The paper "Narcoterrorism in Afghanistan" is an outstanding example of an essay on law. Narcoterrorism is the act of using money got from the sale of narcotics to finance terrorist activities. This is something that has become very common in Afghanistan which is one of the leading countries in the world in opium production. The financiers of terrorism activities that are performed by Al Qaeda are those who grow the opium.
Ban on opium growth was lifted in 2001 and this made the increase of opium production in the global from around 70% to an average of 92% (Jalalzai 2006). Terrorism activities on the other hand also increased in the country leading to a decline in security. Increase in insecurity and lack of proper governance over the years provided a good base for the Narcoterrorism.
The Taliban who seem to be in charge of Afghanistan now offer protection to the drug lords to ensure they are not disturbed in their trade of the illicit drug. In turn, the drug lords pay the Taliban mover 70% of their income for the protection (Jalalzai 2006). This form of trade and negotiation has served to ensure the smooth running and flourishing of the Narcoterrorism in the country and it is, therefore, a difficult war to fight.
Countries like the United States and NATO have been trying in vain for a while to fight the illegal drug trade and also the terrorism. It is difficult because of the threats and terrorism retaliations from the Taliban and Al Qaeda. One of the retaliations was though the world trade center bombings in September 2001 and also subway bombings in London by suicide bombers from Afghanistan.
Significance of the Death of Osama bin Laden
On 1st May 2011, the whole world was presented with the shocking news of the death of Osama bin Laden the leader of Al Qaeda (Rollins 2011). The death was received differently in various parts of the world and it had different significance to individuals. The differences depending on the countries and what impact Osama bin Laden had on them. Different groups of individuals also reacted differently to that news.
In the United States, for example, there was jubilation and celebration was in the air. People left their homes to celebrate together in the streets. His death marked a kind of payback for the deaths that Al Qaeda caused in the country in September of 2001 through the bombings. His death signified a new beginning for some of those who were directly affected by the bombings.
In countries like Afghanistan where most people viewed Osama as a leader and role model of many suicide bombers and other terrorists, it marked one of the saddest days of their lives. This is because they had lost their leader. The death, therefore, signified a blow to their organization and some even committed suicide and bombings as a way to react to the news (Rollins 2011).
The reaction in Pakistan where Osama had been residing until his demise was almost the same as that in Afghanistan though not so open and obvious due to fear of the Western countries. His death marked the end of a long friendship which had been established long ago and the loss of a hero. The Pakistanis were in partnership in the Taliban and Al Qaeda though not so directly and hence the death was like a loss of a fellow Pakistani.
The legitimacy of the US-led “War on Terror”
The end of World War II and cold war led to the weakening of the Soviet Union and Europe and America benefitted hence becoming a superpower. On achieving this newly acquired status, America started using military force and power to impose its ideologies in other nations and especially those that seemed to have the potential of rising to be superpowers in future (Saull and Colas 2010).
In order to cover its tracts and justify its use of military force over these sovereign nations, it masked its activities with the term “war on terror.” The war was and is still is being directed towards these countries and until the time when America will not feel threatened again by a country will it move from it and state that it has won the war against terror as is currently the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan and soon moving to Iran.
The above therefore indicate that it has no legitimacy over the “War against Terror” because it is fighting no war. Other European nations do not join in these “War” for long and pull out as soon as they discover the real reason for fighting these wars. These nations are however starting to retaliate on their abuse and infringement of their sovereignty and if this continues, it may lead to another world war fought by the use of nuclear energy.
Strict measures should be taken by all nations of the world to end this so-called legitimacy on war against terrorism as it may finally cause a loss to all the nations. Sovereign countries should be let alone to rule themselves and practice their sovereignty. The actions America is carrying out may be interpreted as a form of neocolonialism in these countries. The retaliation by these countries usually ends up harming passive participants of the war including US citizens and the allies of the US through bombings.