Global Assessment of the
Confrontation
December 29, 2007
2007: A
By
Walid Phares
The conflict we call the War on
Terror still continues at the end of
2007 and all indications are that
its battlefields are expected to
spread further, and escalate, in the
upcoming year.
The following is a global assessment
of the confrontation that has taken
place since 2001, though the
systematic war waged by the Jihadi
forces against democracies and the
free world began at least a decade
before 9/11. This evaluation isn't
comprehensive or definitive, but a
collection of observations related
to major benchmarks, directions and
projections.
Global cohesion lacking
The main powers and allies involved
in the War on Terror still lack
global cohesion. While the US
integrates its efforts in the
ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
with its efforts globally to defeat
al Qaeda and contain nuclear
proliferation of rogue regimes like
Iran, other powers and blocs of
countries have different outlooks
and plans. While Britain and other
U.S partners in Europe espouse
common views on the global scale,
France, Germany, Spain and Italy
agree on the Afghan theater but
still are uninvolved in the Iraqi
theater. All Atlantic partners,
however, pursue al Qaeda and
consider it -- along with other
Salafi networks -- as the principal
threat. Also, most Western partners
perceive the Iranian threat as
serious, although differ in the ways
in which to respond.
Non-Western powers fighting Jihadist
forces do not necessarily unite in
the international arena against a
common foe. India is targeted by
Islamists but doesn't associate with
the US-led efforts in the Middle
East. Russia is also at war with
Jihadi terror, yet it distances
itself from the Afghan theater,
opposes the US in Iraq, and worse,
backs the two terror-spreading
regimes in Tehran and Damascus.
In the region, Western-inclined
governments claim they fight
"terrorism" but only the terrorists
who threaten their own regimes, not
the worldwide Jihadi threat. The
current Turkish government fights
the terrorist-coined PKK, but isn't
concerned with the growth of
Wahhabism and Khomeinism in the
region. Saudi Arabia dismantles al
Qaeda cells inside the Kingdom but
still spreads fundamentalism
worldwide. Qatar hosts the largest
US base in the region, and at the
same time funds the most notorious
indoctrination programs on al
Jazeera. In short, there are several
"wars" on terror worldwide. Surely
America is leading the widest
campaign, but efforts around the
globe are still dispersed,
uncoordinated, and in many cases,
contradictive.
Afghanistan
Many critics asserted in 2007 that
the Taliban were returning and that
NATO wasn't providing full stability
yet. In my assessment, this is a
long war: the neo-Taliban weren't
able to achieve full enclave control
anywhere in the country. The
government of Mr. Karzai should take
advantage of international backing
to achieve a breakthrough in the
counter-ideology campaign, because
the US-led mission will be
successful as long as it provides
space and time for Kabul to win the
war of ideas. Efforts in 2008 must
focus on coordination with Pakistan
against the Jihadists, and on civil
society political gains.
Pakistan
Finally, General Musharaf's
government widened its military
offensives during 2007 in the
neo-Taliban zones, prompting terror
counter strikes in various cities
and a major Jihadi uprising in
Islamabad. The escalation opened a
window among political opposition to
make gains against Musharaf. By the
year's end, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz
Sharif came back to the country and
were leading the opposition in the
next elections. The assassination of
Bhutto was a setback to the
political process. Musharraf and the
secular forces need to coalesce
around a platform of national
security and democracy and move
forward with elections and
anti-Terror campaign in 2008. But
for international security, the
priority is to preserve Pakistan's
nuclear assets and keep the
Jihadists at bay. Will secular
opposition and the President
understand this higher national
priority in 2008?
Somalia
An important, but still temporary,
victory was scored in Somalia
against the Islamist Mahakem,
the Taliban of the Horn of Africa,
and it took Western support to the
Somali Government and an Ethiopian
intervention to accomplish it.
Denying a state sanctuary to al
Qaeda in Africa is a plus, but the
future will depend on Bin Laden's
advances or defeats across the
African continent in 2008.
Sudan
The main international concern in
Africa is undoubtedly toward Darfur.
The Sudanese regime was able in 2007
to stall Western intervention for
one whole year, allowing the
Janjaweed to strengthen and
perform additional atrocities.
Playing the Arab League and the
African Union roles to delay a UN
action, Khartoum is battling African
resistance movements on two fronts:
Darfur, but also the south. The
regime, similar to other Jihadi
powers in the region, is gaining
time to crumble its previous
commitments and unleash counter
campaigns. The international
campaign in Darfur must begin in
2008, otherwise the Jihadi counter
offensive in Africa will strike deep
in Chad and across the Saharan
countries by early 2009.
North Africa
Moroccan, Algerian and Tunisian
counter terrorism efforts increased
in 2007 but so did Terror attacks by
al Qaeda in the Maghreb. The North
African battlefield is now wide open
after the combat Salafists have
joined Bin Laden officially. U.S and
European support need to target the
Sahara region as a whole from
Mauritania to Chad in 2008 before it
slips to the Jihadi forces. If al
Qaeda entrenches itself in the area,
West Africa will be threatened by
2009.
Iraq
The surge by US forces and allies
has worked and al Qaeda plans have
been impacted and delayed in 2007.
The goals of the combined enemies of
Iraqi democracy (al Qaeda and the
Syrian and Iranian regimes) were to
crumble the Coalition's role and to
interdict the rise of a Government
in the country. US military action
eliminated al Qaeda's attempts to
create enclaves. The rise of Sunni
Tribes against the Terror groups in
the center is a major development in
the Iraq Theater. Furthermore, the
rise of Shia tribes in the south
against Iranian influence and in
solidarity with the central Sunni
tribes is the beginning of a
strategic shift in the country.
However the persistence of Damascus
and Tehran in supporting Terror
forces can eventually reverse these
advances. Hence, during 2008, it is
important for the US-led Coalition
to counter the moves by the Iranian
and Syrian regimes in Iraq and set
up a national Iraqi capacity to
deter the Pasdaran activities.
Iran
On the negative side, confusing
messages issued by US Congressional
leaders regarding a so-called
"dialogue" with the Iranian regime
during 2007 weakened the US
containment strategy and harmed
efforts by the Iranian opposition.
Furthermore the American NIE
findings during the Fall of this
year gave Tehran's Mullahs
additional room to maneuver. On the
positive side, the sanctions issued
by the US president against the
Pasdaran and the Quds force
reverberated throughout the country,
encouraging an escalation by the
opposition inside the country.
President Sarkozy's strong attitude
reinforced the Western coalition
against nuclear weapons sought by
the Khomeinists. However if by end
of 2008, no further containment is
achieved, by 2009, the
(Iranian-Syrian) "axis" will be
achieving a regional offensive. It
is advisable that significant
efforts to support Iran's civil
society uprising during 2008.
Syria
During 2007 the Syrian regime
continued to back Terror activities
in Iraq, Lebanon and in the
Palestinian territories without
significant responses from the
international community. In Lebanon,
the Assad regime was successful in
weakening the Government and the
Cedars revolution to a tipping
point. In Gaza, it backed Hamas coup
along with Iran. And it was able to
dodge the Hariri international
tribunal for one more year.
Furthermore Damascus continued to
strengthen its missile capabilities
and programs of weapons of mass
destruction. As for Iran, if no
serious containment strategy is
applied to the Assad regime as of
2008, by the following year a domino
effect would be taking place in the
region against the rise of
democracies with Syria playing a
significant role. During the present
year both US Congress political
messaging towards "dialogue" and the
Russian backing encouraged Assad to
pursue his policies and created
harsher conditions for the Syrian
opposition.
Lebanon
The year 2007 witnessed a series of
tragedies with terror assassinations
directed against legislators from
the majority in Parliament and a
senior general in the Lebanese Army.
Hezbollah and its allies were
successful in intimidating the
Government and the Cedars Revolution
with violence and threats. The
United States public position stayed
the course in support to the
democracy movement while French
initiatives further confused the
Lebanese. In 2008 the fate of
Lebanon will be centered on the
election of a new President. The US,
the European Union and their allies
in the region have about 9 months to
back free Lebanon, otherwise the
following year could witness the
fall of the country back into the
hands of the "axis."
Turkey
The inevitable dragging of the
Turkish Army in incursions against
the PKK in northern Iraq during 2007
indirectly serves the interests of
the Syro-Iranian "axis." It also
deflects the attention from the
ideological change performed by the
Islamist Government in Ankara.
Saudi Arabia
During 2007, the Saudi Kingdom
continued its efforts against the al
Qaeda cells inside the country. It
developed additional tactics to wage
theological pressures on the
organization. But at the same time,
Saudi funds were still made
available to fundamentalists around
the world.
Russia
Although Russia continues to be a
main target to Wahhabi and Jihadist
terror and incitement, ironically,
the Putin government during 2007
staged three moves to the advantage
of terror regimes: opposing the US
missile defense system in Europe,
meant to protect Europe from the
Khomeinist threat; shielding Tehran
from Wsetern ressures; and
protecting the Assad regime. In
2008, the current direction taken by
the Kremlin should be addressed
seriously by the US and Europe
through a historic and open dialogue
on the future of Terrorism. Russia's
current policies, if not corrected,
can backfire against its own
national security in view of the
Jihadist rising activities in
Chechnya and the Caucasus as well as
in central Asia.
India
India continued to be targeted by
the Jihadists in 2007. As a nuclear
power, and the largest democracy in
the world, this country should be
further included in the
international coalition against
Terror and granted a more important
role in south Asia in 2008.
China
During 2007, Chinese technology and
weapons continued to flow to
Terrorism-supporting regimes
including Sudan, Iran and Syria. As
for Russia, China's own security
within its own borders can be
affected by a growing Jihadi network
in its north Western provinces.
France
The election of Nicholas Sarkozy in
2007 is a positive development as
the new President intends to
increase French participation in the
War against Terrorism. Continuous
incitements by Jihadists networks
against France also escalated
projecting forthcoming
confrontations in France.
Europe and the West
Developments and arrests made in
Great Britain, Spain, Italy,
Germany, Denmark, Sweden, the
Netherlands and Belgium in 2007 all
indicate that Jihadi warfare in
Western Europe is to be expected in
2008 and beyond. Similar trends were
detected in Australia and Canada
during the same year
The United States
During 2007 several arrests and
dismantling of cells within the
United States demonstrated the
spread of the Jihadi networks at
various levels and in different
areas. A Projection of these
developments and of the type of
infiltrations already in place in
this country shows that the map of
the Jihadi web is much wider and
deeper than anticipated, even by
Government agencies and estimates.
The diverse nature of the Jihadi
activities in America lead me to
believe that the next waves will be
more sophisticated and better
inserted in the institutions and
society. The 2007 arrests and
reports show that the Jihadists had
interest in penetrating the US
defense system.
However another type of threat has
also appeared: the Jihadi
ideological penetration of various
spheres of education and
decision-making, including at the
strategic level. Both Wahabi and
Khomeinist funding and influence
have been spotted in 2007. The US
Congress and the Administration
should be spending time and efforts
during 2008 to develop a national
consensus on the definition of the
threat doctrine, Jihadism. Short of
achieving a minimal understanding of
the Terror ideology, 2009 and beyond
will witness a faster mutation of
the Jihadi threat inside the
country.
Dr Walid Phares is the Director of
the Future Terrorism Project at the
Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies and a Visiting Scholar
at the European Foundation for
Democracy. He is the author of
Future
Jihad and TheWar of Ideas.
|