Reaction Paper 2 Final Draft

(THIS ESSAY IS A SAMPLE ONLY. FOR FULLER SAMPLE ESSAYS THAT INCLUDE INSTRUCTOR COMMENTS, PLEASE SEE THE COURSE DOCUMENT SECTION OF CANVAS.)

Reaction Paper 2 Final Draft: Overreaction to Terrorism
In response to “Beyond Bin Laden: Reshaping U.S. Foreign Policy” by Stephen M. Walt

Imagine this scenario: you are a middle class American with 2.5 children living in a house surrounded by a white picket fence. Terrorism should be the last thing on your mind – every year an average of only about 3 Americans are killed by jihadist terrorism which is about .000000009% of all Americans. You are more likely to die from a car accident or even by just falling.1 Even so, media sensationalism and fear politics have caused you to believe terrorism is an existential threat. The need to change our foreign policy to address terrorism and other international issues is overblown by Walt and policy writers in general that contributes to fear mongering that ultimately does more harm than good.

Walt tends to veer on the side of being overly cautious when it comes to terrorism. He seems to suggest terrorism is a pervasive and pressing issue but since 9/11, only about 48 Americans have been killed in Jihadist attacks.1 In comparison, gun violence is responsible for 30 deaths a day.1 Even so, according to a 2015 Public Religion Research Institute Poll, nearly half of Americans are worried about terrorism.1 It’s writers like Walt that feed into this overreaction.

But Walt’s assertion is not just ignorant but also harmful and damaging to democracy. By supporting this overreaction to terrorism, he is actually indirectly legitimizing it according to Professor Schinkel of Erasmus University because “the overreaction of the enemy state is crucial in terrorism”. Walt’s well-intentioned approach ends up contributing to the mass media circulation of terrorist ideals which garners sympathy and supporters that makes them a looming threat. Take two major terrorist attacks involving Orlando nightclub shooter Omar Mateen and London suicide bomber Germaine Lindsay for example. In both cases, the FBI suspect self-radicalization motivated their attacks because of how easy and prominent access to media sources about terrorist causes have become. Thus, Walt unwittingly furthers the harms done by terrorism by being a part of the larger media frenzy surrounding it. Paradoxically, it is actually the absence of discussion to abate terrorism that delegitimizes and defeats these political movements. Walt’s focus on counterterrorism and circumvention of it harms liberal democracy, as well. The types of international “coalitions” and “foreign state” support to counter terrorism supported by Walt actually allow government officials to make radical judicial judgments on the criminality of terrorism that operate in the same “gray zone of illegality” terrorists exist in. We place aside the very values and justice liberal democracy functions on to protect ourselves from a non-existential threat. Walt even acknowledges this gray area of ethics, advocating for Washington to “downgrade its concern for human rights temporarily”. If we strip our nation of the values of democracy it is founded on, then are we not just doing the work of terrorists for them? The kind of counterterrorism Walt supports is not just unnecessary but also harmful, destructive, and potentially catastrophic for the very democratic system we strive to uphold.

Even if we concede that these threats to our nation are very real, the ways in which Walt proposes to change our dealings on the international stage are ineffective at best and a money sink at worst. Walt proposes to invest more resources and expand multilateral institutions such as NATO and the UN to better prevent state failure and combat terrorism. What Walt fails to address is that these institutions have become too costly and almost obsolete in comparison to unilateral action. The United States is the largest financial contributor to the UN with contributions even reaching $7.691 billion in 2010. But the UN has been largely ineffective, culminating in its inability to prevent the Rwanda genocide. NATO on the other hand hasn’t fared much better, allowing European countries to take advantage of American military assets without giving much in return.

Walt’s several missteps in his essay is further revealed in his incorrect predictions of the future. Walt’s proposal to focus on nation-building and counterterrorism didn’t take into account that new terrorist groups and roadblocks to diplomacy would arise such as ISIL and country’s unwillingness to balance power. His proposals are not only ineffective but also contributed to the continuing existence of the fear of terrorism. Ultimately there is no issue or even a need to change our stances on foreign policy in order to counter terrorism. Walt’s argument then, as Adam Gopnick says best, is merely “the amplification of the self-evident toward the creation of paralyzing, preemptive paranoia”.  

Bibliography

Bandow, Doug 2012. “NATO and Libya: It’s Time To Retire a Fading Alliance.” Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2012/01/02/nato-and-libya-its-time-to-retire-a-fading-alliance.

Boot, Max 2000. “Paving the Road to Hell: The Failure of U.N. Peacekeeping.” Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/review-essay/2000-03-01/paving-road-hell-failure-un-peacekeeping.

Chalk, Peter 1998. “The Response to Terrorism as a Threat to Liberal Democracy” in The Australian Journal of Politics and History. Australia: U. of Queensland 44 (3), 373–88.

Gopnik, Adam 2000. Paris to the Moon. New York: Random House.

Pape, Robert 2013. “Self-radicalization of Boston Suspects Fits a Familiar Profile – The Boston Globe.” Boston Globe. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/04/25/self-radicalization-boston-suspects-fits-familiar-profile/PSVu44FHcOaRLF6JGExUmN/story.html.

Schaefer, Brett 2012. “How Much Does the UN Cost Us?”. Heritage. http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2012/09/how-much-does-the-un-cost-us.

Schinkel, W. 2009. “On the concept of terrorism” in Contemporary Political Theory. 8(2), 176-198.

Waldman, Paul 2015. “Why Do We Freak out about Terrorism, Anyway? Here’s Why We Shouldn’t.” Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/12/10/why-do-we-freak-out-about-terrorism-anyway-heres-why-we-shouldnt/?utm_term=.3649073e29cb.

Zapotosky, Matt, and Mark Berman 2016. “Orlando Gunman Who Pledged Loyalty to ISIS Was ‘homegrown’ Extremist Radicalized Online, Obama Says.” Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/06/13/police-orlando-gunman-was-cool-and-calm-during-hostage-standoff/?utm_term=.39d9e8c22be7.