Al-Qaeda is a term used by Islamic radicals to describe the terrorist organization to which they belong. The term is not used to describe a single group or even a combination of several groups. Al-Qaeda is made up of several main bases in Afghanistan, Islamic political parties and also has many remote locations around the world and some control over other independent Islamic terrorist groups which it uses to strengthen itself (Gunaratna 54; Burke 1).Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get the original essay The goal of the terrorist group is deeply rooted in the spread of Islam, the installation of Sharia law and the creation of Islamic States. They want to rid the world of secular and Western influences supported by non-Muslims and even moderate Muslims. The men involved in the organization believe they are engaged in jihad. Jihad is a term that can have two meanings: that there is an inner spiritual struggle or that there is a physical struggle against the enemies of Islam. Al-Qaeda members believe they are waging a “lesser jihad” or war against the enemies of Islam (Gunaratna 84-85). September 11, 2001, this day will live in infamy in the eyes of the American people. That day, four terrorist attacks orchestrated by Al-Qaeda killed 2,996 people and caused more than $10 billion in damage. Four planes were hijacked by 19 Al-Qaeda terrorists. Two of the planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, landed at the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York, New York. The towers and several surrounding buildings collapsed, killing thousands. A third plane crashed into the Pentagon in Washington DC. Fortunately, the plane struck a wing of the building which was unoccupied at the time and undergoing renovation. The fourth plane crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after the passengers attempted to regain control from the hijackers (Kleinfield, 2001). This attack was used to justify the "war on terror", an ongoing military campaign against terrorist organizations that is being led by the United States, the United Kingdom and their allies. Following the September 11 attacks, the United States stationed troops in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia and Yemen. On May 2, 2011, nearly a decade after the attacks, the United States achieved a major objective in its “war on terror.” A Navy SEAL team infiltrated Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan, killing him (CNN, 2014). However, this has still not led to a complete military withdrawal in the Middle East. The United States continues to fight Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Al-Qaeda remains a major international terrorist threat and is growing in power. One of the main reasons Al-Qaeda has been seen as such a threat to world peace is the way it targeted civilians during the September 11 attacks. “Al-Qaeda's published doctrine holds that there are no innocent civilians in Western society, and this principle leads to the most serious of international crimes. In war, the principle of distinction requires that civilians never be singled out as targets” (Wedgewood 329). But that's exactly what al-Qaeda did when it planned the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. The diversions were timed so that as many civilians as possible were in the area. On January 7, 2015, twelve people were killed in a shooting at the headquarters of the Parisian satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, forhaving published caricatures or comic strips satirizing the Prophet Muhammad. The suspects are believed to be linked to Al-Qaeda after one of them told a witness: “You can tell the media it's Al-Qaeda in Yemen” (Hinnant et al, 2015). This led to a three-day manhunt for the shooters, the Chérif brothers and Said Kouachi. After the suspects fled the scene, five more victims were killed in a roadside shooting Thursday, January 1. January 8, as well as during two police confrontations on Friday, January 9. Heavily armed, elite police forces stormed the countryside and towns surrounding Paris in search of the brothers. The search ended when police cornered the brothers in the sleepy rural town of Dammartin-en-Goëlle, near Charles de Gaulle airport (Andrews et al, 2015). Many have called this event September 11 in France; However, this is a bit of an exaggeration. The shooting put France in the spotlight because the attackers were French nationals and had been arrested in the past on alleged terrorism charges. The brothers had both gone to Yemen to train with Al-Qaeda, then returned to France. The French are known for their hatred of Arab people. France has struggled to integrate Arab immigrants into its society and many Arab immigrants live in slums, unable to create a better life for themselves. For the French, even Arabs born in France are not French. This trend has caused many tensions between French and Arabs living side by side in France (Bilefsky and De La Baume, 2015; Higgins and Bilefsky, 2015). The attack on Charlie Hebdo will go down as one of the most horrific events. in the journalistic and modern history of France. The attack on Charlie Hebdo journalists is the deadliest attack on journalists since 2009, when thirty journalists were killed during the Maguindanao massacre in the Philippines (Ingraham, 2015). France itself has not experienced a terrorist attack of this magnitude for half a century. These are the worst terrorist attacks in France in over fifty years and are leading many to question France's national security. If the brothers had already been arrested for association with terrorist organizations, why weren't they monitored more closely? Al-Qaeda did not release an official statement on the attack but tweeted that the attack was "inspiring." An al-Qaeda member, claiming to represent the group, contacted the New York Times and said the attacks were actually organized by al-Qaeda in Yemen. The statement read: “The target was France in particular because of its obvious role in the war against Islam and oppressed nations,” referring to tensions between the French and Arab people (Hinnant et al, 2015). To understand how state actors interact with each other, there is a set of theories that attempt to explain state behavior. In this essay, international secular and feminist theories will be used to analyze reactions to Al-Qaeda, terrorism and the marginalization of Muslims in the international system. Secularism offers a different explanation of current international difficulties than previously thought. Secularism recognizes the religious resurgence occurring in modern society. Scholars did not expect a religious resurgence and does not fit any traditional or existing theory of international relations. “Conventional conceptions of international relations, focused on material capabilities andstrategic interaction, immediately exclude the possibility that religion could be a fundamental organizing force in the international system” (Hurd 1). The problem with this way of thinking about the international system, Hurd argues, is that although it is widely accepted in Western countries that religion and state are theoretically separate, this is not the case in many countries. developing, a typical example being states. development in the Middle East. Classic theories of international relations, liberalism, realism and constructivism, assume that religion is a private matter after the signing of the Peace of Westphalia. While operating under this assumption, realists, liberalists, and constructivists believe, to a lesser extent, that religion has no relationship to state behavior. The influence of religion is largely ignored until "faced with something inevitably religious, like the Iranian revolution or the Taliban, they [foreign policy][elites] start talking about religious fanaticism and fanaticism, which explains everything at once. After a few days of shaking their heads at the fanatics, they return to their usual secular analyses” (Hurd 4). Secularism offers an alternative vision of international affairs in which the dominant religion(s) of a state's culture are present in their decision-making and legislative practices. When examining cases of terrorism committed by members of Al-Qaeda, such as Charlie Hebdo and 9/11, it becomes increasingly clear that religion plays an important role in national and international affairs, even though Traditional international theories tend to reject this concept. Al-Qaeda members are overzealous Islamic militants. These men founded Al-Qaeda and participate in it with the aim of propagating and imposing by force their version of Islamic values. The presence of such an aggressive religious state has negative consequences for the entire world. Western and secular states are subject to aggression from overly religious autocracies and risk being victims of terrorist attacks orchestrated by fanatics. States heavily influenced by religion, such as Islam, tend to be autocracies. However, an autocracy does not necessarily have to have a strong religious influence. It can be seen that many weaker countries in the Middle East and elsewhere are easily manipulated by the religious fanatics residing on their borders. These religious fanatics settle within the borders of these weaker states for several reasons. First, the ruling regime does not necessarily have the power to control outbreaks of religious fanaticism, nor is it always concerned with guaranteeing basic human rights. Second, due to the weakness or apathy of the government in power, poverty is widespread. Widespread poverty, neglect of human rights and lack of control lead to the birth and rapid growth of terrorist organizations within the borders of a state, as citizens residing in that state are more likely to turn to other non-governmental organizations, such as Al-Qaeda, for help. The bare necessities and security that their official government has failed to provide. To resolve the problem of religious resurgence, secularists would look at the situation along one of two trajectories. The secularist trajectory and the secular Judeo-Christian trajectory are the two branches of secularist theory. Secularists view religion and religious fanatics as “an adversary and obstacle to modern politics.” Judeo-Christian secularists see religion as “a source of unity and identity that generates conflict in modern international politics” (Hurd 23). A Judeo-Christian secularist would have a more positive view of religion in general, unlike a secularist who would advocate the abolition of religion, particularly in the political realm. The Judeo-Christian layman believes that the conflict in the Middle East is caused by ethnic conflict and the lack of Christian values ​​in the region. Associating secularism with a religion seems contradictory; However, as can be seen in the United States, "Christian values" have always played a role in representative politics due to a representative's personal philosophies and those of their constituents. These “Christian values” that countries adopt under the guise of Westernization cause conflicts and tensions between non-Western Islamic states. This tension pushes Islamic terrorists stationed in the Middle East to preemptively strike Western countries. A secularist finds fault with religious influences in politics, regardless of denomination. He or she would recognize that the central issue driving the conflict in the Middle East and the growing threat of terrorism is directly linked to the religious resurgence throughout the world. A secularist advocates for a state free of religious influence, which is arguably not visible in today's world, even with France's secularist policies. France pursues a policy of secularism, meaning that church and state are completely separate. The government does not even collect data on citizens' religious preferences (Khosrokhavar 2015). However, if we ask Muslims living within French borders, this policy is not enforced to the extent the government would have us believe. The day after the Charlie Hebdo shootings, the New York Times published an article by Farahad Khosrokhavar entitled “The Mill of Muslim Radicalism in France.” As previously stated, the French are known to have racist tendencies towards Arabs and Muslims. We could compare France's prejudices against Muslims to American prejudices against African-Americans. Muslims represent only 7 to 10% of the French population, but around 50% of the prison population in France. Even in prison, many Muslims feel persecuted. Khosrokhavar interviewed a French Muslim who said: “Look at how a Catholic or a Jew is treated and look at how we are treated. They have their weekly prayers; in this prison we don't have prayers on Friday. Their rabbi can go to all the cells; our Muslim minister cannot. There is kosher food, but no halal meat. They despise us and they call it secularism. This is somewhat of a misconception. Muslim ministers are allowed in French prisons but often do not visit them; and halal meat is increasingly available, but French secular policies and prejudice against Muslims make young men on the streets and in prisons feel the need for retaliation. Another young Muslim interviewed by Khosrokhavar said: “If you are Muslim and ask to participate in Friday prayers, they write down your name and give it to General Intelligence. (French equivalent of the FBI.) If I try to take my prayer rug into the yard, they ban it. If I grow a beard, the guards call me Bin Laden, smile at me and make fun of me. They hate Islam. But Islam can take revenge.” This mistreatment of Muslim men in a secular society, such as that of France, transforms even moderate or non-practicing Muslims into.