Countering Transnational Terrorist Support Networks: A Framework for the Long War
While eliminating the terrorist and insurgent leadership cells,
waging the ideological war against the Salafist historical narrative, and addressing the root causes of radicalization are critical to success in the war on terrorism, these efforts must be supported by counterterrorism strategies that target the connective tissue between the enemy’s strategic desires and their operational or tactical efforts.
Transnational support networks are an overlapping feature of both the global jihadist movement and the Iraqi insurgency, and, if properly targeted, they constitute the Achilles’ heel of these networks.
Where can i do to improve and focus my energy on the wrong areas where I should guidance for A work.
Mastering the weekly course objectives is not an issue for me however understand where to focus my energy I need to kn
statement of strategic clarity…US engaged in will be a long war and indeed a global one characterized by its transnational nature,
Understand the breadth and depth of the strategic battleground….the magnitude of the challenge by examining the service and support mechanisms of al Qaeda and its offspring.
Complex Adaptive System (CAS)
MEMs
Brimley claims: the ways our enemies learn and adapt to pressure, recruit followers and resupply combatants:
RESULT in offering important insights into the nature of the conflict.
Brimley claims: Using safe houses, smuggling rings, secured communications, and personnel who connect individuals to training and support networks, our enemies benefit from an interconnected global system that:
RESULTS in enabling violent groups and handicaps intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
Evidence: The recent example of a Belgian woman traveling to Iraq to perform a suicide attack against a US military convoy is a case in point.2 A convert to Islam, the woman typifies the growing threat facing Europe, America, and the nascent democracy in Iraq.
Brimley claims:
Both the global jihadist movement and insurgent forces in Iraq utilize support networks that are best characterized by their mo
bility, flexibility, and fluidity.3
Brimley believes:
Understanding and successfully targeting the service and support networks of terrorist groups is a prerequisite for success in the long war.
The Importance of Mobility and Support Networks
In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, a disproportionate amount of effort was devoted to targeting and eliminating the sources of terrorist financing to the detriment of other, more critical support mechanisms.4
Claim: Efforts at understanding, targeting, and eliminating transnational support networks should be a main effort of counterterrorism strategy.
If successful, these efforts will greatly aid the US and its allies in both prosecuting the war on terror and quelling the insurgency in Iraq.
Claim: The ability to train, move, and nourish combatants across vast distances in time & space is a constant feature of modern warfare.
— “War, with its numerous tentacles,” according to Carl von Clausewitz, “prefers to suck nourishment from main roads, populous towns, fertile valleys traversed by broad rivers, and busy coastal areas.”6
The ability of a commander to maneuver forces rapidly or clandestinely contributes significantly “to sustaining the initiative, to exploiting success, to preserving freedom of action, and to reducing vulnerability.”7
Clausewitz believed that service and support capabilities in a prolonged conflict were critical to success, writing, “Where a state of equilibrium has set in, in which troops move back and forth [freedom of action] for years in the same province, subsistence is likely to become the critical concern. In that case, the quarter-master-general becomes the supreme commander, and the conduct of war consists of organizing the wagon trains.”8
While one could certainly find proof of the validity of this insight throughout history, two modern examples are instructive.
Evidence: First, the ability of North Vietnam to sustain its massive war effort by utilizing a 10,000-mile, jungle-covered logistical pipeline greatly hampered the ability of American commanders to wage a successful counterinsurgency in the South.9
Evidence: Second, the ability of Afghan and Arab insurgents to consistently cross the Afghan-Pakistan border during the Soviet occupation was a primary reason for the defeat of the Soviet Union in 1989.10
In each case, the strategic difficulty or political impossibility of expanding conventional conflict to neighboring states bequeathed significant advantages to insurgent forces.11 Not only can mobility and support networks thrive in relatively secure areas, but neighboring states often contain large diaspora communities in which insurgents can easily disappear while regenerating supplies and raising personnel, as well as engaging in training and doctrinal innovation.
The ability of an enemy force to maintain secure areas from which to draw nourishment and reinforcements has proven to be especially vexing during insurgencies or terrorist campaigns. Virtually every great military philosopher has devoted a portion of his writing to the importance of service and support capabilities.
“Plunder fertile country to supply the army with plentiful provisions,” Sun Tzu wrote. “Pay heed to nourishing the troops; do not unnecessarily fatigue them . . . conserve their strength. Make unfathomable plans for the movements of the army.”12
Beyond statements of strategic importance, the 19th-century writings of Baron Antoine Henri de Jomini that deal with maneuver are instructive. Jomini was the first to conceive of the importance of “interior lines of operations”—routes that, if possessed, give a commander the ability “to concentrate the masses and maneuver with his whole force in a shorter period of time than it would require for the enemy to oppose to them a greater force.”13 Clausewitz would have agreed, as he too believed that “lines of communications” were critical “arteries” that sustained an army’s ability to mass force at decisive points. Telegraphing the difficulties that conventional forces would have when fighting irregular campaigns, Clausewitz wrote, “The position of lines of communication… [isa matter] of free choice only up to a certain point; their exact location is determined by the facts of geography.”14
The American experience with the Ho Chi Minh Trail and the Soviet difficulties in countering infiltration over the Hindu Kush are evidence of geography posing serious problems to countering insurgent lines of operations.
Mobility and support networks that utilize effective LOOs have been strategic problems for military commanders throughout history, and they will continue to be so, irrespective of the radical technological and doctrinal improvements in modern warfare.15
Modern transnational terrorism presents similar problems to intelligence and law-enforcement agencies.
While geography certainly plays into the difficulties in tracking down figures like Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri in the mountainous Northwest Frontier Province in Pakistan, the process of globalization has created a newly difficult topography that terrorists can use to great benefit.
The post-Cold War era has been defined by the increase in connectivity and linkages between states and among societies.
Conveniences such as the internet, instant banking, cheap travel, and mobile phones greatly increase the global reach of terrorist organiza- tions. From planning detailed and synchronous operations, to communicat- ing intent and doctrine, and to the recruitment of new members, modern transnational terror groups gain strength and capability by using a global system that at once favors the offensive and allows for greater operational security. Not only does the 21st-century global system create operational benefits, but it has changed the strategic environment in ways amenable to transnational groups like al Qaeda. According to Audrey Cronin, the strategic picture is best visualized as a broad “enabling environment of bad governance, nonexistent social services, and unmet expectations that characterizes much of the developing world.”16 The rise of al Qaeda and the process of globalization are fundamentally intertwined. Indeed, Bruce Hoffman concludes that Osama bin Laden is the “quintessential product of the 1990s and globalism, [a] terrorism CEO [that] could not have existed— and thrived—in any other era.”17
The notion that al Qaeda operates in a uniquely enabling global environment is reinforced both by its deeds and, most especially, by its means.
Rohan Gunaratna is right to criticize European counterterrorism approaches that target operational cells and “overlook support cells that disseminate propaganda, recruit members, procure supplies, maintain transport, forge false and adapted identities, facilitate travel, and organize safe houses.”18
In some ways, al Qaeda’s transnational network survives by grafting itself onto existing networks that are older and have enjoyed a long history of success.
By using gang, drug, prison, money laundering, and smuggling networks to facilitate everything from recruitment to financing, material procurement, and operational support, al Qaeda is able to sustain a horizontal network structure
Summer 2006 33
in the absence of a convenient state sanctuary. Whether one uses terms like convergence, netwar, or fourth-generation warfare to describe the systemic characteristics of transnational terror or insurgent groups, the underlying propositions are quite similar—namely that networked organizations are used both to create capabilities and to exploit an enemy’s vulnerabilities.19
In both the virtual and real worlds, networked support mechanisms are crucial to the success of transnational movements.
Support Mechanisms in a Uniquely Enabling Global Environment
Given that even horizontal transnational networks rely on a wide variety of service and support mechanisms, it is important to identify how these features add to or reinforce capability.
Too often when dealing with transnational terror or insurgent groups, analysts will attempt to explore certain features (including ideology, strategy, and tactics) without framing their efforts around a holistic picture of what the organization looks like, and how specific capabilities fit into the larger whole.Moreover, given that al Qaeda is both an organization and a movement that is constantly adapting and evolving, it is imperative to understand how specific support capabilities help it survive. The following section explores how particular support mechanisms address al Qaeda’s autonomy, representation, and influence.
Brimley states that it is worth noting that until recently, many analysts believed that large and active international terrorist organizations could not survive without significant state support.
While al Qaeda proved its spectacular capability on 9/11 2001, it displayed its truly revolutionary nature by virtue of its survival following the loss of Afghanistan as a secure state sanctuary.
In fact, al Qaeda and its affiliates have carried out nearly double the number of attacks since 9/11 that they executed prior to that date.21
— In this sense, al Qaeda’s continued existence after almost 5 years of offensive operations by the United States and its allies is evidence that it continues to be an autonomous transnational organization.
— This type of autonomy was created largely out of necessity, and it explains why we have seen al Qaeda evolve from a vertically structured organization to a horizontal, flatter structure. Where we once could link bin Laden and his immediate lieutenants to the various operational commanders throughout the world, these types of linkages are increasingly rare.22
Indeed, Marc Sageman was one of the first to argue that the post-9/11 picture of al Qaeda is “mostly that of a self-generated network with unusual characteristics of robustness and flexibility rather than one created by the intention of bin Laden.”23 Beyond the strategic imperatives and the ideological evolution initiated by this flattening of al Qaeda, certain
34 Parameters
support mechanisms still exist in a modified, decentralized form, and have become more important to the movement in the post-9/11 environment.
Most support mechanisms that existed prior to 9/11 continue to contribute to al Qaeda’s ability to retain its autonomy, yet some are clearly more important than others.
1) The ability to draw resources from various financial sources, such as regional drug and criminal networks, for example, bequeaths to this transnational movement a logistical capability that helps to perpetuate its continued survival in a hostile environment.24
However, there seems to be a general consensus in the policy community that targeting jihadist financial networks has not been an effective way of target- ing terrorists—there is simply too much porosity in modern financial infra- structures that depend on the rapid movement of capital and the preservation of wealth and liquidity in virtual form.25 Mobility mechanisms will be dealt with in more detail below, but the extent to which al Qaeda’s service and sup- port functions contribute to its autonomy as a transnational entity should be integrated into analysis of counterterrorism policy and practice.
Transnational terror networks can also be evaluated by the extent to which they are regenerative. In this sense, the ability of a network to regenerate and recuperate from losses is directly related to its ability to represent a com- pelling message to disparate groups in dozens of states and over thousands of miles. Contrary to the repeated messages that “al Qaeda is greatly diminished,” or that a high percentage of its leadership has been killed or captured, al Qaeda as both an organization and a movement is defined by its “robust capacity for regeneration and a very diverse membership that cuts across ethnic, class, and national boundaries.”26 Moreover, according to Rohan Gunaratna, despite the high number of arrests incurred in the first six months following the 9/11 at- tacks, “al Qaeda has regenerated new cells as well as sustained many of its older ones. Nor has the severe disruption of al Qaeda’s command and control operations in Afghanistan permanently crippled it.”27 While much of this capa- bility is related to the appeal of the Salafist jihadist narrative and the socio- economic vulnerabilities inherent in Muslim audiences throughout the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, several support mechanisms facilitate the spread of this ideological narrative and should be targeted appropriately.28 Areas for explora- tion in this context could include targeting popular internet sites that dissemi- nate the Salafist message and display violent jihadist propaganda, revising hate speech laws in Western countries to prevent preachers from advocating vio- lence, and passing strict immigration laws that prevent known jihadist figures from traveling freely in Europe.29 The British government is moving forward on immigration reform, while its intelligence services are reportedly actively hacking popular jihadist websites.30 While attempts at countering the jihadist message should remain a central component of counterterrorism strategy and
Summer 2006 35
public diplomacy, that approach should be supported by efforts aimed at pre- venting the message from being easily disseminated in the first place.
The extent to which al Qaeda’s overall influence in world affairs is directly related to its service and support mechanisms is clear—it cannot ex- ist as a powerful transnational actor without an effective and robust infra- structure. Given that al Qaeda has been a singular priority for the United States and its allies for more than four years, however, there is more to al Qaeda’s successful infrastructure than robust survivability—something else is at work. Helmuth von Moltke’s famous quote, “no plan survives first con- tact with the enemy,” also applies to the actors involved—contact with the en- emy changes the player as well as the plan.31 Al Qaeda’s ability not simply to survive in a hostile environment but to maintain an offensive posture and prosecute operations is directly related to its success in organizational learn- ing. Through the mechanics of globalization outlined above, al Qaeda is able to acquire, interpret, distribute, and store information and knowledge.32
When one looks at the recent attacks in Madrid and London, for example, it becomes clear that whether or not these cells were formally “connected” to high-level jihadist operatives, these types of operations are analyzed and de- bated on jihadist websites and online forums. Some sites even contain instruction manuals and video clips on how to assemble bomb vests to maxi- mize casualties.33 Moreover, the operational tradecraft and the technology used for both London attacks were quite similar. Similarities between recent attacks are still being considered by various intelligence agencies, and the possible existence of so-called “connectors”—technical or operational ex- perts acting as liaisons between disparate cells—continues to be debated.34
Whatever the dominant learning method, the ability to detect a group’s efforts to learn, anticipate its success or failure in learning, and thwart such attempts will factor heavily into the success of counterterrorism policy and practice over time.
Assessing Progress in Countering
Terrorist Support Networks
Given the general exploration of the history and importance of sup- port and mobility networks outlined above, it is worth examining in detail several mobility and support networks that are among the most dangerous known networks currently in operation. First, evidence has surfaced that sev- eral Taliban leaders have traveled to Iraq in order to observe insurgent opera- tions and disseminate the knowledge they gain to their organizations in Afghanistan.35 Such mobility networks are clearly a threat to coalition forces in Afghanistan and to the Karzai government. Second, the infiltration of thou-
36 Parameters
sands of jihadists from North Africa, Europe, and the broader Middle East to battlefields in Iraq is extremely threatening both to American and Iraqi mili- tary forces, as well as to the nascent Iraqi government.36 Finally, the conflict in Iraq, the recent attacks in Madrid and London, and the unrest in France have concentrated the focus of analysts on the existence of recruitment and mobility networks in Europe. These networks have been linked to numerous terrorist operations and are evidence of the importance of support and mobil- ity to the broader jihadist movement.
It used to be that the primary concern regarding al Qaeda in a post- Taliban Afghanistan was the extent to which it would be able to maintain a low-level operational tempo by using its ability to remain hidden in the moun- tains in the Northwest Frontier Province in Pakistan.37 Recently, however, as briefly alluded to above, al Qaeda and its affiliates have reportedly been in- volved in organizing trips to Iraq for Taliban insurgent leaders. Hamza Sangari, a Taliban commander from Khost Province, was quoted by Newsweek reporter Sami Yousafzai as saying, “God heard me and granted my request to see and learn from the Iraqi mujahedin.”38 In what are essentially educational ex- changes, these trips are apparently designed to teach Taliban leaders more ad- vanced explosive and urban warfare tactics being used by jihadists in Iraq. Learning how to make rudimentary shaped-explosive charges operated by re- mote control, these Taliban leaders are helping their organizations learn by be- coming force multipliers. “I’m explaining to my fighters every day the lessons I learned and my experience in Iraq,” Taliban insurgent leader Mohammed Daud told Newsweek. “I want to copy in Afghanistan the tactics and spirit of the glorious Iraqi resistance.”39
Such exchanges appear to be having the desired effects. Not only has the frequency of violence in Afghanistan increased—with more Americans killed in 2005 than in 2004—but the emergence of suicide bombing as a prominent tactic is a “grave concern” among US officials.40 Such concern is justified, according to Lieutenant General Michael Maples, head of the De- fense Intelligence Agency. Testifying before the Senate Armed Service Com- mittee in February 2006 along with Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, Maples said that attacks in Afghanistan were up 20 percent be- tween 2004 and 2005, that suicide attacks had increased “almost fourfold,” and that the use of improvised explosive devices had “more than doubled.”41
While it is unclear exactly how Taliban leaders are moving into and out of Iraq, one likely route may be the drug-smuggling networks originating from Baluchistan, a region of Pakistan bordering southern Afghanistan.42
Given that 52 percent of Afghanistan’s gross domestic product is derived from the growth and traffic of opium, it should come as no surprise that smug- gling networks might be used by al Qaeda and the Taliban.43 A recent upsurge
Summer 2006 37
“For al Qaeda in general and Zarqawi’s network in particular, the road to jihad in Europe
certainly runs through the Sunni triangle in Iraq.”
in violence in southern Afghanistan will likely further complicate the ability of coalition and Afghan forces to prevent the use of these logistical routes.44
Given the dramatic increase in the regional drug trade after the fall of the Taliban, the ability of Taliban and al Qaeda personnel to remain hidden while traversing increasingly popular smuggling routes will likely lead to a greater increase in the number of these jihadist “educational exchanges.” The ability of our enemies to move personnel from one operational theater to another re- veals a level of integration and communication that defies the accepted wis- dom of a fragmented and entirely decentralized jihadist network.
Recent American military operations in al-Anbar Province and the city of Tal Afar in Iraq have generated multiple press reports on an issue that military and civilian analysts have been concerned about for some time—that of foreign fighters using the Syrian border region to infiltrate into Iraq to bat- tle coalition forces.45 An excellent example of how a transnational terror movement like al Qaeda can generate a transnational component of what would otherwise be a nationalist insurgency, the network of trails surround- ing the Euphrates River corridor has become the Iraq war’s equivalent of the Ho Chi Minh Trail that plagued American efforts during the Vietnam War.46
The pressure on the Assad regime remains high, with President Bush making a series of public statements in late 2005 demanding that Damascus do more to prevent the infiltration.47 While the number of foreign fighters in Iraq rep- resents less than ten percent of the overall insurgency, they are reportedly re- sponsible for a much larger percentage of the violence.48
Like the Taliban leaders infiltrating from the east, the insurgents are using old smuggling networks to infiltrate into and out of Iraq. Moreover, the insurgents have access to a network of sympathetic Sunni mosques “in almost every village and town from Damascus to Baghdad.”49 American efforts to prevent cross-border infiltration resulted in a series of clashes with Syrian troops last summer, and reports of American forces crossing the border in or- der to disrupt and destroy staging areas and training camps are reminiscent of operations against Cambodia during attempts to damage the Ho Chi Minh Trail.50 While there are indications that continued pressure on Syria may be
38 Parameters
causing the Assad government to decrease the ease with which foreign insur- gents use Syria as a way-station on their road to jihad, reports of training camps, weapon depots, and the aid of Syrian intelligence officials continue to provide more than an ample dose of doubt concerning Syrian cooperation.51
The ability of al Qaeda to use Iraq’s porous borders to infiltrate jihadists into the battlefields of western Iraq and the Sunni triangle will continue to compli- cate the security environment and the chances for a stable transition to a fully independent Iraq.
European policymakers and intelligence officials are growing in- creasingly worried about the connections between the continent and the Iraq war. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of “al Qaeda in Mesopotamia,” is linked to several attacks outside Iraq, including the deadly November hotel bombings in Jordan.52 Moreover, the US National Counterterrorism Center believes that Zarqawi’s network extends to over 40 countries and 24 militant groups worldwide.53 This is not just speculation. Dozens of people alleged to have ties to Zarqawi have been arrested across Europe, and intelligence offi- cials are increasingly concerned over the number of Europeans estimated to be fighting in Iraq. While reports are varied, British officials estimate that over 70 militants have traveled to Iraq from the United Kingdom, while French officials talk about “dozens.”54 According to The New York Times, se- nior intelligence officials from four European countries believe that “hun- dreds of young militant Muslim men have left Europe to fight in Iraq.”55
While the numbers involved are still unclear, what is starting to gen- erate serious concern are the consequences of jihadist militants acquiring a high level of combat experience and expertise in urban warfare and then re- turning to their countries of origin. An assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency is said to warn that “Iraq may prove to be an even more effective training ground for Islamic extremists than Afghanistan was in al Qaeda’s early days, because it is serving as a real-world laboratory for urban com- bat.”56 CIA Director Porter Goss testified before the Senate in February 2005, concluding, “Those [jihadists] who survive will leave Iraq experienced in, and focused on, acts of urban terrorism. They represent a pool of contacts to build transnational terrorist cells, groups, and networks.”57 Were substantial numbers of European jihadists to return to the continent with advanced skills in tradecraft and weaponry acquired in Iraq, law enforcement and intelli- gence agencies in Europe would surely be at a disadvantage.
In addition to the skill-set that European militants would acquire as participants in the Iraqi insurgency, the possibilities of a new generation of jihadist networks taking form should be taken seriously. The origins of al Qaeda, after all, are intricately linked to bin Laden’s use of a database of mujahideen contact information during the later years of the anti-Soviet jihad
Summer 2006 39
bal jihadist movement, the more dangerous these new networks will become. Given the multiple arrests of European militants allegedly affiliated with his network, it would be dangerous and foolhardy to assume that Zarqawi does not place strategic value on his European members.59 The Taliban leaders who are smuggled into Iraq to learn advanced urban warfare tactics, for example, re- portedly do not participate in direct combat because they are too valuable as force multipliers. For al Qaeda in general and Zarqawi’s network in particular, the road to jihad in Europe certainly runs through the Sunni triangle in Iraq.
Preparing for the Perfect Storm
Al Qaeda is alive, well, and preparing for the future. Al Qaeda as an organization is learning how to survive as a constantly hunted transnational en- tity. Al Qaeda as a movement is greatly benefiting from the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, and especially in Iraq. The jihadist narrative carries a reso- nance and a logic that thousands of Muslims find completely compelling. While it is surely more difficult for al Qaeda to operate now than before the
9/11 attacks, reports of its imminent demise have been proven wrong time and again. As thousands of foreign fighters continue to wage their jihad in Iraq, and as Taliban and al Qaeda leaders continue to network and travel via virtual su- perhighways and ancient smuggling routes, Western intelligence and law en- forcement agencies are growing increasingly concerned. While thousands of officers, agents, and analysts are working hard to protect their nations from ter- rorism, more attention needs to be paid to how support and mobility networks enable terrorist groups not only to survive, but to thrive as transnational enti- ties. What follows are four general recommendations on targeting jihadist mo- bility and support networks during the “long war.”
First, counterterrorism needs to refocus on offensive strategies. While “going on the offensive” has become a rhetorical cliché by virtue of its use by seemingly every head of state who wants to appear tough on terrorism, offensive strategies are not as common as they should be. For example, while monitoring jihadist websites and financial transactions can be useful in gaining intelligence on the enemy, a purely defensive posture is unwise. The reported effort by Brit- ish intelligence services to attack the jihadist presence on the internet is a posi- tive, offensive strategy that greatly complicates the ability of terrorists to communicate over the internet, as well as decreasing the ease by which sympa- thizers and potential militants can access jihadist propaganda, training videos, and ideological writings. The American intelligence community should imple- ment a mix of offensive hacking of jihadist websites and defensive monitoring when there is good reason to believe that the benefits of passive observation out- weigh the costs of keeping the sites accessible to millions.
40 Parameters
against al Qaeda and its affiliates, Western intelligence services should make better use of their comparative advantages. Since transnational terror groups are more reliant on the types of benefits a globalized world can offer, they are more vulnerable to efforts at targeting support mechanisms. For example, while it is extremely difficult to directly infiltrate a jihadist terror network, it may be easier to access the types of transnational networks they depend on for survival. Drug networks, international gangs, organized crime, money laun- dering, human smuggling chains, and international arms dealers may all have contact with jihadist groups, yet it is unclear whether infiltration of such net- works is a bona fide counterterrorism priority, or if these interdisciplinary ap- proaches suffer from bureaucratic obstacles and problems with interagency coordination. One can be sure that such networks are already targeted by vari- ous agencies, but if such efforts are seen as critical to undermining al Qaeda and other like-minded transnational groups, more success in countering the types of support and mobility structures outlined above may result.
Third, international cooperation is absolutely vital in the war on ter- rorism. Some progress has been seen in this regard, and more resources should be devoted to international intelligence and law enforcement cooperation. For example, recent reports of “Alliance Base”—the multinational intelligence center in Paris created by the Central Intelligence Agency and the French General Directorate for External Security—portray an excellent example of multilateral intelligence cooperation.60 Western nations are surely safer from transnational terrorism if their leaders prioritize international intelligence co- operation. Indeed, joint intelligence work is reported to have been responsible for identifying, tracking, and eliminating the “vast majority of committed jihadists who have been targeted outside Iraq and Afghanistan since the Sep- tember 11th attacks.”61 However, some European intelligence officials believe efforts at cooperation have not been proceeding fast enough. One officer told the Financial Times that “the threat is multiplying but in an awful lot of the in- telligence and security services the underlying mentality hasn’t shifted from a
‘need to know’ to ‘need to share.’”62 Transnational jihadist networks are best countered by deep working alliances between constellations of committed al- lies. While European attention is currently concentrated on the so-called “se- cret prisons,” it would be a disaster if transatlantic intelligence cooperation was to become a casualty of this controversy. Irrespective of the whims of poli- tics, prudence requires that the success of efforts like Alliance Base be repli- cated to the greatest extent feasible.63
Fourth, all agencies involved in prosecuting the long war need to allocate more resources to efforts at understanding how the processes of learning and innovation are affecting strategic perception and operational effectiveness.
Summer 2006 41
For al Qaeda in general, and our enemies in Iraq in particular, their success in learning from and adapting to the types of strategies US and Coalition forces em- ploy is clear. The persistent threat of improvised explosive devices, for example, is but one indication that our enemies are able to understand changing patterns, identify weaknesses, and exploit vulnerabilities.64 More work needs to be done in the government, think-tanks, and universities to explore how our adversaries learn and adapt in a decentralized and fluid environment.65
The Department of Defense does a far better job than most agencies of prioritizing and allocating resources to understand learning and encourage in- novation. From the organizational solutions like the Army’s Combat Training Centers, the Center for Lessons Learned, and the Asymmetric Warfare Group, to the Quadrennial Defense Review process, DOD’s efforts at institutionaliz- ing imagination and innovation need to be strengthened internally and mir- rored externally.66 As General Peter Schoomaker concluded in his forward to Lieutenant Colonel John Nagl’s influential book, Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: “For the twenty-first century, we must have an Army characterized by a culture of innovation and imagination.”67 Finally, policymakers and civilian leaders need to make sustained efforts at institutionalizing interagency learn- ing and strategic planning. Some thought has been given to creating a QDR an- alogue for the entire US national security apparatus—such thinking should be taken seriously by those tasked with prosecuting and winning the long war.68 In a conflict characterized by transnational complexity and networked, intelli- gent enemies, creating cultures of learning, innovation, and imagination con- stitutes a sine qua non for victory.
A Framework for the Long War
At the dawn of the last “long war,” an American diplomat serving in Moscow perceived the essence of the developing Cold War with the Soviet Un- ion, and felt compelled to warn Washington by sending what became the fa- mous “long telegram.” It was published by Foreign Affairs in 1947 under the pseudonym “X.” The author, George Kennan, wrote that the Soviet Union’s “political action is a fluid stream which moves constantly, wherever it is per- mitted to move, toward a given goal. Its main concern is to make sure that it has filled every nook and cranny available to it in the basin of world power. But if it finds unassailable barriers in its path, it accepts these philosophically and ac- commodates itself to them. The main thing is that there should always be pres- sure, unceasing constant pressure, toward the desired goal.”69 Kennan’s insight into the nature of the Soviet Union helps to illuminate both the challenge and a countering strategy for those prosecuting the first long war of the 21st century.
While there are dangers associated with comparing historical foes to current adversaries, al Qaeda is clearly interested in “filling every nook and
42
cranny available to it.” Furthermore, the way our enemies in the long war are able to detect, adapt, and circumvent “unassailable barriers” defines the chal- lenges faced when confronting the service and support networks used by al Qaeda and its affiliates. In its recent “report card” issued last December, the
9/11 Commission gave the US government failing grades in several areas re- lated to its prosecution of the long war and its attempts at securing the home- land. Commission member Timothy Roemer stated his concern that “al Qaeda is quickly changing and we are not. Al Qaeda is highly dynamic and we are not. Al Qaeda is highly imaginative and we are not.”70
As the five-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks approaches, we face an enemy that is both a transnational organization and a growing ideological movement. As long as the war in Iraq continues, more recruits will join the disparate terror networks that feed off the conflict. When the war eventually ends, al Qaeda will have acquired a new generation of jihadists—hundreds or thousands with urban warfare skills gained from the fight against Ameri- can troops in the Sunni triangle and the Euphrates corridor.
Offensive strategies
IC need to cooperate while targeting those support and mobility networks that allow al Qaeda to perpetually evolve and adapt in a hostile environment. At the same time, analysts and academics need to develop a research agenda that aims at understanding how transnational groups learn and adapt in a constantly changing environment. By understanding and shaping the virtual and transnational battlefield, the United States and its allies will stand a better chance of success at discovering, targeting, and destroying the tentacles of the global jihad.
My intent is to receive an A in this class however that margin is getting slim the last two DQs are my lowest graded DQs of three ACSC courses I have taken. I need to understand what you look for as expectional
what do you recommend to achieve that goal. my goal is an A at need direction my last two post need know what I need to improve to achieve my goal of an A.
Mastering weekly objectives are not an issue for me to achieve however I need to understand where to focus my energy to meet your expectations. How are rubics graded are they curved I request your insight