By Larry C Johnson
George Bush got it partially right yesterday (Thursday, September 22) when he said that mistakes made by three of his predecessors, including the Reagan administration, had emboldened terrorists and helped set the stage for the Sept. 11 attacks. Unfortunately he ignored the role his own actions have played in making terrorism worse and pushing the Middle East to the brink of a new war. Instead, the President blindly insisted that he is taking America on the right path in Iraq to confront the threat of terrorism. On that point he is wrong; dead wrong.
Why is he wrong? The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq is doing the exact opposite of what Bush says U.S. policy was supposed to achieve:
- Instead of reducing terrorism, Islamic terrorism is spreading dramatically.
- Instead of winning new supporters for democracy, the war in Iraq is spurring the recruitment and training radical jihadists.
- Instead of creating a “City on the Hill” that other nations in the Middle East will emulate, Iraq is fissuring and setting the stage for a regional ethnic and religious civil war.
Rising Terrorism
The American-led invasion of Iraq has produced unprecedented surge in terrorist attacks that kill and wound people. Data collected by the Central Intelligence Agency, which goes back to 1985, shows that the number of international terrorist attacks declined steadily from 1987 until 2002. 2003, however, was a watershed moment. The total number of attacks (208) increased slightly over the previous year. However, 80% of those attacks involved someone being killed or wounded. The perpetrators of most of those violent attacks were radical Islamists.
In 2004 the terrorist numbers went thru the roof (and the Bush Administration tried to cover this up). The number of significant terrorist attacks (i.e., an attack in which someone is killed, wounded or kidnapped or there is damage in excess of $10,000) surged from 175 to almost 700. These numbers are without historical precedent. In other words, we have never had a time (since the CIA started keeping the statistics in 1968) that was this high. While a large number of these attacks occurred in Iraq, Iraq did not account for the majority of the deadly events.
Building the Next Generation of Terrorists
The insurgency is a complicated mix of groups foreign and domestic, but foreigners do not make up the bulk. Nonetheless, the foreign influence is growing and the U.S. presence in Iraq is serving to radicalize Islamic youth that previously were willing to spend their time playing soccer and listen to Western music.
How do I know? Foreign officials with the job of tracking and fighting aspiring terrorists tell me so. During the last year I have provided briefings on terrorist trends to senior leaders from Pakistan, Kuwait, Yemen, Tunisia, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, and Mali. Although they come from different countries they convey the same message—what the hell are you doing?
Our friends and allies naively believe that we have a plan and know what we are doing. Nonetheless, they also tell me that just as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 created Bin Laden and his ilk that our invasion of Iraq is creating the next generation of terrorists. They see that their societies are becoming more anti-U.S. than pro. They see a new generation of idealistic youth falling under the conviction that God (Allah) is calling them to fight the infidel. They are genuinely afraid that we have lit a fuze on a bomb that will detonate in the next few years unless we demonstrate we are in control.
A cultural side note. The countries in the Middle East genuinely believe that we are encouraging and cultivating the suicide bombers and the break up of Iraq. Why? Because they cannot conceive that a country as large and powerful as the United States could be impotent to deal with this threat. Instead, they are convinced that we have a secret plan we are not sharing with them. They believe that our sincere goal is to create chaos and control the oil resources. They look at me with disbelief and bewilderment when I tell them there is no secret plan and we are as incompetent as they fear.
BELOW: Yugoslavia on Crack
Yugoslavia on Crack
Today’s New York Times reported that Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, said Thursday that he had been warning the Bush administration in recent days that Iraq was hurtling toward disintegration, a development that he said could drag the region into war. This is not the wild ravings of a crazy man. This is a cold, honest assessment from someone who really believes he is still a friend of the United States.
Our actions are confusing the hell out of our friends. They look at Iran, who has been the largest most prolific sponsor of terrorism since 1980, expand its influence among the Iraqi shia with our help. The Iranians attacked us, Saddam didn’t, yet we are helping the Iranians (at least from our friends’ perspective). The Saudis (and others) scratch their heads as they watch us give the shia militia carte blanche to establish their power. The Saudis understand that the Shia are keen on solidifying their power. They wonder why we don’t see this.
What the Saudis and the Kuwaitis and the Omanis and the Abu Dhabis understand is that the Sunni tribes will go to any length to defend themselves and their families from the corruption represented by Shia rule. Think for a moment what a small town in Texas, habitually under the control of Southern Baptists, would do if a group of Catholics or Hasidic Jews moved into town and took control of the political process. While an incomplete analogy, this scenario offers a taste of what is in store for Iraq.
Unlike the international intervention in Yugoslavia, there is not a firm international consensus to fight against the fragmentation of the Iraqi society. Prince Faisal, I fear, is a prophet. In the coming years the United States may face the unsavory prospect of actually having to invade Saudi Arabia to secure and protect its access to oil. In the meantime, the U.S. presence in Iraq is provoking terrorism and becoming a rallying point for our enemies.
Before George Bush tries to pick the splinter out of the eyes of his father, Bill Clinton, and Ronald Reagan, he may want to spend some time removing the huge beam lodged in his iris.
Larry C. Johnson
Personal Blog: No Quarter || Bio
Recommended Book List || More BoomanTribune Posts
