Terrorism and Emergency Management

Article 1: “The War on Terrorism and the Problem of Military Intervention:
Using Just War Theory to Frame Foreign Policy Debate”

The above article under review broadly examines the ethical implications of the War on
Terror and military intervention. Specifically, the book examines how just war theory can
assess these actions’ morality. Therefore, the article begins by providing an overview of just
war theory and its history. It then applies this theory to the War on Terror, looking at the
initial intervention in Afghanistan and the more recent intervention in Iraq.
Particularly, the text argues that military intervention is only justified if it meets
specific criteria, such as being in self-defence or being authorized by a legitimate authority
(Bureau, 2022). It also discusses the problem of killing innocent civilians in military
interventions and how the U.S. can avoid these scenarios in the future.
Just war theory is a set of ethical principles that determine when military intervention
is morally justifiable. The most important principles are those of proportionality (the benefits
of intervention must outweigh the costs) and last resort (military force should only be used
when all other options have failed). Military intervention is only morally permissible if it
meets the criteria of just war theory. This means that the intervention must be motivated by a
just cause (such as self-defence or the defense of innocent civilians), and that it must be
conducted in a way that is proportional and last resort. If an intervention does not meet these
criteria, then it is not morally justifiable, and the military force used in such an intervention is
considered to be unjust.
Additionally, self-defence and international politics are the two countervailing impulses
that address the issue of terrorism. Further, it is evident that the U.S. leadership is faced with
a political and moral challenge based on how they should craft a foreign policy protecting
Americans from terrorism, avoiding transgression of international law by military crusades,
and showing respect for international law (Bureau, 2022). However, it is important for

3
policymakers two take both causes of action into consideration as they formulate foreign
policy.
Overall, terrorism war and the issue of Military Intervention provide a more broadly
detailed and thoughtful analysis of the ethical implications of the War on Terror and military
intervention. The article is a good read for people interested in this topic and also for the
government bureaucrats who address terrorism as it analyses the two scenarios that lead to
action when dealing with terrorists.
Article 2: “Combating Terrorism: Increased Oversight and Accountability
Needed over Pakistan Reimbursement Claims for Coalition Support Funds”
The United States has given Pakistan billions of dollars in Coalition Support Funds
(CSF) since 2002, but there is little transparency or accountability over how Pakistan spends
the money. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) report
found that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) lacks adequate oversight of Pakistan’s
reimbursement claims and that Pakistan has been over-reimbursed by at least $170 million
("Combating Terrorism: Increased Oversight and Accountability Needed over Pakistan
Reimbursement Claims for Coalition Support Funds", 2022)Therefore, the report
recommends that the DOD improve its oversight of Pakistan’s CSF claims by conducting
audits of Pakistani expenditures.
The U.S. Congress should also ensure that Pakistan is held accountable for its use of
CSF funds. The new guidance demands that reimbursement claims of CSF should contain
assessable information indicating the increasing nature of support, authentication that the
Pakistan government offered the service or support, and invoices and any other documents
that support the calculations after every annual reimbursement.
The Department of Defense (DOD) is responsible for reimbursing Pakistan for its
counterterrorism efforts through the Coalition Support Funds (CSF). However, there is

4
currently no effective system to track how Pakistan spends these funds (Bureau, 2022). As a
result, there is a risk that the money is not being used for its intended purpose. To improve
oversight and accountability, the DOD should implement a system to track how Pakistan
spends the CSF reimbursement funds. Furthermore, the DOD should require Pakistan to
provide detailed documentation on how the funds are used.
Finally, the


Place your order