Local and global standards: Interests moving states in fight against terrorism

Nahla Abdel Moneim

The emergence of terrorist groups on the international scene has been linked to the emergence of vocabulary such as caliphate, allegiance and geographical expansion with a view to annexing various countries under the reign of a terrorist organization.

Global and domestic movements in terrorism

On that common ground, and based on a single exclusionary ideology, all organizations and groups associated with terrorism are grappling with what the countries concerned with this scheme are in grave danger and push the coalition to fight terrorism in all its organizational forms.

Both sides of the game inadvertently shed light on the concept of “universal” versus “domestic” and the cooperation of neighboring countries, as well as its role in the effective access of terrorist groups to power.

Problem of goal not structure

The problem is the ultimate goal of the group, not its reality on the map, or even its historical construction, that is, groups that aim primarily to expand and export their experience to others; At home, it may not represent the same threat, but it has international relations, interests and understandings as well, and may be treated as a rebel movement, despite carrying out the methodology of Islamic radicalism.

The Taliban is a model

According to the vocabulary of the current political reality, the Taliban is a model for the violent and local radical group as well. It enjoys international attention, cooperation and political accommodation with neighboring countries, such as China, which announced in January 2019, its recognition of the movement as a political party in the country.

Iran also has its own relations with the movement, which always hosts its members; to maintain a role in neighboring countries and to protect against the rise of ISIS, which poses a threat to its sectarian project in the region, associated with the local hypothesis and its impact on acceptance.

On the other hand, the Taliban is currently negotiating with the United States, about the withdrawal of the latter from the country and the end of its war, which broke out 18 years ago mainly; to eliminate the movement itself, but realistic variables forced them to negotiate instead of continuing fighting, in addition to acquiescence to the demands of the movement.

Moreover, the Taliban at the beginning was the legitimate authority to govern in Afghanistan, but the United States moved to eliminate it and fight it in 2001 after 9/11, and the movement was involved in supporting al-Qaeda with international terrorist targets.

But there are other angles to the contrary, such as the implications of power, ie the strong presence and control of the movement on the ground along with the social construction of the fragile state at the social, security and political levels.

Regional cooperation: Interests first

Ali Bakr, a researcher on extremist groups at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, said the gains made by the Taliban were based mainly on the US failure to resolve its military battle with the organization that controls much of the country, and with the spread of tribes in Afghanistan.

Bakr added that the thesis of globalization and localization cast a shadow on the countries dealing with the Taliban file. The statements expressed by the group expressed its intention not to interfere in the affairs of neighboring countries, and that its experience is not for external export, and that it is limited only to domestic affect.