This blog …

... supports Professor William Snyder's sections of National Security Law, Counterterrorism Law, and Prosecuting Terrorists at the Syracuse University College of Law.

Foreign Policy Contributors Favor a Less Military-Centric Approach to U.S. Counterterrorism Efforts

Phillip Carter and Deborah Pearlstein recently published an article in Foreign Policy arguing, “[W]e’ve already figured out how to win the legal war on terrorism.”

And how, exactly, is that? According to Carter and Pearlstein, the United States should use military force only when “necessary and appropriate,” and, in most instances, should instead rely on diplomacy, intelligence, and law enforcement.

As the authors emphasize, this less military-centric method has proven successful in recent cases where the U.S. chose to arrest alleged terrorists overseas rather than use military force against them, citing specifically the cases of Sulaiman Abu Ghayth and Ahmed Abdul Kadir Warsame. Moreover, Carter and Pearlstein argue, the Justice Department’s record is more impressive than that of the Department of Defense in terms of prosecution and conviction of terrorists.

The article continues to say:

This . . . approach works precisely because the military plays a supporting, not a leading, role. A number of foreign intelligence and law enforcement agencies are far more likely to cooperate with their American intelligence and law enforcement counterparts than they are with the U.S. military. . . . Capturing individual terrorists and treating them all like warfighters . . . empowers them, feeds their propaganda efforts, and enables them to attract funds and recruits in their efforts against us.

You can read the full Foreign Policy article here.

Share this article:

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.