipsen Lise (2019). Armed non-state actors need to be included in pragmatic peacebuilding. News and Press releases.