Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK ---------------------------------------------
A Long, Tough Job http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28598-2001Sep14.html By Wesley K. Clark America is indeed at war. The attacks in New York and Washington have raised the dangers posed by international terrorism to a new level. But despite the awful familiarity of the devastation in New York and Washington, an effective U.S. response is likely to be something new and unfamiliar. For the United States, the weapons of this war should be information, law enforcement and, on rare occasions, active military forces. The coalition that will form around the United States and its NATO allies should agree on its intent but not trumpet its plans. No vast military deployments should be anticipated. But urgent measures should be taken behind the scenes, because the populations and economic structures of Western nations will be at risk. And the American public will have to grasp and appreciate a new approach to warfare. Our objective should be neither revenge nor retaliation, though we will achieve both. Rather, we must systematically target and destroy the complex, interlocking network of international terrorism. The aim should be to attack not buildings and facilities but the people who have masterminded, coordinated, supported and executed these and other terrorist attacks. I can hear some warning us to narrow our objectives because the task before us is so difficult, warning that there may be failures and actions that can never be acknowledged. But now all must accept at face value the terrorists' unwavering hostility to the United States and what we stand for. There is no room for half-measures in our response. Our methods should rely first on domestic and international law, and the support and active participation of our friends and allies around the globe. Evidence must be collected, networks uncovered and a faceless threat given shape and identity. In some cases, astute police work will win the day, here and abroad. In other cases, international intelligence collaboration may be necessary. Special military forces may be called on to operate in states that are uncooperative or simply unable to control their own territory. In exceptional cases, targets will be developed that may be handled by conventional military strikes. But in the main, this will be arduous, detailed and often covert work to track, detain or otherwise engage and "take down" our adversaries, rolling them up cell by cell and headquarters by headquarters. These terrorist networks may well have state sponsorship. And here, more intense, visible action involving not only strikes but also substantial ground action may be required to gain the surrender of hostile governments or the end of their support for terrorists. But we should not underestimate the overpowering impact of an aroused and determined America and its allies in forcing preemptive changes in previously uncooperative states. Some will call for full disclosure and near-legal standards of evidence before acting. Others will arm a hair trigger, seeking to use the most readily available information, even if scant. But we must not pose legality and expediency as opposite extremes. To be expedient, we must act within the bounds of international law and consistent with consensus among the allied coalition that is emerging. And maintaining this consensus will be one of the prime challenges we face. A second key challenge is to recognize that we are in an action-reaction struggle with a capable and competent adversary. Almost certainly there are other gambits in preparation to be used against us. When they are unable to hide, terrorists may be even more willing to strike. More horrifying scenarios than Tuesday's are easily imaginable. We must strengthen our protective measures at airports, at utilities and other public service facilities such as communications networks, and prepare necessary public health and disease control capabilities for the possibility of nuclear and biological events. And if we are successful in preventing further attacks, another challenge will be to maintain our resolve. If these attacks were the second Pearl Harbor, then it is also true that it will likely take more than a second Doolittle raid to win this war. Months and years may be required. But we should remember that awful sight in downtown Manhattan and at the Pentagon the morning of Sept. 11, and resolve that it shall never, ever happen again. And we should renew our resolve during every inconvenience we suffer at an airport and every additional impediment to our activities. For a decade the United States has periodically declared that its top priority, or one of its top priorities, is to protect our people against international terrorism. In hindsight, it is clear that a well-intentioned defense wasn't enough. This is a problem that now requires more active measures and a commitment to eliminate terrorism as a threat. And doing so requires an old concept, "decisive force," but defined and used in a new kind of war. - The writer is former supreme allied commander in Europe and the author of "Waging Modern War." ------------------------------------------------- This Discussion List is the follow-up for the old stopnato @listbot.com that has been shut down ==^================================================================ EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9spWA Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email was sent to: archive@jab.org T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
