Global It Is
The war on terror is indeed global. The initial engagement with the Taliban was a success. Witness al-Qaeda no longer has the security of operating in Afghanistan and the initial tactical effect of the war is therefore a success. In Iraq, the removal of Saddam’s regime was significant if for no other reason than ending the likelihood of further collaboration between Saddam and al-Qaeda or likeminded groups. But there were, of course, other effects associated with that victory. Primary among those was the light shined on Iraq’s neighbors as supporters of Islamic terror and the growing tide of confidence from Middle Easterners to stand against terror and the tyrants that support it.
Syria, having hugely miscalculated its ability to support terror and squelch the Lebanese autonomy movement by taking part in or supporting the murder of Rafik Hariri, may now finally be forced to withdraw from Lebanon. And it’ll do so with Lebanon’s citizens calling for it at a much higher pitch than when it was the U.S. and UN demanding change. Assad’s regime is weakened and is more likely to fall or fall in line without conflict than the Mullahs of Iran are. Still continued pressure is needed to ensure follow through on the troop withdrawal, and moreover should be increased to demand the end to support for terrorist targeting Iraq.
Iran’s isolation has been less successful thus far primarily due to the EU3 and Russia. Both have shown an inability to take the necessary stand against Iranian support for terror and nuclear development efforts. While the movement for reform grows on the streets of Iran, the Mullahs continue to tighten their grip and reinforce their fist. This will likely be the single largest battle of the war on terror; whether diplomatic resolved or resolved on the battlefield, it will require more of our resources and resolve than either Iraq or Afghanistan.
Yet the war has other fronts, as the Belmont Club’s Wretchard the Cat notes in recent posts regarding the war in Southeast Asia (Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore). Like you, I’m looking forward to future post regarding Jemaah Islamiyah, Abu Sayyaf, Moro Islamic Liberation Front, or any of the indigenous groups supportive of al-Qaeda’s ideology. The latest version of Congressional Research Services report on Terrorism in Southeast Asia, offers significant detail on the spread of the movement through the region, and the ties between al-Qaeda and the region, as well as the as yet unmentioned core of islamofascism, Saudi Arabia.
As many Saudi citizens will tell you, the rulers are significantly not Muslim in their living, yet they use the religion as a means of control and suppression within the Kingdom. They’ve also permitted, and supported, its spread around the globe. This, significantly more Arab than Muslim version of Islam is the prime ideological vain of islamofascism that we fight today, the other being that of the Mullahs in Iran. Whether it be in Virginia, Europe or Southeast Asia, the Saudi financed masjids, mosques and madrassas have not ceased their indoctrination nor have they acknowledged the tie between their teachings and terrorism (the latest CRS report states that no data exist pertaining to the amount of funding from Saudi sources). Last July, I noted the significance of Muslims in non-Arab states becoming more Arab in their view. Given the recent developments in the Middle East, one might think that Arab Muslims are beginning to see the light. And yet, they are only beginning.
Only when Arabs more fully express a willingness to address the terrible strain of Islam behind islamofascism, then, and only then, will we have the real means to address the enemy in Southeast Asia and around the world ideologically. Until then, cutting their financial support out from under them, displacing and disrupting their cells and plans, and killing them on the battlefields of our choice, not theirs, has to be the primary means to achieve victory.
