Failure™ Magazine

Failure of the Year 2001

Terrorism.

Written by Jason Zasky   Filed under History

It’s also true that bin Laden was taking aim at more than just the World Trade towers and the Pentagon on September 11. When the Palestine Liberation Organization and its Black September group seized and murdered eleven Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, their cause was immediately recognized the world over. Although the attacks of September 11 were much more lethal and audacious, the effect was much the same: A relatively obscure organization and its leader became infamous in the course of a single morning.

However, Al Qaeda appears to be falling short in achieving its ultimate goals, just like Black September’s Olympic attack failed to liberate imprisoned Palestinians. By repeatedly calling for jihad, bin Laden was hoping to pit Arabs and Muslims in a war against the West, thereby fostering unrest in one or more Arab nations, whereby he might have the opportunity to seize power and eventually attempt take control of surrounding nations. Unless the conflict extends to other Middle Eastern countries, this seems unlikely to occur. In part, this is because the war has been well conceived. From the beginning, President Bush emphasized that the war was strictly against terrorists (and those that harbor them), not against Muslim people. Moreover, in spite of Taliban protests to the contrary (and broadcasts of the 24-hour Arabic news network Al Jezeera), civilian casualties have been few.

Meanwhile, while Osama bin Laden has more than his fair share of sympathizers in the Middle East, September 11 and other recent events seem to have moved the governments and/or the people of several Arab nations closer to the U.S. and the freedoms it represents. For example, the Afghan people are clearly enjoying their expansion of freedoms in the post-Taliban environment, the government of Yemen abruptly began cooperating with the U.S. in hopes of reducing the number of terrorists within its borders, and the people of Iran have recently been openly demonstrating strong pro-American sentiment. Moreover, anti-U.S. rhetoric has dulled in recent weeks and the Arab media has begun criticizing bin Laden.

Finally, the war on terrorism has already made an immediate impact on the functionality of terrorist cells around the world; Arrests have been made, supplies of funding cut off, and communications increasingly monitored and/or intercepted. The intelligence agencies of individual nations suddenly have become more receptive to the idea of cooperating with one another. In Afghanistan, the Taliban has been toppled, Al Qaeda’s bases have been bombed, and its activities disrupted. Osama bin Laden and his surviving aides are either on the run or in hiding. Although the reasons are different, as with Black September, Al Qaeda’s signature attack has made it less viable as a continuing operation.

Of course, destroying Al Qaeda and bringing Osama bin Laden and his aides to justice is only a small part of the ongoing fight. To begin with, no one can be sure how a badly wounded Al Qaeda will act, so thwarting potential revenge attacks is at the top of the list of priorities. Al Qaeda aside, the long term outlook for terrorism isn’t encouraging, as the geographical spread of attacks figures to continue, and the stakes get higher as weapons of mass destruction become cheaper and easier for small groups to acquire.

Ironically, the so-called “success” of the September 11 attacks—and to a lesser degree, the anthrax letters—is already working against future and would-be terrorists. Regardless of the outcome of any overseas military action, the most critical battles of the war will be fought on American soil. Most of the work will be done by domestic intelligence officers, as well as ordinary civilians like bankers, security guards and public officials. In this regard, the events of 2001 have brought immediate and soon-to-be-realized changes, all of which will make it increasingly difficult for terrorists to operate inside the United States.

For example, U.S. intelligence agencies are restructuring themselves to more efficiently combat this new enemy and now have significantly more potential recruits to choose from. Border controls and entry restrictions are tighter, and security forces have more leeway in detaining potentially threatening individuals. It goes without saying that potential targets are now being more closely guarded and suspicious activity is more likely to be reported by civilians. Again, the list of changes goes on and on.

President Bush has stated that the United States will not fail in the war against terrorism. In this case, that might depend on what each individual’s perception of success or failure is. Newly appointed Director of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, has one of the toughest jobs imaginable. Even if he successful in thwarting 98% of all threats, he will be viewed as having failed. However, one thing is for certain. The United States is far better prepared for this fight than it was prior to September 11.

Page 2 of 2 pages < 1 2