War on Terrorism Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

War on Terrorism - Research Paper Example The invasion of Afghanistan is seen as the first action of this war, and initially involved forces from the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Afghani Northern Alliance. Since the initial invasion period, these forces have been augmented by troops from Germany, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. In 2005-2006, Canadian forces there will be increased to over 2000 troops. Canada also supported coalition efforts in Operation Archer, Operation Apollo, Operation Altair, and Operation Athena as part of the ongoing support for Operation Enduring Freedom. The Canadian government, however, does not recognize Iraq as part of the informal network of support for the attacks of 9/11 and as such, has declined to send Forces to that theatre of operations, although scores of them are on assignment to US Forces - mostly assisting in AWACS operations. (Richard Miniter. October 2005) Support for the United States cooled when America made clear its determination to invade Iraq in late 2002. The United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, South Korea, Poland, and Australia joined the "coalition of the willing", unconditionally supporting U.S.-led military action. Other countries, including Canada, Germany, France, Pakistan, and New Zealand opposed military action and blocked American attempts to pass a UN resolution explicitly backing military action. Countries that did not participate in the invasion but who have made themselves parts of the reconstruction and peacekeeping efforts include Ukraine, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Romania. Many of the 'Coalition of the willing' countries also have sent troops to Afghanistan, particular neighboring Pakistan which has disowned its earlier support for the Taliban and contributed tens of thousands of soldiers to the conflict. Support for the "War on Terrorism": Supporters assert that democracy in traditionally authoritarian countries has a transformative power that will add to peace and stability. Supporters downplay civilian casualties by arguing that many who live near terrorist cells are likely to support them materially, although this would imply that western tax-payers should be considered legitimate targets by those opposing western military action. Some argue that war could act as a deterrent against terrorists, demonstrating to potential recruits that they would face certain retribution. This argument may hold less water in reference to suicide terrorism, or when terrorists expect to become martyrs, but can be argued to deter such attacks by weakening the logistical base which provides martyrs with explosives and points them toward effective targets. (Gary C. Schroen. May 2005) Some analysts argue that democracy in the Middle East will elevate Islamists, including radicals, who will use democratic institutions to gain power but then implement their autocratic agenda. Democracy can also lead to instability. In short, things may get worse before they get better, which may be bad news for the US. Many however believe that in the long run increased democratic governance or the break up of static autocracies will lead to a better outcome than the status quo even if the emerging governments initially oppose U.S. policies. Some furthermore argue that any type of somewhat democratic government would find more common ground with the U.S. than the existing ones even if rapprochement was gradual and difficult.