One of the most important
events that occurred during the last month is the ISIS attack in Paris and
other countries in Europe. France had been on high alert for terrorism since
the Charlie Hebdo shooting and a series of related attacks in January by militants
belonging to Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. A series of coordinated
terrorist attacks occurred in Paris and its northern suburb, Saint-Denis, on
the night of 13 November 2015. The attackers killed around 130 people,
including 89 at the Bataclan theatre, where they took hostages before engaging
in a stand-off with police. Around 368 people were injured, 80–99 are in a
serious situation.Seven of the attackers also died, while authorities continued
to search for accomplices.
Three suicide bombers
struck near the Stade de France in Saint-Denis, followed by suicide bombings
and mass shootings at cafés, restaurants and a music venue in Paris. The
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) claimed responsibility for the
attacks, saying it was in retaliation for the French airstrikes on ISIL targets
in Syria and Iraq. The President of France, François Hollande, said the attacks
were an act of war by ISIL planned in Syria, organised in Belgium, and
perpetrated with French complicity.
In response, a state of
emergency was declared, and temporary border checks were introduced. On 15
November, France launched the biggest airstrike of Opération Chammal, its
contribution to the anti-ISIL bombing campaign, striking ISIL targets in
Al-Raqqah. On 18 November, the suspected lead operative of the attacks,
Abdelhamid Abaaoud, was killed in a police raid in Saint-Denis, along with at
least two other people.
France had been on high
alert since the January 2015 attacks in Paris that killed 17 people, including
civilians and police officers. The November attacks were the deadliest on
France since World War II, and the deadliest in the European Union since the
Madrid train bombings in 2004.
The reason why this
happened is link to previous war in Syria that the powerful states attack Syria
to get rid of President Assad in order to get their oil resources. Then now it
comes to the Paris attacks by ISIS while because those countries are attacking
them first which make them attack back. The attack becomes a cycle among Middle
East, Europe, Russia, and the U.S.
The realist theory is
much more suitable in explaining this event because it viewed that the world is
anarchy and there is no international world government to control the world.
People are egoist; they don’t care about other as long as its benefit them.
Especially, only the powerful states would able to survive. According to the
ISIS case, it is a war between individuals and states. It won’t be possible for
states to combat terrorists in the world, even though they try to kill ISIS.
The fact, that those who family were killed by the powerful states will decide
to be part of ISIS and revenge, so the war won’t end.
Follow the realist theory
gives us the real pictures that those powerful states are selfish try to use
their power to dominate the other weak states. For example, Russia is a back
support of President Assad in term of military, weapons, economic, and other
technology. Yet, Russia is fighting against ISIS. However, look at the U.S
side, they are strongly against President Assad because Syria is not on the U.S
side. Therefore, the concept of realist on the balance of power is workable in
this event. Syria, in order to flight with the U.S, they have to back by
Russia. Furthermore, for ISIS, they have a lot of support from major countries
around the world in order to attack back with the powerful states. ISIS sells
their oil in the lower price in the trade of money, weapons, and other military
equipment.
This is really difficult
for realist to believe in change as long as human nature is selfish, yet only
war is permanent solution. How can the world combat the used of arm force? It
is impossible. In contract, if pluralist is workable, the world won’t be
anarchy. If interdependence tends to be effective, ISIS won’t occur. For
example, the international governmental organization is served only the
powerful states as they receive big support from them. Therefore, the world
starts to bias. States won’t help any other states if they don’t earn any
benefits back. We can see the operating among the British, French, American,
and more corporate on the war in Syria because they will get back the oil
another natural resources. Thus, states won’t corporate each other for peace
but for benefits. Indeed, realist theory appears right for the powerful states
while pluralist isn’t seem to be effective especially during the war time.
