AP Comparative Politics
Article Analysis
Title: “Global Warning”
Author: Philip Bobbitt
Source: New York Times
1. General Summary
On October 3, the United Kingdom was warned, by France and Germany, of potential terrorist attacks in Europe, where as the United States was also advised about the same issue by the State Department. Shortly after, French Government alerted its citizens of an increased risk of terrorist attack in Britain. However, the warnings received by the American and British governments have only been considered confusing in light of recent events. Thus, there is great controversy over how the issue of warnings should be dealt with, since the potential terrorist situation is credible but not yet detailed enough. If the warnings are true, separating it into three distinct functions should make an improvement in alert system. What the government should do, is if it believes there is an imposing threat, then they should inform the public about the nature of the threat, but not divulge any more information.
2. Constructing Support
In this article, there are a couple restatements of past events, which result in sparking the new way that Britain is handling the potential terrorism threats. The article mentioned the incidents at North Waziristan, past information on Osama bin Laden’s planned attacks after his release, as well as actual threats that France and Germany had received over the past few years. With all of these past events as supporting evidence, the United Kingdom is able to make these assumptions and moves forward to avoid running into any snags.
3. Constructing Support
Overall, the article can sense that the United Kingdom was attempting to garner more and more the sense of a community as a whole, where their citizens can rely on the government for their safety. With the increased awareness of the need to have a better alert system, it also can be drawn that the government is taking more of an active lead and trying to create a...