Why did the terrorist attacks of 2001 and the ones before happen?

Why did the terrorist attacks of 2001 and the ones before happen?
Name
Course number
Instructor’s name
Date
Terrorism has been defined as the carefully planned use of force in a violent and intimidating way against masses of people. Terrorism coerces governments to concede to political and ideological demands. It attracts publicity and media attention, destabilizes polity and causes serious damages to the economy (Krieger and Meieerricks 4).Terrorists targeted the US on September 11, 2001, the Khobar towers complex near a US military base in Saudi Arabia1996 bombing of, Kenya and Tanzania’s US embassies in 1998 by Alqaeda terrorists and USS Cole in the Persian Gulf in 2000 by Alqaeda (Kondrasuk and Pamplin 645). Subsequent attacks have followed in Casablanca, Istanbul, Riyadh, Madrid, London and Mumbai among other places. These multiple attacks have resulted in the need to better understand the causes of terrorism (Pilat 171). An understanding of the why the attacks happened is essential in determining counterterrorism measures.
Terrorism is a complex phenomenon that may not be explained on the basis of a single cause or a set of causes. Many construe that poverty, socio-economic, political and psychological factors are linked to terrorism. They indicate that terrorists may be ‘madmen’ with psychological predispositions for terror and that religious fanaticism, political discontent, alienation and marginalization may be the causes of terrorism. However, there is no empirical evidence to support such claims. They also cite national and international structural inequalities although they are inadequate to explain and predict terrorist attacks (Pilat).
Globalization, modernization and socioeconomic and cultural disruptions may be exploited by terrorists but they are insufficient in explaining the occurrence of terrorism (Pilat 173). In as much as these factors may not adequately explain why terrorist attacks happen, there is a strong correlation between them and terrorism. This paper outlines the conditions that may determine terrorism. These conditions include economic deprivation, socio-economic and demographic strain, political and institutional instability, identity and cultural strain, and global and political order (Pilat 9). It also illustrates that the the more direct reason why terrorists in particular Al qaeda attacked the US was because the CIA was ineffective in its prediction about terrorism. It failed to predict that Al qaeda was radicalising people against the west, that the imminent threat was real and that Al Qaeda had enough capacity and resources to attack the US.
Discrepancy between individuals that arises from relative deprivation of resources in the economic distributive processes has been linked to terrorism (Krieger and Meieerricks). Poor economic structures stimulate frustration among the deprived and it increases the possibility of violence. Countries that produce terrorist organizations recruit followers easily and at low costs. It is noted that lack of non-violent economic activities organizations stimulates an upsurge in followers that fill the ranks of terrorist organizations due to low opportunity costs of violence. This indicates that economic deprivation triggers more terrorism because it incites frustration, which lowers violence’s opportunity cost (Krieger and Meieerricks).
The rich countries become targets of terrorism when the poorer countries assess global economic deprivation. The perpetrators are those who believe that they have been disadvantaged by the status quo and the victims are those who they perceive as beneficiaries of the status quo. Terrorist attacks are thus an expression of the dissatisfaction felt by terrorist groups that reside in poor countries (Bird, Blomberg and Hess 260). Poor economic and institutional conditions trigger emergence of terror particularly in a situation where a certain country presents low opportunities for to participate in political and economic life in the country (Krieger and Meieerricks). Some importers of terrorism include Israel, US, France and Great Britain. These are the rich democracies while the poor and undemocratic countries that have not engaged competitively in globalization are the main exporters of terrorism (Bird, Blomberg and Hess 261).
Modernization is an aspect of the socio-economic and demographic strain that determines terrorism. Modernization encompasses aspects such as economic growth, new communication technologies and lifestyles, and globalization. Countries may adopt new ideas to foster economic growth that restructures the economy. This creates grievances among the losers who are negatively impacted by globalization by for instance by losing employment (Krieger and Meieerricks). Terrorists are known to take advantage of the aggrieved losers that are churned through modernization.
Terrorist organizations capitalize on the economic impact of modernization to people (Krieger and Meieerricks). The negative economic impacts lead to dissatisfaction and adoption of new social patterns. Examples of such demographic issues include population growth and the socioeconomic issues may include low education levels. Terrorism is more likely to stem from countries with large sizes of youth population with limited access to education. There have been reports indicating that higher secondary school enrollment reduces the chances of terrorism production (Azam and Thelen 378).
It has been noted that countries that experience political and institutional order through democratic regimes allow channels for communicating dissent in non-violent means but are unable to counter hard counter terrorism production. However, these democratic regimes are less likely to engage in terrorist attacks. In autocratic regimes, perpetrators resort to terrorism as a means of expressing dissatisfaction because they feel that there is no superior alternative (Bird, Blomberg and Hess).
The government may suppress opposition views by banning civil liberties of free speech and association. In an international setting, the perpetrators may feel that their views are not represented in the global organizations. Exporters of terrorism include countries such as Iran and Cuba, which have considerably autocratic regimes (Bird, Blomberg and Hess 261). Democratic institutions reduce conflict by offering cost effective non-violent conflict resolution and there is little evidence linking liberal societies to terrorism. Powerful autocratic governments cause more terrorism because oppression produces hostility that increases the payoff of terrorism (Pilat 175).
Political transformation and instability as seen in failing states and failed states has been indicated to fuel terrorism occurrence. For instance in the Middle east, there are reports that indicate that state failure and political instability has led to increased terrorism production. This is because political instability teaches violent behavior making it less costly. The failed states become breeding grounds for terrorists (Bakker and Kessels 94). For instance, the Alshabaab from Somalia has been launching terrorist’s attacks around East Africa in the recent years because Somalia has been a failed state. The terrorism incidents have reduced significantly since the reestablishment of a functional government in 2012.
Identity conflicts and cultural clashes have been linked to transnational terrorism. It has been indicated that countries with more homogenous populations generate less terrorism and that the countries that have more religious fractions generate less terrorism (Krieger and Meieerricks 20). Although the linkages are weak, the hypothesis has been maintained. There are reports indicating that high ethnic tension is associated with higher levels of terrorism production (Krieger and Meieerricks 18).
Disparities in worldviews where groups that have different identities pursue different policies may trigger terrorism. The inferior groups may engage in terrorist attacks to voice their worldview and shift material outcomes in their favo...