Search

In the last two decades, along with the process of digitalisation of businesses and state apparatuses, the world has faced a new major issue that can produce physical / non-physical damage, and equally threaten individual security and the state’s sovereignty: cyberattacks. Confronted with the strategic competition – within a multipolar world – coupled with this new challenge that can redefine the nature of war, NATO member states have tried to find a common answer by linking cyberattacks to Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, NATO’s collective defence principle. Understandably, Article 5 was drafted while having in mind the aspects of deterrence and defence related to conventional wars. However, it has been invoked by the Allies only once, i.e., after the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the USA, which represented quite an unconventional scenario, certainly unanticipated by the Alliance’s Founding Fathers. Given the current trend, and reflecting on the increase in the complexity, intensity and persistence of the known cyberattacks, it is important to study the potential game-changing circumstances of such unconventional attacks, which might trigger Article 5 and its collective defence principle. The present paper seeks to depict the complexities and consequences of cyberattacks within the framework of the collective defence principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The war between Russia and Ukraine which started on the 24th of February 2022, has heightened concerns about the implications of rising military expenditure on the spread of weapons and world security. Since the 9/11 attacks in the United States, studies have indicated that state military spending has increased, raising concerns among policymakers throughout the world. Therefore, the objective of this study is to investigate how an increase in military spending may affect both human security and the proliferation of weapons. Data for this study were gathered from secondary sources using a historical research approach, and content analysis was used for analysing the data. This study makes the case that increasing military spending has detrimental effects on human security in a variety of contexts, including the political, socio-psychological, and economic components of daily living. On the economic front, funds that could be utilised to raise citizen welfare are instead being spent to buy military hardware and software. In the political realm, it results in invasion and the funding of proxy wars, while on the social front, it has sparked hostility and concerns among nations. Lastly, this study recommended among other things that there is the need for collective efforts by member states of the United Nations through collective security to pressurised erring states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The motivations of Hamas in its October 7, 2023, attacks seem perplexing and not rational. What was the point of the brutality? The essay argues the violence should be considered apocalyptic and in a global tradition going back nearly 100 years. Such violence aims to create an apocalyptic process by eliciting a vast overreaction. Apocalyptic goals and sacred values are not negotiable in a world of realpolitik. Hamas treats its own people as dispensable pawns. They want the indiscriminate destruction of apartments, hospitals, and even mosques to stir a wider upheaval. That is only way for Hamas to hope to offset their huge military disadvantage. We are familiar with the offensive rhetoric of Hamas about wiping Israel off the map (including the antisemitic meme "From the river to the sea"), but the totalistic excesses in the remarks of many Israeli officials and its citizens are disturbing. The more such comments occur, the more extreme calls to "wipe out" and "eliminate" Gaza become normalized. Americans, however, should be humble in what we say about this war. We overreacted to the 9/11 attacks out of rage and humiliation, unleashed two forever wars, killed hundreds of thousands of people, spent several trillion dollars—and lost both wars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Terrorist attacks against the United States and some European states, and the war against terrorism characterised the end of the 20th century from the perspective of international relations. In harmony with this, military theoretical and ethical research aimed at terrorism, insurgency war in general and counterterrorism in this period. Some years later, however, at the beginning of the 21st century, some further questions joined these problems, like the theoretical and ethical issues of hybrid war. This essay deals with the theoretical and philosophical features of hybrid war in order to develop an ethical theory for it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On October 7, 2001, 3 weeks after 9/11, U.S. forces attacked Afghanistan; bombers struck Taliban headquarters and Al Qaeda training sites. By early December, the Taliban and Al Qaeda have been defeated and had fled. However, a war that began so successfully in 2001, eventually ended ignominiously on August 30, 2021, almost exactly 20 years later, with a U.S. withdrawal and a total Taliban victory. The speed of the Taliban's triumph shocked everyone. The entire campaign, costing US$2.3 trillion and 2,488 U.S. lives, had failed—utterly. The United States had lost its longest-ever war. How is it possible to explain a defeat of that magnitude? This article seeks to address this question. Although numerous factors played a role, this article identifies three principal factors: the environment, the local politics, and the Taliban. Afghanistan is a very difficult place to conduct large-scale military operations. The West never came to terms with the local politics and consequently undermined their own efforts. Finally, although they were not militarily sophisticated, the Taliban were politically astute and very resilient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Asia Minor Studies is the property of Asia Minor Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The terrorist attacks to the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington DC on September 11, 2001 reinforced comments that it was the beginning of a new era. In the 21st century, war and terrorism exert increasing power in international affairs and are accepted as sources of destabilization of international security. In this regard, concept of "new war" is on the agenda of international relations and terrorism is evolving in a new direction in this process. In this study, it aims to reconsider the development process, transformation, and important moments in the history of international relations in order to explain the new concept role played by terrorism on a global basis. In this context, the dimension of the reflection of terrorism in term of the transformation of the concept of new war in international relations is discussed by using the case study method and the September 11 attacks and the subsequent process. The determinations and the conclusion are related to the continuity of the phenomenon of terrorism within the concept of new war. Different border and international conflicts also show that terrorism is among the main factors that will feed different problems. Likewise, within the scope of this study, terrorism, as seen on September 11, shows that war has a moer destructive and threatening potential and that war is shaped according to the new order rather than traditional methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"The Achilles trap: Saddam Hussein, the United States and the Middle East, 1979–2003" is a book that analyzes the relationship between the United States and Iraq from the 1970s to the 2003 war. The book explores the misperceptions and prejudices held by both sides, leading to a shift from attempted allies to mortal enemies. It provides a nuanced perspective on the actors and decision-making processes involved in the Iraq War, including the Iraqi vision and Saddam Hussein's long-term perspective. The book highlights the failure of US foreign policy in Iraq, resulting in a devastating war, increased instability in the region, and a decline in US influence. [Extracted from the article]

The war between the US and the Taliban began after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. President Bush immediately sent US military troops to Afghanistan to capture the leader of the Al-Qaeda terrorist group, Osama bin Laden. It is known that President Obama was sheltered by the Taliban in Afghanistan. During the Obama's administration, bin Laden was successfully killed in 2011. The war between the US and the Taliban will continue until President Trump's leadership. He considers that the goals of this war have been realized, targeting Al-Qaida leaders and that nothing is profitable for the US in continuing the war. According to Trump's thinking, in 2020 there will be a peace agreement between the US and the Taliban. To answer this fact, this article will use constructivist theory to explain the construction of Bush's thoughts, the result of which is the United States' political policy towards the war in Afghanistan. Therefore, this journal will discuss the construction of Trump's thoughts on ending the long war between the US and the Taliban. So that this paper can see how Trump's thought construction can end the war and what the real impact is for the US. From this, it can be concluded that the result of Trump's thought construction is to protect US citizens and interests in the economic and military fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, terrorism has been perceived as a paramount threat to security at all levels of international functionality -- local, national, regional, interregional, and global. Terrorism can be referred to as a peril, a real and long-lasting threat of significant proportions. Currently, it is one of the major factors that affect global development and shapes the socio-political agenda at all levels, from national to international. The Republic of Moldova is in solidarity with the activities of both state and non-state actors aimed at countering terrorism. While the capacities of the Republic of Moldova are relatively limited, it takes a firm stance against terrorism and has always expressed readiness to align with international efforts. The Republic of Moldova considers the consolidation of international efforts necessary, convinced that only through the cooperation of all anti-terrorist forces can this scourge be suppressed. Currently, the attention of international actors is focused on identifying solutions to the armed conflict in Ukraine and preventing other outbreaks of conflict. International terrorism seems to have been relegated to a lower priority, but this does not preclude the need for the prevention of potential terrorist actions. In this context, international cooperation in the field of counterterrorism is indispensable and timely. The article will highlight the particularities of the international cooperation of the Republic of Moldova with international governmental organizations in the field of combating and preventing international terrorism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the end of the Cold War and through the start of the 21st century, conventional IR theories were anticipating an eventual balancing against the United States. Puzzled when this phenomenon did not occur, balancing theorists engaged in a lively discussion, bringing with it the development of proposed alternative forms of balancing and a debate over whether the concept itself had perhaps outlived its relevance. This article reengages with this discussion, suggesting that many of the involved theorists were hampered by theoretical blinders based on statism, and that in fact balancing did occur, but in an unconventional manner and at the hands of an unexpected suspect: al Qaeda, a violent non-state actor, acting in a transnational manner. In this context, this article treats the 9/11 attacks of the violent Jihadist anti-Western movement as an instance of balancing against the hegemon, a successful one in that the Jihadists arguably aimed not at "winning," but at revealing the superpower's weaknesses so that others would subsequently join the balancing effort. By failing to view the Jihadists' efforts as an ideological balancing effort, the United States responded with force rather than ideational counter-balancing. They waged a war instead of emphasizing efforts to separate the radical violent Jihadist perpetrators from the idea they were championing—a struggle in the name of Muslims/the downtrodden East against the United States—and thus allowing the challenger to rise into a position of "dissident" in the Muslim world, and, arguably, paving the path for today's state revisionist behaviors. The article proposes a framework based on traditionally state-based concepts of intent and impact/capacity to show how non-state actors can in fact balance superpowers and therefore should be incorporated into balancing theories, and presents the actions of the violent Jihadists as an example of transnational, ideational balancing—a phenomenon as real and consequential as state-balancing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research seeks to explore Pak-US relations under the umbrella of pre and post 9/11incident. This paper follows a qualitative research design with an exploratory and interpretative approach. Whether the soviet war, the cold wars or 9/11 incident, Pakistan US relations have been tied since independence of Pakistan 1947.The Pak-US relation, no doubt remains very important since independence of Pakistan till present as United States of America was the first country to have bilateral ties. After its inception in 1947, Pakistan required economic support from the US. Pakistan not only received economic support but social and political as well; however, this relation was much on economic and military bases. The terrible incident of 9/11resulted in Pakistan’s participation in fighting the war against terrorism, thus making Pakistan an ally for the US. US offered a treaty to Pakistan to join in “war against terror”. The US-Pakistan relations were healthy till the incidents that happened in 2011which put Pakistan into mysterious situation towards this relation. The discussion comes up with the conclusion that Pak US relation have gone through various ups and downs however both need to stay grounded for their mutual interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Weiß man mehr, werden die Informationen stabiler und die Folgen absehbarer, machen die schnellen Debatten über den Ausnahmezustand, den Neuanfang und die Schuldzuweisungen denen über Normalisierung, über Legitimation oder deren Fehlen, über ihre Überwindung Platz. Und sie machen Zusammenhänge und Unterschiede deutlich: Fiesole ist nicht Florenz, und die Erzählungen der (Über-)Lebenden sind nicht die Krankheit. Hinsichtlich der Pandemie und des Hochwassers des Jahres 2021 sind wir noch am Anfang, aber die Zahl der Informationen steigt und damit die Sachnähe und Präzision der Problemwahrnehmungen und der -lösungsvorschläge. Leiden und Sterben der Kranken, die Sorge und die Trauer der Angehörigen, die Furcht vor der Ansteckung derjenigen, die nicht einfach zuhause bleiben können oder dürfen, die Belastungen der Ärzte und Pflegenden, der Kinder und Eltern im (gemeinsamen) Homeoffice, die Ängste um Einkommensverlust, Arbeitsplatz oder die gerade aufgebaute wirtschaftliche und soziale Existenz - denen übrigens die Beamten wegen ihres besonderen rechtlichen Status enthoben sind -, um die Zukunftsfähigkeit der Ökonomie und der Sozialsysteme, Entscheidungszwänge und -nöte der Politiker/innen: Sie alle sind auch betroffen von rechtlichen und politischen Entscheidungen im "Realm of Corona Normativities". [Extracted from the article]

The Battle of Mogadishu, on October 3rd, 1993, is one of the most notable events in recent history after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The battle would later be seen as a tactical achievement in which, despite impossible odds and unequal forces, an army of 100 Americans held more than 1,000 enemies equipped with small-caliber weapons and rocket-propelled grenades in a well-organized ambush. But strategically, this battle will be the key reason for the then President of the United States to decide to renounce his forces from Somalia, six months after the battle. The paper observes the events and operations that occurred before the battle, as well as the possible reasons and prospects for such a reaction by the Somali insurgents. The main thesis calls into question the use of the undeviating tactics of the U.S. command which, as the principal carrier of tactical operations, forces the helicopter infiltration/exfiltration scheme. The analysis is performed by comparing all previous tactical operations, taking into consideration all possible factors that could contribute to the learning of the model of action by Somalis. Although technologically superior, U.S. forces cannot face and defeat the Somalis, through the narrow streets and hellish climate of Mogadishu, who for the first time unify the modern urban war and proclaim a new concept of warfare that to this day is an unfathomable enigma for even the largest military forces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is an attempt to historicize Pakistan's war on terror in the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP). United States of America started a global war against terror after 9/11 attacks in 2001. Immediately, Pakistan became USA ally in this war especially when this war was fought against Taliban in Afghanistan. Sooner than later, the USA's war against terror became Pakistan's own war against terror in 2008/09. This paper takes up this question that how did global war against terror become Pakistan's war on terror in KP. Pakistan's pre-9/11 history has significant explanatory value for this answer. For this query, this research methodologically investigates this topic through secondary sources relevant to the pre-and post-9/11 war and its various dynamics and history. This research is qualitative that simultaneously use descriptive and historical designs for war against terror after 2001 and the cold-war history during 1980s respectively. The objective of such mixed design was to find out that how Pakistan's pre-9/11 history of war, militancy and sectarianism is responsible for transforming global against terror into Pakistan's own war on terror especially in KP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As with proxy wars, intelligence operations, and colonial policing, terrorism became an aspect of the game played between the United Kingdom and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Twentieth-century terrorism, particularly the terrorism of the inter-War years, remains a forgotten phenomenon in understanding the contemporary phenomenon of international terrorism. The 11 September 2001 attacks in the US changed the course of world history and made Al-Qaeda a state-like actor in international affairs, thereby confounding a core Realist idea. [Extracted from the article]

There is the Islamic State Khorasan, the newer Islamic State Pakistan, the remnants of the old "core" Al-Qaeda and the more recent Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent; all of which have global terrorist aspirations. Pakistan stands on the brink of another crisis, and one almost entirely of its own making. [Extracted from the article]