The gradual rise of radicalisation and in result, terrorism, sparked debate in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation on the subject of the prevention of future terrorist attacks, most prominently following the attacks on Westminster Bridge. So far, three areas of discussion have been covered, domestic terrorism, cyber terrorism, and the financing of terrorist groups.
The main causes of domestic and international terrorism have been identified by the committee: a lack of acceptance, financial restraints of those in poverty, and the spread of propaganda on the internet affecting impressionable minds. Firstly, a lack of acceptance of minority groups such as refugees or those of a religious minority may lead to ostracization. Resultantly, this would inevitably cause hate being garnered, and make a turn for radical acts very tempting. Next, those living in poverty or in dire straits may turn to radicalism in order to fund themselves, or most particularly, their families, as terrorist groups like ISIL may offer financial recompense for loyalty to the group. Lastly, in present time, children of the impressionable age are greatly exposed to technology, and most importantly, access to the internet. This poses a direct harm to children and teens, as they may easily access propaganda, as well as contact of organisations recruiting and preaching their radicalism.
While cyberterrorism is relatively new in these modern times, terrorists have already seized opportunities to take technological advances to their advantage, for example, the aforementioned use of the internet to spread their doctrine of radicalism. Many countries are vulnerable to attacks like these seeing as how technologically dependent the world now is. Acts of cyberterrorism can be simply defined as any act of Internet terrorism which includes deliberate and large-scale attacks and disruptions of computer networks using computer viruses, or physical attacks using malware, to attack individuals, governments and organizations. Past acts of cyberterrorism famously include the Morris Worm of 1988, and a slightly more recent cyber attack on the Estonian government in 2007. Currently, although not a solid resolution, NATO has been discussing ideas of an international mandate, encouraging the censorship of radical ideas being spread on the internet, be it religious, racial, or political.
Finally, in order to target the main support of international terrorism, the issue of cutting off funding and support from known terrorist organisations was discussed. It is well known that radicalist groups such as ISIS receive financial support from their oil production , as well as from states that support these terrorist groups. Regarding oil production and export, the committee immediately reached a consensus after realizing the infeasibility of implementing sanctions on countries depending on ISIS’ oil, and nearly pointlessness of sanctioning ISIS itself. International powers, mainly the United States of America and Canada, have proposed the idea of using military force in order to seize these oil rigs. Although perhaps not the most peaceful or the best option, the use of international forces to control these oil rigs would have an immediate and effective result in removing funding. As for terrorist organisations receiving funding from nations, the previous use of military force, or sanctions would be unlikely seeing as these tactics would severely infringe on each nation’s sovereignty, so discussion to find a resonable solution continues.
From the debate seen today, the Oxford Research Group has done its best to address and promote the discussion of the treatment of refugees, in addition open dialogue between each nation’s intelligence, and the importance of education in the short term, and the long term. Main issues raised surrounding refugees include their acceptance and transport to other nations, and aid in war-stricken zones. The Oxford Research Group advocated for providing aid to those stranded in war zones, as most of NATO have agreed on a limitation of refugee acceptance due to limited resources and immigrant screening. On the subject of open dialogue and the sharing of intel between nations, its importance must be stressed as it is very apparent the war on terror is a war that cannot be fought alone. With cooperation between members of NATO in shambles due to the development of an enforced international mandate, the sharing of aid, resources, and information on terrorists is a must. Ultimately, the most crucial factor of the war on radicalism must be fought with education. The use of informing the public is not solely the education of regular day-to-day citizens regarding the dangers of radicalism, but also of bolstering acceptance and multiculturalism. Another benefit of education is to help lift those living in poverty, which is the denomination most at-risk of turning to radicalism. The Oxford Research Group pushes for the use of state-sponsored events and workshops endorsing acceptance, a possible implementation of these ideas into school curriculum worldwide, and further aid for educational infrastructure of imperiled regions.
The main causes of domestic and international terrorism have been identified by the committee: a lack of acceptance, financial restraints of those in poverty, and the spread of propaganda on the internet affecting impressionable minds. Firstly, a lack of acceptance of minority groups such as refugees or those of a religious minority may lead to ostracization. Resultantly, this would inevitably cause hate being garnered, and make a turn for radical acts very tempting. Next, those living in poverty or in dire straits may turn to radicalism in order to fund themselves, or most particularly, their families, as terrorist groups like ISIL may offer financial recompense for loyalty to the group. Lastly, in present time, children of the impressionable age are greatly exposed to technology, and most importantly, access to the internet. This poses a direct harm to children and teens, as they may easily access propaganda, as well as contact of organisations recruiting and preaching their radicalism.
While cyberterrorism is relatively new in these modern times, terrorists have already seized opportunities to take technological advances to their advantage, for example, the aforementioned use of the internet to spread their doctrine of radicalism. Many countries are vulnerable to attacks like these seeing as how technologically dependent the world now is. Acts of cyberterrorism can be simply defined as any act of Internet terrorism which includes deliberate and large-scale attacks and disruptions of computer networks using computer viruses, or physical attacks using malware, to attack individuals, governments and organizations. Past acts of cyberterrorism famously include the Morris Worm of 1988, and a slightly more recent cyber attack on the Estonian government in 2007. Currently, although not a solid resolution, NATO has been discussing ideas of an international mandate, encouraging the censorship of radical ideas being spread on the internet, be it religious, racial, or political.
Finally, in order to target the main support of international terrorism, the issue of cutting off funding and support from known terrorist organisations was discussed. It is well known that radicalist groups such as ISIS receive financial support from their oil production , as well as from states that support these terrorist groups. Regarding oil production and export, the committee immediately reached a consensus after realizing the infeasibility of implementing sanctions on countries depending on ISIS’ oil, and nearly pointlessness of sanctioning ISIS itself. International powers, mainly the United States of America and Canada, have proposed the idea of using military force in order to seize these oil rigs. Although perhaps not the most peaceful or the best option, the use of international forces to control these oil rigs would have an immediate and effective result in removing funding. As for terrorist organisations receiving funding from nations, the previous use of military force, or sanctions would be unlikely seeing as these tactics would severely infringe on each nation’s sovereignty, so discussion to find a resonable solution continues.
From the debate seen today, the Oxford Research Group has done its best to address and promote the discussion of the treatment of refugees, in addition open dialogue between each nation’s intelligence, and the importance of education in the short term, and the long term. Main issues raised surrounding refugees include their acceptance and transport to other nations, and aid in war-stricken zones. The Oxford Research Group advocated for providing aid to those stranded in war zones, as most of NATO have agreed on a limitation of refugee acceptance due to limited resources and immigrant screening. On the subject of open dialogue and the sharing of intel between nations, its importance must be stressed as it is very apparent the war on terror is a war that cannot be fought alone. With cooperation between members of NATO in shambles due to the development of an enforced international mandate, the sharing of aid, resources, and information on terrorists is a must. Ultimately, the most crucial factor of the war on radicalism must be fought with education. The use of informing the public is not solely the education of regular day-to-day citizens regarding the dangers of radicalism, but also of bolstering acceptance and multiculturalism. Another benefit of education is to help lift those living in poverty, which is the denomination most at-risk of turning to radicalism. The Oxford Research Group pushes for the use of state-sponsored events and workshops endorsing acceptance, a possible implementation of these ideas into school curriculum worldwide, and further aid for educational infrastructure of imperiled regions.