The Concept of the Political

As a counterterrorism officer my moral duty is to protect the residents of my state from terrorism attacks and the national security of US. Therefore, I am under no obligation but to ensure I fulfill the role that I have been assigned. I am the senior counterterrorism officer in California State where there is a high percentage of Arab American citizens and immigrants. Thus over the last couple of decades it has been difficult to detect terrorists. Furthermore, infiltrating such a community has proved to be difficult thereby providing a loophole for the increase in terrorist activities.Infiltrating the Arab American Community To curb this demise I will commission FBI agents to act as my spies by posing as Muslim worshippers in the California mosques. This decision may be perceived as a violation of human rights and the freedom of privacy enjoyed by other citizens. However, in the actual fact this initiative is among the criminal responsibilities that are bestowed on counterterrorism officer. Moreover, it is a counterintelligence activity that ensures protection of the US national security by providing important information to the FBI body and the government.The rights to perform counterintelligence activities have been governed by the National security of 1947 which was amended in 2004 by the establishment of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. Furthermore, the commissioned FBI agents will not commit any wrong doing offences (Uwe, 2007). I will also employ informant to live amongst the community. The informant will mainly be ex-US military officers whose credentials are remarkable and stimulate the required standards.I prefer using ex-military officers because they are competent, trained to serve the nation thus will thoroughly understand the importance of their assignment and the need for them to keep their identity in discretion. The agents will regularly be monitored to prevent the development of discrepancy behaviors against ethical and mo ral norms. I will also make use of biometric fingerprint procedure for all travelers leaving and entering the California state. It may be argued that this tactic will detain people unnecessarily thereby wasting their time and subjecting them to measures and challenges that are unjustifiable.However, the initiative will enable the California Homeland Security Department to prevent identity theft, use of fraudulent documents and terrorists from gaining access to the state thus enhancing the national security and safety of California residents (Schmitt, 2007). The Status, Rights and Protections offered to Culprits of Terrorism In an attempt of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of counterterrorism an executive order authorizing the interrogation and trial of foreign terrorist suspects and illegal combatants by a special military tribunal was passed in 2001.Therefore, an ex-American citizen captured in the United States in the act of terrorism should be considered as an illegal enemy combatant. Thus I would not hesitate to hand the culprit to the jurisdiction of the military commission of the United States, an act that will be in accordance with the (Military Commissions Act (MCA) of 2006 that was passed by the Congress introducing the concept of illegal combatant into US legislation. Furthermore, the concept of illegal combatant enemies has been accepted by other nations who have willingly handed over their sovereignty in this context to the US (Gill & Sliedregt, 2005).The establishment of the above legislations withdrew all the protections that were accorded to ex-American citizens. The same applies to foreign nationals caught engaging in terrorism in US, American citizens fighting American forces abroad and foreign nationals that are non-military officials fighting American forces abroad. The above are all illegal combatant enemies of the state and thus also deserve to be tried before the jurisdiction of the military commission without the provision of Habeas corpus rights.The Habeas Corpus is a provision given to detained culprits to appeal for their release incase of being detained unlawfully. The above subjects are liable to torture in the event of collecting information that would increase the efficiency of the government and military to provide the US state national security. Therefore, I would fully support the idea of implementing torture as a method of extracting useful information to such culprits in an attempt of protecting the California residents (US Congress Joint Resolution, 2001). Perspectives Concerning Just WarJust war is perpetuated by states in an attempt of protecting themselves from aggressive attack from other nations. However, for just war to be justifiable it should be used as a last resort problem of solving the conflict that exists that is after all non-violent mechanisms of resolving conflicts are exhausted. Just wars should only be perpetuated by bodies that are recognized by the society as legitimate. A just war should be initiated if the presumed end results are beneficial where its success is guaranteed to prevent death and suffering of innocent people in accordance to moral vices.The death of civilians can only be justified if they were accidentally killed by being in the vicinity of the military targets. Therefore, just wars should initiate long lasting peace between the nations that were under conflict. Furthermore, states are not supposed to use force when initiating just wars and in instances where such force must be implemented it should not exceed the injury or suffering caused. The war on terrorism can thus be classified as a just war because it adheres to the above principles.However, it can cease to be a just war if its goal is to spread terror, subject war on a non-state organization and if it aims at killing and hurting civilians (Fotion, 2007). Anti Americanism involves the negative aspect that individuals and state have over the political, economic, social and cu ltural values of US. Anti Americanism has adversely affected the national security of US due to introduction of foreign hostility towards the US state for instance terrorism, thus curbing the effective attainment of stipulated US policy goals.Anti Americanism also affects the ability of US to conduct businesses abroad. This is unethical and thus not justifiable therefore individuals that perpetuate the stimulation of violent acts against the American state should be held accountable for their actions and thus are liable to stand trial before the military commission. The US government has a right to protect the national security of the country by dealing with schools, mosques and charities that indirectly support terrorism while actually not directly engaging in the terrorism activities.The government prosecutes such individuals or organization with the aim of eliminating the terrorism concept and support that the individuals and organizations offer (US Congress Joint Resolution, 200 1). USA PATRIOT Act The enactment of the USA PATRIOTIC ACT after the 9/11 attack has substantially reduced terrorism in United States because the surveillance and investigating powers of the US law enforcement officers was increased especially with respect to internet use.However, if I were in Congress I would vote for the renewal of the Act to amend it. This is because the Act was enacted in haste without being subjected to Congress debate and house report to declare the consent of Senators. This fact resulted to the omission of a balance between civil liberty and stipulated legislations (US Congress Joint Resolution, 2001). Word Count: 1190 Reference List Fotion, N. (2007). War and Ethics: Just War Theory. New York: Continuum. Gill, T. & Sliedregt, E.(2005). Guantanamo Bay: A Reflection on the Legal Status and Rights of Unlawful Enemy Combatants. The Utrecht Law Review, 1 (1). Retrieved on July, 6th, 2009 from http://www. utrechtlawreview. org. Schmitt, C. (2007). The Concept of t he Political. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. U. S. Congress Joint Resolution (2001). Authorization for Use of Military Force. Public Law, 107(40), 115 Stat. 224. Uwe. S. (2007). On the Ethics of War and Terrorism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.