Status on the Global War on Terror
A lot of people have commented about whether the “Global War on Terror” should actually be called the “Global War on Terror”. Is it really global? Can nation war against terror or should it be policed? Should nations provide military assets to fight the fight? Should the war be directed at specific nation states or terrorist groups? How long will the “Long War” be?
In November 2001, President Bush made the following statement.
Early on in GWOT, many industrial nations successfully used two of the four instruments of national power (diplomatic and economic) to suppress, hinder, and/or cripple terrorist networks and activities. However, many nations did not want to use their militaries to take the fight to the terrorists. In addition, most nations, to include the US, have not engaged in Information operations so as to not upset their Muslim constituents.
During the Afghanistan war (the first front in GWOT), mostly American and British forces with the assistance of host nation entities took the fight to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. While several countries expressed “sympathy” most were unwilling to commit military forces; especially given the disastrous Russian defeat at the hands of the Afghanistanis a decade before.
However, by routing the Taliban and Al Qaeda swiftly and engaging NATO early, President Bush was able to get several European nations to join the fight militarily. As of 31 July 2006, 36 NATO and non-NATO nations have 18,500 forces deployed in Afghanistan and are taking the fight to the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the southern regions. There is not a resurgence of Taliban in Afghanistan. Instead, the fight is now being taken to the southern part of Afghanistan. It is this coalition that can keep up the fight for the long term that will ensure a free and democratic Afghanistan. President Bush recognized long ago that GWOT would be a “Long War” and America would need the assistance of other countries for the long fight ahead. By successfully engaging NATO and non-NATO European governments, he has set the stage to free up US forces for operations in Iraq and beyond to accomplish his Middle East Initiative.
Most importantly, President Bush has gotten 36 other nations to use another instrument of national power, their military. These nations now have a dog in the fight and are committed to fighting GWOT. They are no longer just sympathizing; they are actively bringing the fight to the enemy. They are performing. It is one thing to see another nation attacked or to let the police forces in your country deal domestically with terrorists as you go on with your day-to-day life. It is entirely another thing to have your army on the front lines in foreign countries fighting the enemy directly, stabilizing a society, and reconstructing a country that has been ransacked by terrorists. The stories of their soldiers will be brought back to their countries where the information war will, over time, be fought against not only the terrorists abroad, but also at home and against ambivalence among its citizens.
Iraq (the second front in GWOT), is a much larger and harder mission, especially given the fact it is bordered by two countries intent of its failure and has three distinct religious/ethnic groups vying for control of it. However, there too, President Bush has maintained of coalition of 27 countries continuing to use their instruments of national power. One thing that Iraq has taught terrorists is the coalitions are in it for the long term despite egregious acts of barbarism committed in the name of Allah. While some countries have lost their will, most have not.
Slowly but surely, Iraqi police and security forces are gaining the upper hand on terrorists. Slowly but surely, Iraqis are seeing democracy take hold. Slowly but surely, terrorists are losing their sympathizers. Slowly but surely, the graft in Iraqi politics is cleansing itself. All people in the Middle East are seeing what the caliphate has in store for them if they so choose that route. This is a significant informational victory. While victory has not yet been secured in Iraq, it is inching closer everyday despite the forces arrayed against it.
Lebanon (the third front in GWOT) is a blessing in disguise. While a crushing defeat of Hezbollah by Israel would have weakened Iran and Syria, it would not have brought these regimes down with it. Iran and Syria were able to stay on the sidelines during the Lebanon-Israeli war. It is a blessing for the people of Lebanon that they saw what allowing a terrorist group to exist in their national border would bring them. It is a blessing in that France has now brought itself to the forefront in GWOT. While trying to backtrack on its sponsorship of Resolution 1701, Lebanon and the UN are looking for France to commit troops on the ground to secure the fragile peace that now exists.
France is the last industrialized nation to commit its Soldiers to GWOT. Up to this time, it has not been performing nor sympathizing. It has been a neutral player, not wanting to incite protests from Muslims at home nor venture beyond its shores to militarily assist in GWOT. It may now be forced to commit. Providing a large force in Lebanon, it will have no chance but to commit to GWOT for the long term. Its frontline enemy will be Hezbollah, supported in the background by Syria and Iran. France, for its part, is using diplomacy very well prior to committing its military. It secured a peace and is now getting the UN to commit to a robust set of Rules of Engagement (ROE) to ensure it is not the sitting duck it was in 1983. It is diplomatically getting the UN to commit to GWOT; something America has not been able to do for five years. At this point, all Lebanon, Israel, and the US have to do it to continue apply pressure, France will do the rest.
Russia is a necessary ally not unlike WWII. It is battling terrorist to its south with a ruthlessness that would not be tolerated in the West. China is still waiting in the wings not wanting to support US hegemony nor loose its influence. For that it will pay dearly in the future. Germany will remain an industrial base for the EU to continue to fight terror abroad. The stain of WWII will prevents its military from being on the front lines in GWOT.
So to answer the questions posed above.
Is it really global? It wasn’t, but it is starting to be as more and more nations are committing their militaries to fight GWOT. France is the last western industrialized nation to hold out on committing forces.
Can nations war against terror or should it be policed? Both, it is policed domestically and fought violently abroad.
Should nations provide military assets to fight the fight? They are beginning to realize that they can either fight terrorists now on their own territory or later at home. This reason alone is why China will pay dearly in the future.
Should the war be directed at specific nation states or terrorist groups? At nations when nations are overtly sponsoring terrorism like in Afghanistan and Iraq. At terrorists groups when covert sponsorship prevails like in Lebanon.
How long will the “Long War” be? President Bush in five short years has been able to assemble western industrialized nations’ militaries for the upcoming battle while they still have a chance to fight the enemy on his own soil. Roosevelt and Churchill were not able to accomplish this in WWII. By the time Allied Forces were assembled, a Normandy invasion was needed to gain a foothold against Hitler. This time, forces are assembled and are employing all instruments of national power to prevent an Al Qaeda or Iranian caliphate from taking over the Middle East which would undoubtedly bring us to unlimited, global warfare, the likes of which the world has not seen since WWII.
So how long will the “Long War” be? As we slowly attrite terrorists and their sympathizers in their own countries, it will be at least another decade to bring peace to the Middle East and a generation to totally wipe terrorism out while still letting our citizens enjoy the freedoms of democracy. If, in the process of being attrited, either Iran or Al Qaeda goes nuclear, it will be a much shorter, but invariably more violent and messier war, not only in the Middle East, but also on the home front.
In November 2001, President Bush made the following statement.
"Over time it's going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity," he said. "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."He also iterated,
"A coalition partner must do more than just express sympathy; a coalition partner must perform,"One of the great battles that President Bush has undertaken on is to get other nations to use all instruments of national power, namely Diplomatic, Information, Military, and Economic (commonly referred to as DIME) focused against the enemy.
Early on in GWOT, many industrial nations successfully used two of the four instruments of national power (diplomatic and economic) to suppress, hinder, and/or cripple terrorist networks and activities. However, many nations did not want to use their militaries to take the fight to the terrorists. In addition, most nations, to include the US, have not engaged in Information operations so as to not upset their Muslim constituents.
During the Afghanistan war (the first front in GWOT), mostly American and British forces with the assistance of host nation entities took the fight to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. While several countries expressed “sympathy” most were unwilling to commit military forces; especially given the disastrous Russian defeat at the hands of the Afghanistanis a decade before.
However, by routing the Taliban and Al Qaeda swiftly and engaging NATO early, President Bush was able to get several European nations to join the fight militarily. As of 31 July 2006, 36 NATO and non-NATO nations have 18,500 forces deployed in Afghanistan and are taking the fight to the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the southern regions. There is not a resurgence of Taliban in Afghanistan. Instead, the fight is now being taken to the southern part of Afghanistan. It is this coalition that can keep up the fight for the long term that will ensure a free and democratic Afghanistan. President Bush recognized long ago that GWOT would be a “Long War” and America would need the assistance of other countries for the long fight ahead. By successfully engaging NATO and non-NATO European governments, he has set the stage to free up US forces for operations in Iraq and beyond to accomplish his Middle East Initiative.
Most importantly, President Bush has gotten 36 other nations to use another instrument of national power, their military. These nations now have a dog in the fight and are committed to fighting GWOT. They are no longer just sympathizing; they are actively bringing the fight to the enemy. They are performing. It is one thing to see another nation attacked or to let the police forces in your country deal domestically with terrorists as you go on with your day-to-day life. It is entirely another thing to have your army on the front lines in foreign countries fighting the enemy directly, stabilizing a society, and reconstructing a country that has been ransacked by terrorists. The stories of their soldiers will be brought back to their countries where the information war will, over time, be fought against not only the terrorists abroad, but also at home and against ambivalence among its citizens.
Iraq (the second front in GWOT), is a much larger and harder mission, especially given the fact it is bordered by two countries intent of its failure and has three distinct religious/ethnic groups vying for control of it. However, there too, President Bush has maintained of coalition of 27 countries continuing to use their instruments of national power. One thing that Iraq has taught terrorists is the coalitions are in it for the long term despite egregious acts of barbarism committed in the name of Allah. While some countries have lost their will, most have not.
Slowly but surely, Iraqi police and security forces are gaining the upper hand on terrorists. Slowly but surely, Iraqis are seeing democracy take hold. Slowly but surely, terrorists are losing their sympathizers. Slowly but surely, the graft in Iraqi politics is cleansing itself. All people in the Middle East are seeing what the caliphate has in store for them if they so choose that route. This is a significant informational victory. While victory has not yet been secured in Iraq, it is inching closer everyday despite the forces arrayed against it.
Lebanon (the third front in GWOT) is a blessing in disguise. While a crushing defeat of Hezbollah by Israel would have weakened Iran and Syria, it would not have brought these regimes down with it. Iran and Syria were able to stay on the sidelines during the Lebanon-Israeli war. It is a blessing for the people of Lebanon that they saw what allowing a terrorist group to exist in their national border would bring them. It is a blessing in that France has now brought itself to the forefront in GWOT. While trying to backtrack on its sponsorship of Resolution 1701, Lebanon and the UN are looking for France to commit troops on the ground to secure the fragile peace that now exists.
France is the last industrialized nation to commit its Soldiers to GWOT. Up to this time, it has not been performing nor sympathizing. It has been a neutral player, not wanting to incite protests from Muslims at home nor venture beyond its shores to militarily assist in GWOT. It may now be forced to commit. Providing a large force in Lebanon, it will have no chance but to commit to GWOT for the long term. Its frontline enemy will be Hezbollah, supported in the background by Syria and Iran. France, for its part, is using diplomacy very well prior to committing its military. It secured a peace and is now getting the UN to commit to a robust set of Rules of Engagement (ROE) to ensure it is not the sitting duck it was in 1983. It is diplomatically getting the UN to commit to GWOT; something America has not been able to do for five years. At this point, all Lebanon, Israel, and the US have to do it to continue apply pressure, France will do the rest.
Russia is a necessary ally not unlike WWII. It is battling terrorist to its south with a ruthlessness that would not be tolerated in the West. China is still waiting in the wings not wanting to support US hegemony nor loose its influence. For that it will pay dearly in the future. Germany will remain an industrial base for the EU to continue to fight terror abroad. The stain of WWII will prevents its military from being on the front lines in GWOT.
So to answer the questions posed above.
Is it really global? It wasn’t, but it is starting to be as more and more nations are committing their militaries to fight GWOT. France is the last western industrialized nation to hold out on committing forces.
Can nations war against terror or should it be policed? Both, it is policed domestically and fought violently abroad.
Should nations provide military assets to fight the fight? They are beginning to realize that they can either fight terrorists now on their own territory or later at home. This reason alone is why China will pay dearly in the future.
Should the war be directed at specific nation states or terrorist groups? At nations when nations are overtly sponsoring terrorism like in Afghanistan and Iraq. At terrorists groups when covert sponsorship prevails like in Lebanon.
How long will the “Long War” be? President Bush in five short years has been able to assemble western industrialized nations’ militaries for the upcoming battle while they still have a chance to fight the enemy on his own soil. Roosevelt and Churchill were not able to accomplish this in WWII. By the time Allied Forces were assembled, a Normandy invasion was needed to gain a foothold against Hitler. This time, forces are assembled and are employing all instruments of national power to prevent an Al Qaeda or Iranian caliphate from taking over the Middle East which would undoubtedly bring us to unlimited, global warfare, the likes of which the world has not seen since WWII.
So how long will the “Long War” be? As we slowly attrite terrorists and their sympathizers in their own countries, it will be at least another decade to bring peace to the Middle East and a generation to totally wipe terrorism out while still letting our citizens enjoy the freedoms of democracy. If, in the process of being attrited, either Iran or Al Qaeda goes nuclear, it will be a much shorter, but invariably more violent and messier war, not only in the Middle East, but also on the home front.
posted by Lieutenant Colonel Caveman at Thursday, August 24, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home