Terror fight needs refocus, RAND says
Source: Agencies |
July 27, 2011, Wednesday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
THE US effort against international terror has run off the rails a couple times in the past decade, and it needs serious redirecting right now, according to the influential RAND Corp.
Missteps include overconfidence in rebuilding Afghanistan, launching a war in Iraq that did little to weaken al-Qaida, and actions that helped militant groups recruit more followers, like the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison, said authors of a RAND book released yesterday.
"The Long Shadow of 9/11: America's Response to Terrorism," a compilation of essays, is being released as the Senate meets to confirm a new nominee for director of the National Counterterrorism Center, a post created in response to a commission's report that investigated the September 11 attacks against the US and the government's reaction. The center was envisioned as a way to share and streamline intelligence-gathering among the CIA, FBI and other agencies so as to head off another terror attack. The nominee is career Justice Department lawyer, Matthew Olsen, currently the general counsel for the clandestine eavesdropping service, the National Security Agency.
The problem now is almost the opposite of that which caused 9/11, according to nominee Olsen's predecessor, Mike Leiter, who chose to leave after serving two administrations in almost five years at the round-the-clock post. Leiter says there is so much data indicating so many threats that it is difficult to figure out which poses the most clear and present danger.
The RAND essays said intelligence sharing has helped uncover terror plots but missteps have cost money and lives. RAND senior political scientist Arturo Munoz argues the United States should have backed Afghan President Hamid Karzai's outreach to the Taliban in December 2001. "A peace process among the Afghans was being discussed at the time, only to be repudiated by the Americans," Munoz wrote. He suggests withdrawing many of the troops, and working within Afghan culture instead of imposing a US-style democracy.
Several authors argued the US invasion of Iraq was a mistaken overreach of American power, leading to a waste of resources that could have been focused better on al-Qaida.
Missteps include overconfidence in rebuilding Afghanistan, launching a war in Iraq that did little to weaken al-Qaida, and actions that helped militant groups recruit more followers, like the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison, said authors of a RAND book released yesterday.
"The Long Shadow of 9/11: America's Response to Terrorism," a compilation of essays, is being released as the Senate meets to confirm a new nominee for director of the National Counterterrorism Center, a post created in response to a commission's report that investigated the September 11 attacks against the US and the government's reaction. The center was envisioned as a way to share and streamline intelligence-gathering among the CIA, FBI and other agencies so as to head off another terror attack. The nominee is career Justice Department lawyer, Matthew Olsen, currently the general counsel for the clandestine eavesdropping service, the National Security Agency.
The problem now is almost the opposite of that which caused 9/11, according to nominee Olsen's predecessor, Mike Leiter, who chose to leave after serving two administrations in almost five years at the round-the-clock post. Leiter says there is so much data indicating so many threats that it is difficult to figure out which poses the most clear and present danger.
The RAND essays said intelligence sharing has helped uncover terror plots but missteps have cost money and lives. RAND senior political scientist Arturo Munoz argues the United States should have backed Afghan President Hamid Karzai's outreach to the Taliban in December 2001. "A peace process among the Afghans was being discussed at the time, only to be repudiated by the Americans," Munoz wrote. He suggests withdrawing many of the troops, and working within Afghan culture instead of imposing a US-style democracy.
Several authors argued the US invasion of Iraq was a mistaken overreach of American power, leading to a waste of resources that could have been focused better on al-Qaida.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
