GLOBAL ASSESSMENT: http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com

[Guest guest]

A Global Assessment of the Confrontation

http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/

- by Dr. Walid Phares

January 2, 2008

 

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 Musharraf’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 Musharraf. 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 Western pressures; 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 Wahhabi 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 Future Terrorism

Project at the Foundation for the Defense of

Democracies in Washington, a visiting scholar at the

European Foundation for Democracy and the author of

the War of Ideas. Dr Phares was one of the architects

of UNSCR 1559. He is also a Professor of Middle East

Studies at Florida Atlantic University.

 

http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/w_phares/2008/01022008.htm

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping