order paper  
more phones
Academic writing services  
Custom written essay Book report Research paper Dissertation Resume and CV Editing and proofreading  
main menu
By ordering custom paper you get
  • 24/7 Support
  • Over 100 professional US Writers
  • 300 words per page
  • Flexible discount system
  • FREE revision (within 2 days)
  • Anti-Plagiarism Software Check
we accept
sample essays
Accounting Essays
Admission Essays
Analysis Essays
Art Essays
Biography Essays
Biology Essays
Book Review Essays
Business Essays
Case Studies Essays
Cause and Effect Essays
Character Analysis Essays
Communication Essays
Communication and Media Essays
Compute Technologies Essays
Consideration Essays
Controversial Essays
Description Essays
Economics Essays
Education Essays
Evaluation Essays
Explanation Essays
History Essays
Job Essays
Law Essays
Management Essays
Medicine Essays
Music Essays
Personal Essays
Personal Experience Essays
Persuasive Essays
Persuasive Speech Essays
Philosophy Essays
Political science Essays
Politics Essays
Proposal Essays
Psychology Essays
Reflective Essays
Religion Essays
Research Essays
Response Essays
School Essays
Science Essays
Sociology Essays
Technology Essays
World Literature Essays
Shiite Terrorism essay
← Drone Warfare: Ethical or NotThe Future of the American Government →

Shiite Terrorism. Custom Shiite Terrorism Essay Writing Service || Shiite Terrorism Essay samples, help


Terrorism is considered as one of the new age threats to international security and peace. Although there is no legally binding definition by the criminal law, it has been identified as the ‘act of creating fear, whether through violence or otherwise, as a form of coercion or to gain attention.’ The United Nations General Assembly, an organ of the UN, which is the transnational body that is in charge of international peace and security, has politically defined terrorism as illegal actions aimed at provoking a state of fear in the general community, a group of persons, or particular persons for political reasons regardless of the circumstances involved, or whether opinionated, idealistic, ideological, ethnic, cultural, spiritual or any other deliberations that may be fulfilled. In an act of terrorism, the perpetrator intends to maximize the psychological impact. This means that terrorism is basically a devised performance for a very large audience with the sole purpose of inducing extreme fear in people. The victims of acts of terror are usually symbols of the perpetrators’ ignored grievances or simply selected tools by means of which their message can be delivered. In these cases, the death of innocent civilians is not as important as the perpetrators’ ‘cause.’

Carsten Bocksette from the George C. Marshall Centre for European Security Studies defines terrorism as ‘political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce psychic fear and terror (sometimes discriminate) through violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols).’ Terrorism is, thus, political in its motives.  As it is violent in its nature, there may be various psychological consequences that are usually beyond the victims. Usually, it is conducted by organized but un-uniformed groups with a sane chain of command. Over the years, studies have shown that terrorism is rooted in a number of causes. When a particular territory or resources are controlled by one ethnic group, there tends to be tension between the domination group and the smaller groups that feel oppressed by the latter. Also, when a government imposes itself on the citizens, peace can be quite elusive. Another cause is an economic deprivation in that extreme poverty levels cause strife amongst the population. Opposition to the brutalities of the local government or army further contributed to the growth of Shiite terrorism. However, all these can be solved amicably through dialogue and peace agreements. The worst type of terrorism is the one which is followed by the religious fanatics. This is because it does not allow for negotiations or peace agreements. Religious doctrines are written in the hearts of the believers no matter how wrong and inhumane it is. It is an extreme form of terrorism that has seen the loss of very many innocent lives up to this day of the international integration.

Shiites are one of the minorities of the world's Muslim population. The word ‘Shiite’ derived from the Arabic word ‘Shia’, which is a collective noun meaning ‘partisans.’ It is a shortening of ‘Shi'at Ali’ (the partisans of Ali) who were Muslims in the original seventh century community. He is believed following his death in 632. Muhammad should be succeeded by Ali, who was his cousin and son-in-law. They believed that Muhammad had deliberately designated Ali as his successor in his wisdom, and consequently, all future community leaders should be Muhammad's direct descendants. They were, however, overruled in the wake of Muhammad's death, and three other caliphs led the community before Ali took over in 656. This, however, was full of challenges, and it resulted in two civil wars. It is worth stressing Ali was assassinated in 661, and the eventual establishment of Umayyad caliphate took place. Ali's son Husain was then coaxed to respond by leading a revolt against the Umayyad caliph Yazid, in 680. The ensuing battle at Karbala, which is nowadays Iraq, led to the massacre of Husain and his army. This massacre established what was called the "paradigm of protest and suffering that has inspired and guided Shia Islam" by the Islam scholar John Esposito. Husain is consequently revered as a martyr in Shiite history, and his death is commemorated yearly by the Shiite Muslims across the world. Thus, Shiite terrorism has been used as a way of protesting against governments and policies or the existence of the entire nation like Israel.

Thus, Shiite terrorism has been used as a way of protesting against governments and policies or the existence of the entire nation like Israel.In the wake of terrorist attacks, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1373. It requires all member states shall combat terrorism in their respective jurisdictions. The resolution demands that states prohibit both active and passive supports of terrorism, ban the use of their territories as safe havens for terrorist groups, and prevent the movement of terrorists between states. States are also required to close or control known funding routes used by the terrorists, and criminalize the act of funding terrorists by citizens as well as corporate.

Background Information

Iranian terrorism and subversion have mainly relied on Shiite Muslim communities for its activities in both in the Middle East and beyond. In the Middle East, Central Asia, and other locations, the Shiite populations have been regarded as fertile grounds for exporting the Islamic Revolution. The ideology of the following revolution is spread through intensive economic, social, religious and cultural activities. The establishment of terrorist and militias organizations within the native Shiite populations in these territories is handled by Iran so as to promote its interests in the global front. In Lebanon, the Iranian involvement is evident in Hezbollah, which was established by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRDC). It has  been transformed from a ‘local militia with terrorist capabilities’ to a worldwide organization with ‘state military capabilities’. Also, it is known to have the ability to attack the Israeli home front and notable influence in Lebanese politics. Iran is trying to create Hezbollah-like militias within the Shiite population in Muslim countries like Iraq, Bahrain, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen, but there has been no remarkable success observed so far. However, America’s withdrawal from Iraq and the recently witnessed regional upheavals are likely to increase Iran's potential for success in advancing its terrorism and subversion activities and strengthening its ties with the local Shiite communities in these countries, and eventually throughout the world.

After the September 11th massive attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon in 2001, the U.S. moved in swiftly to eradicate dangers that could jeopardize the state security by being engaged in the first strike preventative war. The President saw it appropriate to invade in Iraq and act forcefully against it. The U.S. Congress endorsed and authorized military actions against Iraq since it was believed to have weapons of mass destruction. President Bush demanded the total end to claims that Iraq continued to manufacture weapons of mass detraction and violated absolute compliance with the UN Security Council resolutions authorizing the UN weapons inspector unrestricted access to the alleged weapons production conveniences. In December of the same year, Iraq declared grudgingly that it did not possess biological and chemical weapons that could be destructive. This action did not serve any purpose and was dismissed by the international community as a mere public relations exercise.

Despite the persistent opposition on the part of France, Germany, and Russia, the U.S. and Britain continued with their martial upsurge in regions adjacent to Iraq. They maintained that Bagdad was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. The base, which the allies planned to use as the base for the northern front, to their dismay, was located in Turkey, and Iraq refused to allow the use of its territory, though most British- American troops were positioned in Kuwait and other neighboring locations. Therefore, the failure of the approval to locate the US base served as the turning point of starting the war conflict. The war started with an air strike against Iraq. Ground forces invaded in Iraq by the end of April 2003; the Iraqi army was resoundingly defeated, and the government collapsed allowing allies to have full control over the major cities. The process of establishing new Iraq government was started. The conflict was well-known as operation for the Iraqi freedom, where joint troops from the U.S., UK, Australia and Poland attacked Iraq, and Saddam Hussein’s reign was toppled. On May 1, 2003, the former American President, George Bush, proclaimed triumph in the invasion against the enemy. The United States and British leaders had expounded the Iraqnatural and chemical hazard in order to rationalize the war. Hussein was caught in December 2003.

Shiite terrorism might have begun as religious terrorism, but it has advanced into more political causes. With the Iranian influence, Shiite communities have become threats to global insecurity and peace. Iran is on a global terrorism campaign, and Shiite communities are being used as strategic vehicles for exporting these ideologies and acts across the globe. It is, therefore, important to note that while there are various other terrorist groups, this study focuses on those with Shiite roots, their actions, motives, objectives, and responses throughout the world.

Shiite terrorism is mainly funded by the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRDC) through ransoms from kidnappings, smuggling businesses, fraud, robbery, arms dealing, drug trafficking, worldwide fundraising drives, production and distribution of fake monies, as well as prostitution.

Hezbollah has been known as radical, most organized and far reaching Shiite group in the world. Since its inception by the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRDC) in 1982, the terrorist group has conducted a world wide terrorist campaign that has at promoting the radical Shiite-Islamic doctrine as conceived by the Late Ayatollah Khomeini who was Iran’s spiritual leader before his passing on in 1989. This doctrine encourages the two major reasons for Hezbollah’s existence in that it gives them the perceived authority and responsibility to enforce to lead the consistent and relentless struggle against Israel so that the ‘liberation of Jerusalem’ and the ‘annihilation of the Israeli people’ are achieved. There is an intense hostility observed toward the United States, with major efforts aimed at forcing its presence and influence out of the Middle East and Central Asia.

To carry out this mandate, Hezbollah has been using terrorism against its enemies as its strategy of asymmetric conflict where suicide has been one of its key weapons. This is because the representatives of Hezbollah believe that the United States and Israel have no counteractive response to suicide attacks. During 20 years of its existence, Hezbollah has gone through the remarkable organizational development. It started as one of many local Lebanese terrorist groups and has grown into a ‘political movement with global capabilities in the sphere of terrorism, an extensive military apparatus, and weapons that include land-to-land missiles.’ In all its ‘glory’ as a Lebanese terrorist group, Hezbollah has reached its present status mainly because of the extensive assistance and support of both Iran and Syria. Iran regards Hezbollah as a ‘means of achieving its own ideological and strategic goals,’ and is, thus, on a large scale Hezbollah’s source of military support in terms of training, logistics, funding and providing some of the advanced military hardware required in its missions.

Syria has also been known as a strategic supporter of Hezbollah right from its inception. It even prevented the dismantling of the organization after the signing of the Taif Agreement in 1989. This is what allowed for the group’s expansion to its present size. After President Bashar’s succession of his father’s regimes, Syria upgraded its policy of cautious support that prevailed during Hafez al-Assad’s regime to create a strategic alliance that would see Hezbollah as its strategic partner in dealing with Israel. Syria is now also a major source of military support to Hezbollah. Recently, it has provided the organization with long-range missiles made in Syria.

Syria also backs Hezbollah’s terrorist attacks in southern Lebanon by guaranteeing its freedom of operation and, at the same time, limiting the Lebanese government from exercising its powers in the region as per Resolution 425 of the UN Security Council. Hezbollah has carried out about 30 terrorist attacks under the auspices of Damascus since the Israeli troops withdrew from Lebanon.

While controlling Lebanon effectively, Damascus is responsible for creating conducive circumstances that enabled Hezbollah to grow from a local terrorist group into a strategic and well-organized threat to Israel and the USA in the global setting. The Iranian national security policy became the basis for Hezbollah in an attempt to “export the Islamic Revolution” and strategically use terrorism to protect its interests. Iran, thus, shaped Hezbollah’s ideology, gave it the political backing, and enhanced its operational capabilities. Together with the Palestinian terrorist organizations operating from Syria and Lebanon, Hezbollah is also used by the Damascus regime to pressure Israel and promote the Syrian political and strategic interests in the region.

The Hezbollah organization has endured a number of shockwaves and upheavals in recent years. It should be noted that it still draws encouragement from milestones like the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, the September 11 attacks against the United States by their Sunni counterparts in Al-Qaeda, and the many constraints on the US in light of the war against Iraq. These have given Hezbollah the strength to continue building up its terrorism strategies and military capabilities. These have reinforced its standing as a terrorist organization which now combines operational skills, sophisticated political methods, and the radical Islamic, anti-Israeli, and anti-Western ideology that is both used by the Sunni and the Shiite. Consequently, they have transformed into a terrorist network that is now both a risk and a threat to the United States, the Middle East, and the entire international community.

Bombing American and French military Barracks and the American Embassy in Beirut (1983)

The two deadliest terrorist attacks carried out by the Hezbollah group in Lebanon were in April and October in 1983. These attacks were planned by Iran and executed by the Hezbollah. Then the latter claimed its responsibility under the guise of the ‘Islamic Jihad’. There was also the bombing of the United States embassy in western Beirut. This attack was carried out by a suicide car bomber on the 18th of April in 1983. There were about 900 kg of explosives in the car. The explosion took lives of sixty-three people, 17 Americans, 32 Lebanese who were employees of the embassy, and 14 visitors. Also, 120 people were injured; the United States Ambassador to Lebanon, Robert Dillon, was among them, too.

In the attack against the American and French military barracks, which took place on the 23rd of October, in 1983, there was another vehicle used, as well. The truck carried approximately 5,450 kilograms of explosives. It broke through the gate, reached the main building, and blew up inside the camp causing the deaths of over 240 American (including 220 Marines) and about 58 French soldiers.

Although the Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati denied any possible Iranian involvement in these attacks, there was the reliable information that proved the Iran’s involvement in the terrorist attacks against the USA. Among the 17 Americans who were killed in the embassy explosion, there were nine members of the support staff and the CIA, including the Chief of the Beirut station. Also, Robert Ames, a leading CIA analyst in the Arab world, was at that very moment at the embassy. He visited Beirut in business and found his death  in that explosion.

The abduction and murder of various CIA personnel during and after the bombing of the embassy of the United States in Beirut served to paralyze the American intelligence agency in Lebanon and the Arab world at large. According to Tim Weiner,  As the CIA fought to rebuild in Beirut, it did not see a new force rising from the rubble. An assassin named Imad Mughniyah, a chieftain of the violent terrorist group called Hezbollah, the Party of God, was gathering money and explosives, training his thugs for a series of bombings and kidnappings that would paralyze the United States for years to come. He reported to Tehran, where the Ayatollah Khomeini was creating an Office of Liberation Movements to further his messianic vision of conquering Iraq. Mughniyah's name has been forgotten now, but he was the Osama bin Laden of the 1980s. The obliteration of the death of Robert Ames and the Beirut station and destroyed the agency's capability for gathering information in Lebanon and in much of the Middle East.

Motives of the Attacks

Hezbollah bears deep hostility against the United States. This hostility is rooted in the Iranian revolutionary doctrine, in which the United States is defined as “the big Satan”. This ideological hostility against the United States is evident in the statements of a number of leaders of Hezbollah.

Hezbollah claims that America’s political objective is to dominate the region and rob the Arabic nations of their natural resources through its alliance with Israel. At the conference held between the 25th and 27th of January, 2003, in Damascus, to lobby for the boycotting of American products, Nasrallah used the following words to appeal to the audience:

We must break off all associations with the United States and the American people and hold on to the Arab proscribe against Israel. The Arabs must appreciate that Israel is simply a brigade of the American military and that the United States is the primary enemy.

The statements of the top leadership of Hezbollah prove that the group’s hatred and hostility towards the US are deep rooted. In attacking the US Embassy and Military camp, the organization intended to paralyze US operations in the region and eventually force them out using terror and frustration. It was in accordance with their Iranian based doctrine against the US. The aim was to frustrate the operations of the CIA in the Middle East. It was meant to prevent the domination of foreign forces so as to create chaos within the region in order to undermine the influence of Western countries and increase the hostilities against Israel as the ally of the west.

Ronald Reagan, the former US President, termed the attack as a ‘cowardly act’ that would not deter America from its goals of promoting peace in the Middle East. The peace negotiations to withdraw the Lebanese troops were continued, and as a result, the former Lebanese president, Amine Geyamel, asked the US, France, and Italy to double their peacekeeping forces. The US House of Foreign Affairs Committee voted to approve a $251 million budget, in which additional economic and military aid to the Lebanese government in an attempt to mitigate the effects of the Lebanese Civil War on civilians were included. By deliberately leaking intelligence information to show Iran that they knew of their involvement in the embassy and barracks explosions, the US intended to show its prowess in intelligence and show that it was not defenseless against such attacks. This served to put Iran on the alert in its future planning. Although a group known as the Islamic Jihad Organization claimed to be responsible for the attack, courts in the United States found Iran to be responsible through the Hezbollah group.

The Tourist Bus Explosion in Bulgaria in July of 2012

On the 18th of July, 2012, a bus carrying 42 Israelis from the airport exploded. 5 Israelis and one Bulgarian who was a bus driver and a bomber were killed.  There were claims made that the death of the bomber was simply a ‘work accident’ as the explosive had detonated prematurely. In recent years, a series of terrorist attacks in different countries around the world have proven that Israel has been constantly subjected to a global terrorist campaign supported by Iran. The attacks are being planned and executed by the Qods Force. It is an elite unit of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), the founding fathers of Hezbollah. Thus, the Hezbollah acts as the Qods Force's main executioner for its terrorist missions abroad. The terrorist attack on the bus with Israeli tourists in Bulgaria was governed by Hezbollah as a part of the Iranian campaign against Israel.

Motives of the Attack

The motive of this attack was to kill the Israelites in Bulgaria and to show Israel that they were not limited in their war against them. Iran and Hezbollah have been targeting Israeli diplomats in various countries, as well as Israeli tourists and Jewish public figures, especially in the recent years. The Iranian terrorist campaigns against Israel have increased since May 2011. They are spread out in several countries, including Bulgaria, Cyprus, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Indian, Georgia, Thailand, and Turkey. Although most of these attacks failed or were prevented, local security services found Iranian and Hezbollah footprints which could have complicated Iran's relations with the said countries. In fulfilling its objectives, Iran has shown that it is both daring and determined to continue its attacks against Israelis, despite the experienced multiple failures. The success of the Hezbollah attack in Bulgaria, despite the operational failure that resulted in a ‘work accident’, served to encourage Iran in its terrorist campaign against Israel and the United States.

Recently, Iran's terrorist campaign has become more active, and several goals of this campaign have been set, as well. The first one is to counteract what Iran terms as a covert campaign being conducted against it. In other words, the terrorist campaign is aimed at getting revenge for the killings of the Iranian scientists who were suspected of working with the nuclear weapon and a very senior Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyah (credited with the explosion at the US Embassy and Military barracks in Beirut, 1983). Israel is blamed for killing Imad Mughniyah by Iran and Hezbollah. Iran, therefore, seeks to deter Israel from undertaking any other actions against it through terrorizing its citizens both in Israel and abroad and to strengthen its campaign against the influence of the United States in the Middle East. Iran also seeks to show its ‘enemies’ that it is not weak or vulnerable in any way and can respond strongly to any attacks launched against it.

The attacks against Israel have shown Hezbollah’s support for Palestinian terrorism against Israel that is carried out under the guise of defending Lebanese national interests and retaliating against the American presence in the Middle East. The attacks were, thus, a part of Iran’s ‘mandate’ to ensure the annihilation of Israel and to continue the struggle against the United States and the western strongholds in the region.

Hassan Nasrallah, the known leader of Hezbollah, was quoted on al-Manar Television on May 7, 1998, saying:Hezbollah will never accept the existence of Israel.” The ‘consistent and unyielding war against the State of Israel, until its annihilation and the “liberation” of Jerusalem’ is one of the pillars of Hezbollah ideology. It is derived from the vision of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who was the founder and first leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This objective and the devout desire to achieve it have ideologically committed the organization to pursue a continuous struggle against Israel, to ensure an eventual victory on their part.

To justify and legitimize its terrorist attacks on Israel, Hezbollah has maintained a hostile attitude towards Israel. The following attitude has been shown by their use of anti-Semitic expressions and abusive phrases, such as the “vile microbe” and the “cancerous tumor” while referring to Israel. This is intended to justify their goal of  humiliating Israel. The statements made by Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, who is the leader of the organization and the main creator and chief spokesperson of Hezbollah ideology, brought this out clearly. The relationship between the United States and Iran has been sour for a number of years. Even at this point, the United States and Iran have no direct diplomatic relations. The genesis of strained relationship between these two countries dates back to late 1940s. The creation of the State of Israel, in particular, contributed negatively towards smooth relations between the United States and Iran. Many diplomats and foreign relations analysts, including David Christ, only focus on the two countries relations from the period after the September 11th terrorist attack. However, the events of the September 11th culminated as a result of long standing disputes between the two countries. This paper analyses the US Iran relationship in relation to the events of the September 11th. Furthermore, the paper gives the synopsis of the background of the United States and Iran conflict. In this regard, the essay examines the role of neoconservatives in defining the US foreign policy towards Iran, the role of Israel, and the realists’ view of the conflict.

The hostility shown by Hezbollah towards the State of Israel is intertwined with their hatred of the Jews. The leaders of the Hezbollah frequently make offensive anti-Semitic statements, usually using both classic and Islamic anti-Semitic “arguments”. These statements are meant not only to negate Israel as the state, but also to discredit the Jewish population as the nation. Here are some quotations from speeches given by Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut that show just how much Hezbollah verbally attacks Israel. The outcomes of the war were significant. The country experienced vast devastation. There was no security at hospitals; water plants and even the most prominent people, like ministers with very important information, were unsecure. The war was not over. Tension had been increasing between the troops, and they really prepared to go for another war in order for the U.S. to gain full control over Iraq. The theoretical perspective that tends to explain the reason for this war is realism. From the realistic perspective, initiatives by governments to enter into war are outcomes of all states which were involuntary participating to get power over political vicinity, where states fear the actual potential fight back by other states. The expenses of these wars are worked on, as well as benefits. The State International Council replicates the limitation forced on their proceedings in relation to power stakes. It is worth stressing that this, power was distributed between several parties during the war. The U.S. military authority caused the U.S. strategy to shift from policies of subjugation of threats to preventive warfare against aggressive states.

The US Iraq war started on 19th of March 2003. A coalition was created to stop Iraq from producing weapons of mass destruction, terminate Hussein’s dictatorial rule, and set Iraq free. Despite the efforts of Bush administration and interest in setting Iraq free, verylittle proper progress was made until the 11th September 2001 attacks.

It was quite evident when the administration prepared the operation “Desert Badger” in order to respond to any air force. The pilot was shot when flying over Iraq. After the 11th of September, Bush announced his new war on terrorism accompanied by his doctrine. Accusations were made that Hussein had a connection with the al-Qaeda. Some Bush advisers were pro the direct assault of Iraq, while others gave their preference for international acquiring of the United Nations approval.

President Bush was ultimately determined to seek the UN consent considering the alternative of attacking without any consultations. The terrorist attack had critical outcomes, including the blow to the U.S economy. Damages encountered a loss of human lives, as well as massive property destruction of travel and shipping industries. After the attacks, worries also shifted to the possible harm on business. There has been massive campaigns by terrorists across the world aimed at inflicting harm to Americans and there allies.This figurative or status intention could also clarify, why the Bush’s government besieged Iraq, but not North Korea, Iran, or Libya—which were also alleged to be manufacturing weapons of mass destruction considered more powerful than Iraqis threatening to the U.S. and its associates. Ideological perspective can also be applied in relation to other societies.

The Hezbollah’s philosophy does not leave any possibility of a future peace agreement with Israel. The organization refuses recognizing Israel as a national entity in the region or even desiring peaceful co-existence with it. Hezbollah has consistently expressed its fervent opposition to any attempts aimed at achieving peace in the region. It criticizes all those who try to negotiate with Israel so as to increase the pressure exerted on them by public opinion amongst Arabs through out the region. In recent years, Hezbollah has worked to prevent any peace negotiations between Palestine and Israel by maintaining violence and propagating acts of terrorism in all the Palestinian territories.

Hezbollah has constantly referred to its ambition of achieving a “balance of deterrence” and averting Israeli ‘aggression’ against Lebanon, and ‘defending’ Lebanon along with its borders and its waters. In reality, Hezbollah does not operate on a defensive policy. Actually, it only initiates terrorist attacks against Israeli targets and continues to do so long after Israel has withdrewn from Lebanon. This shows its opposition to the implementation of Resolution 425 of the UN Security Council, which is intended to establish security and peace on either sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The meaning of a ‘balance of deterrence’, as per the Hezbollah’s interpretation, is ‘justifying the terrorist acts that are initiated against Israel, while deterring Israel from any plans of retaliation are against its persecutors.’

The operational activity of Hezbollah is founded on a basic principle of “asymmetric attrition.” This strategy is aimed at creating a situation that serves to generate continuous pressure on Israel, mainly through persistent terrorist attacks regardless of Israel’s military superiority. Hezbollah voices its contempt for the resilience of the Israeli society, working hard to reprsent it as a ‘traumatized body’ and a ‘cobweb’. It has drawn confidence from the internal pressures experienced in the Israeli administration that even resulted in the withdrawal of the Israeli military forces from Lebanon. In its bid to annihilate Israel, Hezbollah has accepted to persevere in the armed struggle against it and strike at Israel’s weak spot, which is its civilian population. Thus, the attacks on Israeli tourists and diplomats, as well as local populations were organized and carried out.

From the chronological point of view, the emergence of animosity in 1980 was another factor that contributed significantly to the Middle East aggression. Saddam Hussein had his own interests in invading Iran based on ambitions and signs of weakness.Even, though, he hadmade significantstepsin the formation of the Iraqi state,Saddam saw a threat from neighboring Iran. The revolt leadership of the latter posed a danger on the vulnerable Sunni and Shia’s stability and would take advantage of porous borders, namely Iraq's minimal access to the Persian Gulf, in that case. In this respect, Saddam Hussein's decision to invade in Iran follows a historical pattern: the earliest rulers of Mesopotamia, during a dread domestic conflict and distant invasion, also had the recurrent fight with the inhabitants of highlands.

The U.S.Iraq relationship was quite heated during this era. There was hostility as the U.S. yearned to end the war between these two states. It also put a lot of efforts to liberate Kuwait. The United States and the United Nations imposed economic sanctions on Iraq in a bid to compel the country to abide by limitations on weaponry, which had greatly affected the economic development. As a result of these economic sanctions, Iraq alleged that many children had succumbed deaths because of poor diet and health services. Reviews indicated that this war exploded into open rivalry, as Saddam and his government disobeyed economic sanctions, presupposing military discipline without delay.

Responding to this attack on Israeli tourists in Bulgaria, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, reiterated:”This is yet an advanced validation of what we have previously known, that Hezbollah and its Iranian agents are coordinating an international operation of terror that is straddling across nations and continents.”

The EU was then urged to blacklist Hezbollah, but the resolution needed that the 27 members are in consensus. This was, therefore, not achieved.


The wide spread terrorist attacks against the US and its interests have been credited to Islamic jihadists from both camps (Sunni and Shia). Although both groups attack the western world based on their religious doctrines, the Shiite terrorists, particularly Hezbollah, have been backed by Iran since their conception over 30 years ago. They have been growing as an organization with the aid of both Iran and Syria, although the two countries deny their affiliation with the terrorist group. During all 30 years of its existence perpetrating terrorist activities and exporting Iranian revolutionary ideologies across the globe, Hezbollah has never claimed to be responsible for any of its attacks. It is worth stressing that in many cases, the responsibility has been claimed by some fictitious or unknown organizations while others have simply been denied or left anonymous. This is done so as to keep the group from incriminating itself and protecting Iran from being exposed to international isolation and retaliation.

The numerous Hezbollah operatives have been captured and interrogated in various countries over the past few years. The academic researches as well as numerous articles done by security experts and reliable intelligence information agencies have shown the link between Hezbollah and Iran, Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, operating under the mentorship and support of Iran. It has also been exposed that the Lebanese Hezbollah has been and is still being used by Iran’s Qods Force to build and operate Shiite militias in Iraq against the armed forces of the United States and other international peacekeeping organizations that work in the region. The Qods Force has taken advantage of Hezbollah’s tried and tested capabilities in terrorism and guerilla operations, and there are religious bonds between Lebanese and Iraqi Shiites. This means that although Hezbollah is known as an independent organization whose objectives are to annihilate Israel and frustrate western powers to the point of expelling them out of the region, it is mainly based on Iran’s national security policy that persistently uses terror and hostility to defend its interests. The terrorist attacks credited to Hezbollah are, therefore, aimed at protecting Iran’s interests through annihilation of Israel or frustration of western countries to repel their influence in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Shiite Terrorism. Custom Shiite Terrorism Essay Writing Service || Shiite Terrorism Essay samples, help

Order Now
Order nowhesitating

Related essays

  1. The Future of the American Government
  2. US Counterterrorism Policies
  3. Drone Warfare: Ethical or Not
  4. The War in Iraq

order now

Order now
why choose us
96% of satisfied returning customers
24/7 customer support
A wide range of services
Up-to-date sources
100% privacy guaranteed
MA/PhD writers
Custom written papers only
Free plagiarism report
Free revision (within 2 days)
Free extras by your request
Direct communication with a writer
Are your writers qualified for the custom writing?
How quick can my order be accomplished?
Is it legal to buy custom essays, term papers or book reports from your company?
Are essays offered by your company truly custom-written?
Is it safe to buy from SupremeEssays.com?
How secure is the payment system of your company?
Can I submit custom essays or term papers done by your company as my own?
How can I contact your company if I've got problems with my ordered paper?

Finally, I've found the real custom writing service . My grades are saying "Thank you, it's been a pleasure to work with you."

Jamal, South Africa

I can't believe you finished my essay under such a short deadline! You saved me from a disaster once again. You guys deliver exactly what you promise. I'll be back. That's for sure!

William H , Kansas, US

contact us
Toll free for US & Canada only. International callers are charged for outgoing calls.

Our phone numbers:
Toll free 1(877)801-5587
Call now 1(702)418-3797
SupremeEssays.com provides custom term paper writing/rewriting services inclusive of research material for assistance purposes only. The term papers should be used with proper reference and are not meant to replace actual assignments.

Get 15% off your first custom essay order

Order now

from $12.99/PAGE