The collapse of the nation state has been evident in many fields from the shrinking of the state as a guarantor of welfare for citizens, its retreat from the economy, the unpopularity of socialism in the onslaught of neo-liberalism and now, in the global wave of terrorism.

Of course, terrorism is not new, as the English discovered in 1605 when Guy Fawkes was arrested in his attempt to blow up Westminster Palace in a Catholic attempt to counter the Anglican hegemony.

That was even before the Peace of Westphalia, which established the modern principle of the sovereignty of the state. Terrorism has always been a useful weapon for the angst-ridden and oppressed masses in standing up to powerful state apparatuses even former South African president Nelson Mandela did not discount it as a method of liberation.

The distinction today is that terrorism in many ways has a global look to it. We are not talking about the Palestinian resistance, or the conflict in Ireland, Chiapas or Chechnya, but when we talk about global terror networks that are the obsession now symbolised by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

This form of terrorism sustains itself in the global village abetted by the latest information technology and weaponry. The IRA and the PLO operates within the nation state context both seek national liberation, although both also challenge the Webberian notion of the state's monopoly of violence.

This challenge is also reflected in the American psyche in its extremely liberal attitude to gun control and the enshrinement of the right to bear arms in the Second Amendment.

Global terror networks however take it to a different level; inspired by an international, universal cause, and seeking to shake the very foundations of the nation state and operate on a global scale.

Therefore it comes as no surprise that global terrorism takes the headline as the nation state is going through a radical change itself. With Nietzsche-like confidence, some indeed regard the state as dead. The consequences of terrorism are even more serious than any other challenge on the state in other fields.

American hegemony

One of the primary causes of the growth of global terrorism is American hegemony, which has both beneficial and detrimental effects, depending on how its leadership decides to use it.

When America refused Colonel House and Woodrow Wilson's attempt to allow it more involvement in global issues in the aftermath of World War I, the League of Nations floundered, and failed to stop Hitler bringing World War II.

Roosevelt wanted to ensure America would never again shirk from playing an active role in global affairs, and thus the United Nations was formed with much enthusiasm and idealism.

Then the world was split between two camps of former wartime allies the US and the USSR. America, therefore, in an attempt to contain its nemesis, played a global role far from what would be normally expected of a nation state. So did the Soviets.

Both were guided by ideals that extended beyond the nation state democratic liberalism for the former, and socialism for the latter.

Often, in order to defeat the enemy, ideals were discarded as being of secondary importance. The US intervened even against the people's will in Vietnam, Chile, Iran and Central America, to win the Cold War. This had more to do with paranoia rather than securing its eventual victory against the Soviets.

Furthermore, it created global enemies for America. It armed anyone including ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Osama who chose to be their allies in the Cold War. Saddam was pivotal as he fought the Mullahs from Iran, while Osama fought the Soviets.

This dogmatic enthusiasm has created the global terrorism it is now trying so hard to fight. America is viewed with much animosity throughout the world, thereby providing zealots with ready volunteers to terrorise the Americans and their allies.

The weaponry, funds and training provided by the Americans have provided useful help in aiding their own enemies, so often made of their former proxies.

The US needs to strive to work through international law and institutions especially the UN in order to battle the onslaught on the nation state.

The state too, must not be allowed to shrink to meaningless entity. Its function in providing minimal welfare and security are important to combat the onslaught of global terrorism, and reinstate its function to common citizens.

True, the state needs to be dynamic; yet a state that fulfils fundamental socio-economic needs of its citizens can still be flexible and modern. These have a longer lasting effect in guaranteeing global stability, more than any violent and illiberal measures preferred by many nation states today.

Otherwise the cycle of terrorism will not stop. It will only continue to grow and undermine the state, and in the long term, might lead to total anarchy. America needs to question the presidential wisdom of George W. Bush and remind itself of those of Wilson and Roosevelt.

NIK NAZMI NIK AHMAD is a Malaysian commentator, writer and activist with an interest in global issues.