Perspective: The War On Terror Is Poorly Waged

09/29/2005

Paul Munnis

Today Army General Abizaid appeared before the Congress to provide a testimony on the war in Iraq. The timing for this is critical because the Iraqi elections are looming in the near horizon and U.S. troop withdrawal is linked to that election. He made several points that impressed me.

The first was the idea of al Qaeda as being not that of a monolith but rather being a franchise like McDonalds with outlets springing up around the world in places where they seek to create a foothold that they can then operate from. He showed a graphic that made the point that there are many cells and that they are located all over the world where governance is poor and they are increasing at a fast pace. He made the point that the Army cannot go to war against every cell in every nation and that the U.S. has to engage al Qaeda politically, economically, militarily, and strategically to win.

The second impact of his talk was the idea of al Qaeda as having a mission of global dominion. They see themselves as pervading the rest of the world over a long period of time. He made the point that they need to be dissolved before they become mischievous. They are spreading Muslimism world religion according to the General and that is their key goal.

The third point that he made is that the U.S. cannot be defeated in Iraq and Afghanistan by conventional forces but that these insurgents are not conventional by any means. 

As one watched the General laying out the situation and the problems that we face it is apparent that we are doing mighty little and working in mighty poor ways to win this war on terrorism. The only efforts that are readily apparent to citizens are a war in Afghanistan and a war in Iraq and these are the center of attention while al Qaeda is growing and prospering elsewhere. We are fighting the Iraq and Afghanistan battles but losing the global war is the conclusion that I drew from listening to him.

He is of course right. The bombings in Madrid and London make his point loud and clear. There are other cells throughout the world, they are organizing, and they are able to strike out at the societies that host them at will. They must be contained and broken up.

A number of things are needed to combat the growth of terrorism and we will review some of them. We start with religious freedom and tolerance for other people’s belief system. America guarantees this, or we did until the religious right got its hooks into Washington. If Muslims want to worship in America we should have no issue with that and we should give them full protection under the law to do so. That does not mean that we should be blind to possible attempts to use Muslim facilities for illegal activities. Our government has failed on this matter with other religious organizations. An example is the Branch Davidians in Waco, TX, not so very long ago. Ruby Ridge was another poor FBI operation dealing with people who believe differently from main-stream America. We need to practice and export tolerance for other religions and we tried to do so routinely until the Bush Administration came along with their monotheistic orientation to religion. We must not get sucked into re-fighting the Crusades by the Christian religious right. When people are free to form religious units and openly practice their religion they do not have to act covertly or go to war with the countries they are in.

We had a domestic police unit called the FBI charged with dealing with national cells of terrorists and who have frankly become inept at their job. They apparently have become so bureaucratic and so political that they have failed at their basic missions. At least this is what we are told by various commissions like the 911 Commission. We have no evidence that this branch of service has been revitalized as yet and we know it must be made into an effective organization once again as a part of the war on terror.

We need to be working effectively to spot, identify, infiltrate, and disrupt these cells when they form. That is the job of our CIA. For a civilian to throw stones at a covert organization is ludicrous. We do not know even 2% of what the CIA is up to and that is by design. We have been told however that they need to concentrate more on infiltration and human intelligence penetration. We accept that as constructive criticism from men who do know more about the CIA than we do. However, we have little evidence of effectiveness as yet.

We need to be working through the UN in a coordinated command and control manner using Interpol to gather intelligence, to share it, and to collaborate at striking terrorists cells. This is not a time bounded effort either. It may have to go on forever. So we need to organize to make it happen. We are not doing so.

Little of this proactive work is happening and we are told that international intelligence service rivalry and poor relations with other nations in terms of American Foreign Policy is the reason why we are not being effective. We know that Colin Powell was a failed Secretary of State. We know that Bush has been in conflict with every single national leader in the world. We know that John Ashcroft was not good at managing his department of Justice including the FBI. Bush was getting on good with Tony Blair but after he abandoned Blair to anti-war politicians in Britain then coolness has developed between them. So Bush has isolated America and that is not conducive to winning the War on Terrorism.

An American Foreign Policy of First Strike is a ridiculous policy for America to adopt. We are the most powerful nation in the world. We possess incredible lethal force. We have proven time and again that we can take blows and retaliate effectively and we have no formidable military forces we face. Thus we have no need for a policy that gives us the freedom to deliver nuclear holocaust on the world if Bush feels like it. This may seem like an extreme statement but if you view America from the viewpoint of other nations then we are the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons in war and against other nations and people. We have a history of threatening to use them on others and the Cold War left many people fearful of American military might. Now when they see a U.S. president that is warlike and a political party that dreams of empire with a national policy of first-strike, such a policy leaves them fearing the U.S. and our intentions.

Then there is economic interdiction of funds used to finance terrorism. America has been mighty slow to deal with this and it is largely because we are not enjoying good relations with other nations We are in need of an effective offensive in the areas of finance and economics, it should be lead by the U.S. Treasury Department, yet we have one of the weakest Treasury Secretaries ever seen in America.

So if we are losing the war on terrorism do we blame the Army? No, because they are only part of the force that must be used to stop terrorism.

Do we blame those who have declared a war on terrorists and then turned in a shoddy performance? Yes, very much so.  We have to lay the blame at their doorstep because they are the ones who are failing us. We have a president who has failed politically in Iraq and Afghanistan and the results show. He has not won the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. He is praying for a propaganda victory in terms of the vote on the Iraqi Constitution. If he gets it then civil war seems certain and so how is that good for America or Iraq? Bush is now the recruiting poster child for al Qaeda. His policies of torture and abuse of POW’s are a case in point of providing ammunition for al Qaeda recruiters.

The American people are not to be fooled. Bush is losing the war on terrorism and we all know it. The question is: what are we going to do about it?