DISEC Disarmament and International Security
Committee: United Nations Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC) Topic A: The use of asymmetric warfare by terrorist groups in Northern Africa Written by: Salma González, Omar Tamez and Dayannara González
I. Committee Background
The United Nations Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC), which is also known as the First Committee, was created in 1945. It is one of six central committees related to the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN). It primarily focuses on seven main topics: “nuclear weapons, other weapons of mass destruction, outer space, conventional weapons, regional disarmament and security, other disarmament measures and international security, and the disarmament machinery” (Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations, 2017). The committee is based at the UN Headquarters in New York City. It meets every September to November, although special meetings can be organized at any time. The sessions are divided into three parts: general debate, thematic discussions, and action plan drafts. DISEC reports its agreements and findings to the Disarmament Commission (UNDC) and the Conference on Disarmament (CD) (First Committee, UN, 2019). Currently, the committee is focused on addressing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the arms race in outer space, and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (NTI, 2018).
II. Topic Information
A) History of the Topic
Asymmetric warfare (also known as asymmetric engagement) is a type of war where the military capabilities of belligerent (an individual, country, or group that acts in a hostile manner) powers are unequal. It often involves the weaker force using unconventional tactics to create a significant psychological impact on the larger combatant (Sudhir, CLAWS Journal, 2008). Some examples of this type of warfare are guerrilla warfare and terrorist attacks. Guerrilla warfare occurs between a small armed force of rebels or partisans and a conventional army. Terrorist attacks, such as bombings and hijackings, are also considered to be a type of asymmetric warfare because they involve a smaller group attacking a stronger one. The first documented use of asymmetric warfare was in the 6th century BCE when the much smaller and weaker Scythians defeated the Persian empire. It has since been used as a military tactic in multiple conflicts around the world such as the American Revolution, the Vietnam War and in the Israel-Palestine conflict (Sexton, Encyclopædia Britannica, 2016).
Northern Africa is a region of the African continent that stretches from Morocco to Egypt. Major countries in this area include Algeria, Sudan, Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, and
Egypt. These countries all share a common ethnic, cultural and linguistic identity (ResearchGate, 2019). According to Quartz, it is one of the “most terrorism-prone regions of the world” (Romero, Quartz, 2018). The major terrorist groups in Northern Africa are the Islamic State (IS), Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Terrorism has increased within the region due to a variety of factors including ineffective governments and corrupt political systems, the exclusion of minority groups from political power, and a lack of economic opportunities (Government of Canada, 2018). According to researcher Ezeh Chinonso Kennedy, “The absence of local authority can bring about the growth of safe havens for powerful non-state elements, such as organized crime, human and drug traffickers, and violent extremists. As a result of these fertile circumstances, irregular warfare can be expected to grow and develop into widespread conflicts.” Additionally, religion can be part of the factors which have contributed to the rise in irregular or asymmetric warfare (Chinonso Kennedy, EuroAfrica Media Network, 2017).
When used by terrorist groups in Northern Africa, asymmetric warfare can have a wide range of impacts on economic growth, investment, and tourism. According to The Oxford Handbook of Africa and Economics, terrorism has the “tendency to physically destroy productive assets as well as redirect resources away from productive uses.” This includes the loss of productivity of those injured, the loss of physical capital, a reduction
in the gross domestic product (GDP) and the loss of foreign direct investment. Job loss leads to widespread unemployment which creates poverty and is used as a tool for recruitment by terrorist groups (Elu and Price, The Oxford Handbook of Africa and Economics, 2015). However, it is not just about the loss of economic output that is affected by terrorism in the area. The 2018 Global Terrorism Index found that terrorist attacks have become more frequent and deadlier in Northern Africa. For example, Egypt had one of the deadliest attacks in North Sinai. Around 311 people died when members of the Islamic State group detonated an explosive device and opened fire on the Al- Rawda mosque. In Libya, 141 people were killed when the Misrata Brigades group attacked Brak al-Shati Airbase near the city of Brak (Institute for Economic and Peace, 2018). The impact of these attacks is also a form of asymmetric warfare. Smaller groups can target a country’s expansion and growth, while also spreading fear among its citizens.
These groups frequently utilize asymmetric warfare as a tactic in order to combat larger and well-equipped government forces, as well as to promote fear among the population. Common asymmetric tactics deployed by terrorist groups are suicide bombings, ambushes and the planting of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in well- travelled areas. These types of attacks which require few combatants, usually result in few casualties, and can be conducted by individuals with little-to-no training. Furthermore, the terrain is often used as a force multiplier by terrorist groups in busy cities or forested
in the gross domestic product (GDP) and the loss of foreign direct investment. Job loss leads to widespread unemployment which creates poverty and is used as a tool for recruitment by terrorist groups (Elu and Price, The Oxford Handbook of Africa and Economics, 2015). However, it is not just about the loss of economic output that is affected by terrorism in the area. The 2018 Global Terrorism Index found that terrorist attacks have become more frequent and deadlier in Northern Africa. For example, Egypt had one of the deadliest attacks in North Sinai. Around 311 people died when members of the Islamic State group detonated an explosive device and opened fire on the Al- Rawda mosque. In Libya, 141 people were killed when the Misrata Brigades group attacked Brak al-Shati Airbase near the city of Brak (Institute for Economic and Peace, 2018). The impact of these attacks is also a form of asymmetric warfare. Smaller groups can target a country’s expansion and growth, while also spreading fear among its citizens.
These groups frequently utilize asymmetric warfare as a tactic in order to combat larger and well-equipped government forces, as well as to promote fear among the population. Common asymmetric tactics deployed by terrorist groups are suicide bombings, ambushes and the planting of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in well- travelled areas. These types of attacks which require few combatants, usually result in few casualties, and can be conducted by individuals with little-to-no training. Furthermore, the terrain is often used as a force multiplier by terrorist groups in busy cities or forested
areas. The ground in cities offers terrorist groups the ability to blend in with the crowd and multiple escape routes via public transport. Combat in forests allows terrorist groups to hide and is difficult for large militaries to operate in as space is often limited (McKillop, Global Research, 2014). For example, in January 2019, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb ambushed a well-armed patrol of UN peacekeepers in Mali, killing ten soldiers and injuring 25 more. This attack happened in a remote area where the peacekeepers were unable to maneuver their armoured vehicles easily, and as a result, were unable to escape (The Jerusalem Post, 2019).
Governments in Northern Africa have deployed multiple tactics to combat the use of asymmetric warfare by terrorist groups. Countries such as Egypt have begun to adopt a strategy called the “Indian method” which is named after tactic deployed by India’s military to counter extremist activities within its territory. This method involves countries taking offensive and defensive measures. The aggressive measures include enhancing troop mobility, organizing soldiers into small, agile teams, updating weapons and machinery and building enemy profiles which enable the military to understand the enemy psychologically. Some defensive measures are adopting technological force multipliers, using propaganda to cause an internal collapse of the enemy and expanding information networks. Mostly, to stop terrorist groups from using asymmetric warfare to their advantage, countries need to adapt and modernize their forces (Sudhir, CLAWS Journal, 2008).
B) Current Issues
Afghanistan: In 2001, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) militarily intervened in Afghanistan in order to remove the Taliban (which has been deemed a terrorist group by countries around the world) from power and to restore democracy. However, while operating in the country, NATO forces struggled to combat the Taliban’s use of asymmetric warfare. The group utilized asymmetric warfare by planting bombs, ambushing superior troops in areas with difficult terrain, and spreading false information via videos and printed pamphlets (Deutsche Welle, 2012). Once the Afghan army took over, much of the security in the country, continued to be impacted by the Taliban’s use of hit-and-run attacks, suicide bombings and the strategic use of mountainous regions for military purposes. As a result, since the majority of NATO troops have left the country, the Afghan government and its military have lost ground to the Taliban and are trying to reach a peace deal that would end the continuing bloodshed (Salt, Strategic Studies Quarterly, 2018).
China: According to Eric Sayers of The Weekly Standard, the Chinese “military is only a decade or two removed from operational obscurity. And a Chinese conventional force able to challenge the United States is at least another decade away by the estimates of the most generous analysts.” This means that China is unable to militarily match the United States in the number of well-trained soldiers and military equipment. This is why
China has begun to develop an asymmetric warfare strategy aimed at battlespace denial through the use of technology. The Chinese military thinks that an invasion by the United States military would take place through the island of Taiwan. So, rather than confront the United States directly, “the government believes it can acquire the capabilities to deter an American entrance into the Taiwan Strait, or, should this fail, delay U.S. forces the freedom to operate within the theatre.” These capabilities consist of developing technology that could interfere with American communications, hack into secure networks and conduct secretive surveillance. This asymmetric warfare strategy will continued to be generated by China over the next two decades as the country plans to invest millions of dollars into the training of analysts and the creation of sophisticated technology (Sayers, The Weekly Standard, 2007).
Iraq: The Islamic State used asymmetric warfare in its war with the Iraqi government between 2014 and 2017. While operating in Northern Iraq, the group used the mountainous terrain to its advantage by digging tunnels to transport supplies and troops around the area secretly. It also enabled the group to establish hard-to-reach bases and training camps where it was able to operate mainly undisturbed. Furthermore, as the Islamic State was being cleared from Iraqi cities, the group continued to wage asymmetric warfare. It used mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to booby-trap homes and kill government soldiers. So, while it was losing ground, the group continued to combat the larger government forces, spreading fear and panic. The Islamic State has
been mostly driven from Iraq, but terrorist attacks still do happen, and these primarily focus on harming military facilities to discredit the government (Flood, Combating Terrorism Center, 2018).
Nigeria: Nigeria’s government has been engaged in asymmetric warfare with the terrorist group Boko Haram. Attacks by the group have claimed hundreds of lives and the government has struggled to prevent them from happening. Boko Haram uses “characteristics of typical asymmetric warfare with suicide and car bombings, targeted assassinations, kidnappings, armed ambushes, and coordinated raids continuing to serve as preferred attack vectors.” Moreover, by not engaging in full-out warfare with the Nigerian government, the group has been able to target areas where it can not only spread fear and cause damage but obtain weapons and money. According to a report written by the Global Observatory, Boko Haram has “created the demoralizing perception that it is a threat which is omnipresent, capable of inflicting harm on Nigerians in any given place at any given time.” This has resulted in a decline in the country’s economy, an increase in unemployment, and widespread poverty (Cummings, Global Observatory, 2014).
United Kingdom: Asymmetric warfare has been used by terrorist groups operating in the United Kingdom (UK). Terrorist groups use cars and homemade bombs to spread fear
and target civilians in public spaces. These groups do not have the ability to launch a full- scale military attack and instead choose to use the local terrain and new technology to combat the government. In 2017, 22 people were killed, and 116 were injured while attending a music concert at the Manchester Arena. The Islamic State took responsibility for the attack (BBC News, 2017). That same year, 8 people were killed and 50 injured when a cell of terrorist drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge and then went on a stabbing spree in Borough Market (Minelle, Sky News, 2018). To prevent terrorist groups from utilizing asymmetric warfare, the country's police forces were given an extra £50 million in order to purchase new technology, conduct intelligence operations and increase anti-terrorism training (The Guardian, 2017).
United States: The September 11th terrorist attacks in 2001 are cited by United States (US) Colonel KC Dixit as being as a prime example of asymmetric warfare. These attacks, which were carried out by al-Qaeda, killed 2,996 people and injured over 6,000 others. Al-Qaeda had fewer members and lacked the military capabilities of the US (Dixit, IDSA, 2010). The attack prompted the US to take action to combat future instances of terrorist groups attempting to use asymmetric warfare on its soil and abroad. This lead to the creation of the Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG), the Joint IED Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) and the Rapid Equipping Force (REF). The groups “provide operational advisory support and develop rapid operational solutions to the Army and
Joint Forces to defeat current and emerging threats, enhance combat effectiveness, and inform the Army on future requirements.” Furthermore, they improve the “readiness by enabling adaptation in preparation for, and the conduct of, combat and contingency operations.” So far, they have been deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Ukraine (AWG, 2019).
C) UN Action
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has hosted open debates on the use of asymmetric warfare, especially by terrorist groups. In November 2016, the Council stated that “violent extremism and terrorism thrived on impunity and failures of governance, exploiting deep-rooted grievances.” Therefore, the UN has to step in to prevent these situations from happening. It further declared that UN peacekeeping missions had to be reevaluated to consider asymmetric warfare. Peacekeeping troops need “more sophisticated and predictable uniformed capabilities and a deeper understanding of the operating environment” while “emphasizing the critical importance of developing intelligence and analysis” (Speakers in Security Council, UN, 2016). UN peacekeepers have been severely impacted by terrorist groups that use asymmetric warfare. For example, in February 2019, three Guinean peacekeepers were killed by militants in Mali. They were targeted while traveling along a rural road outside the capital
city of Bamako (New Straits Times, 2019). The UN plans to make changes to address this issue by unifying efforts between committees dedicated to combating terrorism such as the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC), DISEC and the UNSC. Through this, the UN hopes to commit better resources, funds and intelligence information to prevent attacks against its peacekeepers and combat asymmetric warfare (Speakers in Security Council, UN, 2016).
III. Conclusion
Asymmetric warfare has been used by terrorist groups in Northern Africa to combat larger and better-supplied militaries and governments. This type of war utilizes alternative strategies that include suicide bombings, ambushes and the planting of mines and IEDs. It targets government buildings, soldiers and civilians as a way to discredits governments and spread fear and confusion. Asymmetric warfare has enabled terrorist groups such as the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb to expand operations and its successes with little loss of life, minimal personnel and resources. Countries must take action to address this increasing issue. If action is not immediately accepted, terrorist groups in Northern Africa will continue to expand their operations and impact the lives of millions of people.
IV. Essential Questions
1. What is asymmetric warfare?
2. How do terrorist groups utilize asymmetric warfare?
3. What are the most prominent terrorist groups operating in Northern Africa?
4. Has your country been impacted by terrorism? If so, how?
5. What is the United Nations doing to address this issue?
6. How has Northern Africa been affected by terrorism and the use of asymmetric warfare?
7. How are countries in Northern Africa combating terrorism and the use of asymmetric warfare? Have the methods used been successful? Why or why not?
8. Does your country have a plan or method in order to stop terrorist groups and their use of asymmetric warfare? If so, what kind of plan?
V. Resources
“About.” United States Army Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG). United States Army Asymmetric Warfare Group, 2019. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“AL QAEDA: CHAD PEACEKEEPERS' MURDER BACKLASH FOR RENEWED TIES WITH ISRAEL.” The Jerusalem Post. The Jerusalem Post, Inc., 20 Jan. 2019. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“Chapter 4 - The evolving fight against jihadism in North Africa and the Sahel.” Government of Canada. Government of Canada, 2018. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Chinonso Kennedy, Ezeh. “ARMED CONFLICTS AND PEACE-KEEPING: Psychosocial Challenges for Democracy and Political Governance in Africa.” EuroAfrica Media Network. EuroAfrica Media Network, 2017. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Cummings, Ryan. “Boko Haram and the Symmetry of Asymmetric Warfare.” The Global Observatory. The Global Observatory, 10 Dec. 2014. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“Disarmament and International Security (First Committee).” United Nations (UN). United Nations, 2019. Web. 22 Feb. 2019.
Dixit, K C. “The Challenges of Asymmetric Warfare.” Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA). Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, 2010. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Elu, Juliet and Gregory Price. “The Causes and Consequences of Terrorism in Africa.” The Oxford Handbook of Africa and Economics: Volume 1: Context and Concepts. Oxford University Press, 2015. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Flood, Derek Henry. “From Caliphate to Caves: The Islamic State’s Asymmetric War in Northern Iraq.” Combating Terrorism Center. Combating Terrorism Center, 2018. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“Global Terror Index 2018.” Institute for Economic and Peace. Institute for Economic and Peace, 2018. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“Manchester attack: What we know so far.” BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation, 12 Jun. 2017. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
McKillop, Andrew. “Strategy, Military Tactics and Weapons: Asymmetric War and the New Geopolitics.” Global Research. Global Research, 2014. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Minelle, Bethany. “London Bridge attack: Terrorists 'used steroids' before attack.” Sky News. Sky UK, 09 Feb. 2018. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“NATO and the problem of asymmetric warfare.” Deutsche Welle. Deutsche Welle, Jul 2012. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Raineri, Luca and Alice Martini. “ISIS and Al-Qaeda as Strategies and Political Imaginaries in Africa: A Comparison between Boko Haram and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.” Civil Wars. Taylor & Francis Online, 2017. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Romero, Luiz. “Terrorist attacks in the Middle East and North Africa fell by almost 40% last year.” Quartz. Quartz, 09 Aug. 2018. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Salt, Alexander. “Transformation and the War in Afghanistan.” Strategic Studies Quarterly. AIR University Press, 2018. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Sayers, Eric. “China's Asymmetrical Strategy.” The Weekly Standard. The Weekly Standard, Inc., Dec. 2007. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Sexton, Ellen. “Asymmetrical warfare.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 17 Nov. 2016. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“Speakers in Security Council Sound Alarm over Rapidly Growing ‘Asymmetrical Threats’ to United Nations Peace Operations.” United Nations (UN). United Nations, 07 Nov. 2016. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
Sudhir, M R. “Asymmetric War: A Conceptual Understanding.” CLAWS Journal. Centre for Land Warfare Studies, 2008. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“The GA Handbook: A practical guide to the United Nations General Assembly.” Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations. Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations, 2017. Web. 22 Feb. 2019.
“Three UN peacekeepers killed by suspected bandits in Mali.” New Straits Times. New Straits Times, 24 Feb. 2019. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“UK police given extra £50m to fund fight against terrorism.” The Guardian. Guardian News & Media Limited, 17 Dec. 2017. Web. 26 Feb. 2019.
“United Nations First Committee.” Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI). Nuclear Threat Initiative, Oct. 2018. Web. 22 Feb. 2019.