It is wishful thinking for Americans of any political hue to expect that Barack Obama or John McCain will be able to fight terrorism quite differently from George Bush, whether in Afghanistan, Iraq or elsewhere.
His shoot-from-the-hip policies have created long term cages that make it almost impossible for the US to change course regardless of hope-filled audacity. The fact is that post-Bush terrorism has no purely military or non-military solution.
Victory will come, if ever, from the right mix of both but nobody knows how to blend the brew and how long that might take. There are no historical precedents or points of reference around which to build exit strategies or solutions.
Short of ordering a rapid retreat from Iraq and Afghanistan, like from Vietnam, there is little prospect of disengagement without ceding large territories to those who hate America.
The continuing presence of US and allied troops foments more hate but leaving will intensify medium and long-term danger from terrorism. The menace of terrorism is clear and present and affects most of the world’s people; yet no foreign government is siding whole-heartedly with US-led military solutions.
This is partly because of fear and partly because of distrust in US competence and leadership. Everybody follows a winner but the US performance so far seems to be leading to failure. So its friends are discreetly abandoning ship.
This is already clear. Even at the height of the Iraq war, British troops made up less than 10% of the US presence. Other coalition members brought in token troops but continue to demand large political and financial favors in return. In Afghanistan, Washington’s closest NATO allies are very reluctant participants although Americans are taking the lion’s share of deaths and casualties.
Before political quarrels among Americans worsen in the run up to November, it is best to call a spade a spade. Regardless of political affiliation or anger against Bush, it is worth noting that the cages built during the past six years are so robust that they could get the best of any Houdini.
This is not an exaggeration. Terrorists and their sympathizers, who used to be holed up in backward Afghanistan, have entered vast swathes of territory in less than four years. Their most sinister gains are in Pakistan and Algeria.
In Pakistan, both the Taliban and al Qaeda are disliked foreigners in normal times. But they have gained so many local sympathizers that they are gradually taking control of the North Western provinces and Baluchistan. Those rugged territories are inhabited by such obscurantist tribal people that locating and killing terrorists hiding among them is next to impossible.
Only two paths remain to neutralize terrorists. One is to start winning the military war in Iraq and Afghanistan so clearly that allies return to Washington’s side to help wherever needed. That would boost the diplomatic and political tracks of installing and sustaining peace for reconstruction.
The other way to neutralize terrorists enjoying safe haven in Pakistan and elsewhere would be to turn the local people against them. That requires economic development, education and similar activities to create significant prosperity. This is a distant dream not least because the terrorists know it and have no compunctions about killing innocents to prevent stability through bomb blasts, kidnapping and extortion.
Bush is not entirely at fault. Extremists may have gained influence even in the absence of the US invasions simply because of backwardness, tribalism, ignorance and poverty. The difference is that the problem would have been for local governments to solve.
Instead, Bush’s policies have given the American people ownership of intractable situations born of medieval thought patterns light years away from them. The US is now the egg between the hammer of zealots fighting to destroy the anvil of local governments.
US involvement is a boon for both local governments and terrorists. Governments can become rich with money from American tax payers while escaping their people’s wrath by blaming US “militarism”. Terrorists gain local support by saying they are the only ones capable of purging the region of infidel US influence.
The situation is similar in Algeria, where the terrorists have reconstituted themselves as al Qaeda in the Maghreb. After over 20 years of fighting, government forces were starting to corner Islamic terrorists. In an act of despair, they contacted al Qaeda in Pakistan and received sufficient arms and training to stem defeat.
Something similar happened in Iraq’s Sunni triangle with the creation of al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Currently indigenous tribal leaders are resisting al Qaeda’s foreign elements but are no less opposed to US presence in their region.
This kind of hybrid al Qaeda presence is spreading to Sudan, Somalia and Ethiopia, and may also have arrived in Nigeria. It is characterized by local fighters who tie up with Pakistan-based al Qaeda to gain training and weapons. In exchange they tack on to their parochial agendas, the al Qaeda requirements of adopting its name and attacking local symbols of American and allied presence.
Now that this cancer has spread so far, it is unrealistic to expect that Bush’s successor will be able to excise it quickly or cleanly whatever he might promise to get your vote.