Terrorism is an act of using force or violence to realize religious, ideological or political benefits where it has become the major world threat and therefore illegitimate the Anti-terrorism Laws in various jurisdictions. Terrorism is also considered to be a war crime in the laws of war when it targets non-contends, such as neutral military employees, civilians or enemies’ inmates of war. A broad assortment of political has practiced radicalism to further their intentions which have led to extensive use of militant forces and loss of human life (Laqueur, 2001) .
The US government, like any other government in the world, has different policies to counter any crime termed as terrorism. The paper is examining the US response to terror and its operations in Afghanistan since the invention by exposing the misunderstanding, missteps, and understand the fallacies of the US tactics in Afghanistan. There are some lessons the universe learns from the design of the US in Afghanistan and Pakistan and conclude the possible ways achieving security and long-term stability in war-affected countries like the Afghanistan. The strategies are achievable if there is a focus on the different strategies the US adopted in the terror war and their achievements (Perry, 2015) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The United States labeled terrorism a universal rival against whom all the sophisticated countries would have battled when it declared confrontation against horror on October 7, 2001.The primary target of the US was al-Qaeda, which is a militant Islamist worldwide organization. The US claims that the base of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan has a protection of the Taliban regime thus the US airstrikes were aiming at the al-Qaeda bases. Since then the campaign of the US in Afghanistan has implemented a lot of tactics which has shifted the counterterrorism strategy focusing on the enemy in the battlefield to counterinsurgency approach which concentrates on the population of the enemy. Though the US has confronted the al-Qaeda for eight years the militant group is far from being overpowered, and the Taliban has a strong influence, Afghanistan is neither secure nor stable, and terrorism remains a regular threat to international security. The use has achieved progress in the Afghanistan, but it does not understand the negative outcomes of the intervention and the proper strategy the US could have applied (Malik, 2008) .
The new strategies and tactics the US employs in Afghanistan are due to treats terrorism exposes to the country and the need to achieve the primary objective” disrupting the use of Afghanistan as a fanatical base of actions, and the confrontation to the offensive capability of the Taliban administration.” The US builds a comprehensive and efficient strategy counter the Taliban regime and al-Qaeda in the Pakistan and the whole of Afghanistan by combining law enforcement, the immobilizing of the financial assets, regular drives for the international support, and the military actions. Also, the use had an immediate and consistent advantage as compared to al-Qaeda because it involved the tactical aircraft with numerous sophisticated weapons on the battlefield. Moreover, anti-Taliban groups support the US militants in the battlefield weakens the al-Qaeda and the Taliban forces because the members of al-Qaeda had to shelter in the mountains in the eastern section of Afghanistan (Armitage, 2010) .
The US recorded a short-term victory after it applied the strategy of a mutual network-centric with an opponent-centric approach. The focus of the plan was to attack a trickle of major targets such as the Taliban training bases and communication lines which were insufficient in attaining long-term victory. The US changed the counterterrorism strategies in 2003 due to the upsurge pf the Taliban attacks on the US forces. The new plan was founded on counterinsurgency actions o corrode the Taliban’s widespread support and emerged strength, which converted to be the driving vigor in Afghanistan. The central principle stimulating the new plan was the recognizing of the Afghan citizens as the midpoint in the counterinsurgency. The main aim of the latest strategy was to maintain widespread support and prevent the coalition of people with the Taliban and al-Qaeda members (Cigar, 2011) .
The US uses strict strategies to counter terrorism in the world particularly in the Pakistan and Afghanistan but after eight years of the invention, the US Allies and their forces have achieved neither political stability nor security. Despite the quick downfall of the Taliban administration in 2001, the local individuals feel alienated by the Afghan government since It perceiving to be weak and corrupt. Also, the methods applied by the US and its Allies did not lead to positive outcomes because the counterinsurgency campaign was not prompt and efficient and the US used massive airstrike forces. Besides, the lack of contact between the American troops and the local population lead to the nullification of the militant’s achievements and efforts (Crews, 2008) .
The US has to ensure that Afghanistan is stable so has to prevent the Taliban and al-Qaeda from re-stabling safe docks in the country since, stability is strictly connected to a reliable, efficient, and robust government that is not available in Afghanistan. Moreover, the Afghanistan National Army(ANA) is not able to maintain security in the nation by itself, but it depends on the military support from other countries to aid in order maintaining and delivering services to the Afghan citizens. Furthermore, the people of Afghanistan believe that the political instability the country is experiencing is due to the war of US against the Taliban regime (Suhrke, 2011) .
The efforts of the US to build a stable government in the Afghanistan are merely succeeding because the US does not understand the traditions, culture and the institutions of the Afghan people. Also, it 's hard to establish a strong central government in the country because residents were using the system of governance based on the clan or tribe of individuals. The efforts of the US to fight terrorism in Pakistan will be useful if the government will establish a decisional body with members elected by ethnic groups and villages. The chances to be represented fairly by true representatives of different subgroups could make the local population feel secure and develop a will to coordinate with the central government. The local citizens were supporting the Taliban because they were desperate enough to exert power that the central government lacked implying that, the reforms to counter corruption in the government and its incompetence are essential to building an acceptable alternate of Taliban regime (Rashid, 2013) .
The primary focus of the US in Pakistan and Afghanistan should be on maintaining the accomplishments through an obligation to the local citizens since the use of extensive air strikes there are cases of civilian causalities which raises suspicion and anger among the Pakistan members. The use of air attacks is resulting to zero causalities of the US forces, but they are not active in the process of mollifying the nation since there is no guarantee of stability once the strike seizes. Besides, the US government claims that airstrikes are only used when the troops are in danger of which it’s hard to determine whether the troops are in danger or not. Furthermore, The US has to train its forces on how to connect effectively with the citizens and on how to be the part of the society so as to be accepted as pleasant presence. The implementation of the plan requires a lot of time and resources (Mirza, 2007) .
The US government has adopted various strategies to fight terrorism in the world particularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which has led to a complicated situation in the affected areas. The areas are lacking a stable and trustworthy government, the rebellious of local individuals to the Us troops and lack of alliance among the surrounding countries almost quashed the military outcomes in overthrowing the marginalized al-Qaeda and Taliban regime (Fair, 2008) .
The US government has not solely take the responsibilities of fighting terrorism because terrorism is a worldwide treat and not a one nation’s gift. The Us is using a lot of military force to counter terrorism despite the existence of other methods that are efficient and less costly. Furthermore, the Use of Military forces upsurges the level of human right abuses and civilian casualties which leads to lack of trust in the US government and its allies. Moreover, unity is the key strategy to fight terrorism, and the states have to ensure that their citizens are well informed about the effects of terrorism and the various ways to curb terror.
References
Armitage, R. L., Berger, S. R., Markey, D. S., & Council on Foreign Relations. (2010). U.S. strategy for Pakistan and Afghanistan: Independent task force report . New York: Council on Foreign Relations.
Cigar, N. L., Kramer, S. E., & Marine Corps University (U.S.). (2011). Al-Qaida after ten years of war: A global perspective of successes, failures, and prospects . Quantico, Va: Marine Corps University Press.
Crews, R. D., & Tarzi, A. (2008). The Taliban and the crisis of Afghanistan . Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Fair, C. C., & Chalk, P. (2006). Fortifying Pakistan: The role of U.S. internal security assistance . Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Laqueur, W. (2001). A history of terrorism . New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction.
Malik, H. (2008). US relations with Afghanistan and Pakistan: The imperial dimension . Oxford [England: Oxford University Press
Mirza, R. M. S. (2007). The rise and fall of the American empire: A re-interpretation of history, economics and philosophy : 1492-2006 . Victoria, B.C: Trafford.
Perry, W. L., & Kassing, D. (2015). Toppling the Taliban: Air-Ground Operations in Afghanistan, October 2001-June 2002 .
Rashid, A. (2013). Pakistan on the brink: The future of America, Pakistan, and Afghanistan . London: Penguin.
Suhrke, A. (2011). When more is less: The international project in Afghanistan . London: C. Hurst.
