GSSR Special Issue: What the New Administration Needs to Know About Terrorism and Counterterrorism

From the end of our article above:

“While continued and increased US combat air support is also required — especially in Iraq, Syria, Libya and in support of French forces in Mali — that alone is not the answer. American and allied air strikes in coordination with local ground forces have not brought any of these counter-terrorist campaigns to rapid conclusion. Therefore, in tandem with both the continued use of air power and deployment of supporting American special operations forces personnel, division-size conventional US military forces might be usefully deployed on a strict 90-day rotation into violence-plagued rural areas and urban trouble spots. They have the necessary combat experience and skill-sets to sequentially eliminate terrorist strength in each of these areas, and thereby enable indigenous security forces to follow in their wake to stabilize and police newly liberated places. By providing more effective governance and core services — with sustained US and European support — host nations could thus better prevent the recurrence of terrorism and return of terrorist forces.”

Shall we agree that NONE of the above addresses the core grievance of these populations and their states, societies and civilizations; this being that — re: the “effective governance” and “core services” being offered to these populations and their respective states and societies by the U.S./the West — all of these are based on:

a. Alien and profane “Western”/”secular” political, economic, social and value norms. And

b. The desire by the Western powers to transform and assimilate these outlying states, societies, civilizations and their populations more into the Western power, influence and control sphere.

And, thus:

a. The efforts described in the quoted paragraph above — which amounts to putting more “military muscle” behind these such, unwanted, alien and profane, transformation and assimilation efforts —

b. These such “escalatory” efforts would appear to be no more likely to achieve “counterinsurgency” success (again: “transformation” more along modern western lines; “assimilation” more into the Western sphere of power, influence and control) than would (a) putting more gasoline on a fire tend to (b) achieve success in putting out said fire.

And, thus, in an admitted “war of (political?) attrition,” these such actions (which, in truth, only amount to putting more gasoline on the fire?); these such actions would not seem to be the way to go.

A proper counter-insurgency approach, thus, one more likely to produce — admittedly over a longer term — our “transform and assimilate” goals; this such “counter-insurgency approach would seem to involve:

a. Abandoning, for the time being, our effort to provide “effective governance” and “core services” more along our alien and profane modern western political, economic, social and value lines? And, thus,

b. Abandoning, for the time being, the effort to transform and assimilate these outlying states, societies, civilizations — and their populations — anytime in the near future?

(This exact such “go slow” and/or “go backwards” approach, re: the political, economic, social and value “change” demands — in the case of the U.S./the West — of globalism/globalization/the global economy; these such “go slow” and/or “go backwards” approaches being, in fact, the exact such “counter-insurgency” strategy that just got our new American President elected?

Accordingly, if these such “go slow” and/or “go backwards” approaches are appropriate to and can work for the U.S./the West — re: the enormous “change” demands that we face — then might they not also be appropriate to and work for the other states, societies and civilizations of the world; in this case, re: the enormous “change” demands that the U.S./the West imposes on these such “outlying” states, societies and civilizations?)