Summary of the War on Terror

The War on Terror began in 2001, led by the United States and the UK, as a response to the 9/11 attacks.  The basic goal of this operation was to remove Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.  President George W. Bush coined the term “War on Terror,” but this term has since been replaced with “Overseas Contingency Operation,” as requested by President Barack Obama.  The War on Terror has become an overarching name for smaller efforts, operations, and practices that aim at the larger goal of eradicating terrorism.  In October of 2001, about one month after the September 11^th attacks, the US, along with the UK and other allies, invaded Afghanistan in attempt to overthrow the Taliban government.  Subsequent operations followed in attempt to destroy terrorist camps, al-Qaeda, and Taliban forces in the mountains of Afghanistan.  In 2003, the US declared “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” leading a ground invasion of Iraq along with a ‘coalition of willing’ countries.  The UN Security Council blocked the invasion of Iraq, but the United States continued the invasion unilaterally.  Through the years, many have criticized the War on Terror.  One major point of contention was the United States’ invasion of Iraq and it’s claim that this invasion was part of the War on Terror.  Others have been dismayed at the cost of the war, soaring into trillions of dollars.  Although the casualties of the War on Terror have been fewer than any other decade in the past century, many have pointed to these deaths as being unnecessary.  The war in Iraq ended in December of 2011, and troops in Afghanistan are to be sent home by 2014. 

Summary of the September 11^th Attacks

The 9/11 attacks on the United States were planned attacks by the terrorist group al-Qaeda, headed by its’ leader Osama bin Laden.  In total, there were 4 attacks planned for September 11^th, 2001.  On the morning of September 11^th, members of al-Qaeda hijacked 4 planes. Two of these planes were flown into the Twin Towers in New York City, and one plane was flown into the Pentagon in Virginia.  The 4^th plane was likely intended to be flown into the White House or the Capital building in Washington DC.  However, passengers on this flight (flight 93) learned of the attacks and intentionally crashed the plane into the ground in Pennsylvania.  About 3,000 people were killed in the 9/11 attacks in total.  Al-Qaeda cited their motives of planning and executing 9/11 as being 1. The presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, 2. US support of Israel, and 3. US sanctions against Iraq.  The legacy of 9/11 lives on today in many ways including the boost of US national security, increased patriotism among US citizens, and memorials for victims. 

Response:

I have always been interested in the 9/11 attacks, and terrorism more generally.  I remember sitting at home on September 11^th, waiting for the bus to school, when the first tower was hit.  Although at the time I didn’t understand the size and scope of the event, it has since shaped my life in significant ways.  In May, I will be graduating with degrees in both Psychology and International Affairs in hopes of contributing the US national security as a career.  The events on September 11^th have fueled my passion for contributing to the protection of the homeland. 

In response to criticisms about the War on Terror, I feel I should learn more about the reasons behind these criticisms.  I have always been supportive of the invasion of Afghanistan, as were many people post 9/11.  The invasion of Iraq, though claimed to have been part of the War on Terror, may have distracted us from our true mission of eliminating al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.  This is an issue I also wish to learn more about. 

Having learned about terrorism in my international affairs courses, It seems as though the best offense against terrorism, is a good defense.  Because terrorism is so widespread around the world, it may be impossible to eliminate all terrorist organizations.  Although I am incredibly supportive of missions that involve taking out terrorist groups, it is difficult to sustain that mission forever.  12 years after the attacks, it is imperative that we continue to monitor terrorist organizations, but emphasize homeland security as a means of protecting ourselves from terrorist attacks.  

(Sources: Wikipedia pages on “War on Terror” and “September 11^th Attacks”).


EndlessTHIS War?

According to Glenn Greenwald, the War on Terror, by design, can never end.  At least not anytime in the near future.  He estimates that the war will go on for at least another 10 years.  Despite Obama’s promise to end the war, this article paints a grim picture of the progress that has actually taken place since Obama took office.  Greenwald cites many examples of this lack of progress such as: “a new scheme of indefinite detention on US soil, relocation of Guantanamo to Illinois, increased secrecy, and repression and release-restrictions at the camp."  Apparently to him, it sounds like the war will wage on.  He also discusses the fact that Afghan citizens are resenting a US presence more than ever, and that their grievances are becoming “unmanageable.”  Are we then, creating the terrorists we seek to destroy by simply occupying the country? Are we constructing a never-ending cycle which will continue to act as an excuse for a continued US presence in the Middle-East? Greenwald makes an interesting point.  

However, his argument begs the question: why would the US want to continue to fight this war?  He argues the US gains “limitless power, impenetrable secrecy, an unquestioning citizenry, and massive profit” as reasons to continue the war.  Does the US really need to occupy Afghanistan in order to remain the hegemonic actor in the international community? Doesn’t our massive military and having the world’s largest economy suffice? The notion that the US is gaining “limitless power” from occupying countries in the Middle-East is questionable.  And Profit? Fareed Zakaria writes that we have spent $2 trillion dollars on wars in the past 10 years.  If the US is generating profit from the war, where’s the money? Zakaria argues that the best thing Obama could do in his second term would be to end the War on Terror.  Or at least phase it out.  The war is expensive. It is a cause that we can no longer fund.  He argues that although we must continue to protect the homeland,  we should alter the ways in which we battle terrorism, perhaps in a more ‘legal’ way.  Though the US isn’t always one to act in a multilateral fashion with other countries, perhaps it is time to withdraw, and deal with the detainees we have in a law-abiding way.  As long as the US is the hegemon, I wish Zakaria good luck in persuading US officials to deal with terror legally. 

Both authors have good points.  There is no exact timeline for getting out of the Middle-East.  And it is reasonable to ask if it will ever happen.  If we look at Europe-- a region that has been war-ridden since it’s beginnings, there is hope of eventual peace.  The creation of the European Union has made war unthinkable between these nations.  Could some sort of union with our adversaries create peace? It's a nice thought, but terrorism is a different animal.  It is a global network, with countless numbers of actors, that we cannot always locate.    

Though there is a huge demand to "end the War on Terror", we must be careful about the rhetoric we use in this demand.  What does "ending the War on Terror" mean? To stop searching for top leaders of al-Qaeda?  To bow down to terrorist militant groups? Or to bring troops home from the Middle-East? We see the war through a different lens when viewing it from the US.  We must be careful not to demand an end to something without hearing the opinions and reports of progress from our military leaders. 

Our nation is without a doubt becoming exhausted from war, but our exit strategy and our rhetoric on our exit demands, must be carefully chosen.  

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/terrorism_cartoon.jpg