http://ict.org.il/apage/9347.php
WW III - Understanding and Confronting the Threat
Adv. Ophir Falk*
January 18, 2007
Background:
The fall of the Berlin wall in November 1989 marked the end of the cold war
and raised two main, yet contrasting views of the paradigm to come. The
first view was advocated by Professor Francis Fukuyama in his brow-raising
article called the "End of History".[1][1] Fukuyama asserted that "history",
in terms of major human conflicts, had come to an end with the collapse of
Soviet communism. The new world order, he led many to believe, would be
immune from significant ideological wars and future conflicts would be
limited to sporadically localized nuisances that pose no substantial threat
to Western civilization and its way of life.
Subsequently, a critical review and an alternative assessment were
submitted by Professor Samuel Huntington in an article named "The Errors of
Endism"[1][2] and in a more widely read, famously controversial piece, the
"Clash of Civilizations".[1][3] In his classic analysis in the latter,
Huntington argued, inter alia, that ethnically volatile regions previously
held as stable satellite entities of the Soviet Union would gradually erupt
and identified that "Islam has bloody borders".[1][4]
The fall of the Berlin Wall, and with it the Iron Curtain, was a historical
turning point that was seen in the West as the end to a fifty-year long
silent war that brought about the liberalization of peoples. In stark
contrast, however, militant Muslims viewed that turning point as a direct
corollary - indeed, climax - to their successful struggle against the Soviet
superpower in its invasion of Afghanistan.
In a 119-page threat assessment released in January 2005 by the National
Intelligence Council (NIC), the CIA director's think tank, it was assessed
that the likelihood of "great power conflict escalating into total war
is
lower than at any time in the past century". However, it was emphasized that
"at no time since the formation of the Western alliance system in 1949 have
the shape and nature of international alignments been in such a state of
flux as they have in the past decade."[1][5]
True, the liquidation of the Soviet Union removed the ideological impetus of
communist domination, but it also released the tight grip the Kremlin had
around the ambitions of many satellite republics, peoples and frivolous
dictators. The downfall of the Soviet superpower unleashed the specter of
nuclear technology know-how and materiel that could leak to those willing
and able to pay.[1][6] An oil rich and hate driven Iran is both willing and
able to pay.
Future historians may indeed construe that the suicide terrorism phenomenon
and the zeal to acquire nuclear terrorism capability attests to the fact
that "history" did not end in 1989, but rather set our generation into a
clash of cultures that served as the backdrop to World War III.
Understanding the Threat:
The first day of September 1939, when the Germans invaded Poland, is
considered by most historians the official beginning of WWII. There is no
clear date of the beginning of what now seems to be WWIII, but 1979 can
definitely be considered a watershed year. That same year, militant sects of
both Sunnis and Shiites ideologies made a dramatic reentrance on to the
world stage.
The Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan motivated the birth of al-Qaeda,
while the Shiite religious revolution in Iran brought down the Shah and
formed the first ever Shiite Islamic Republic. Both forces champion the
resurrection of an Islamic empire that is supposed to dominate the world and
correct what in their view, was an accident of history that enabled the rise
of the West.[1][7]
At the time, Americans saw the Iranian revolution as a backdrop to the
hostage situation at the US Embassy in Teheran and the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan as reason enough to boycott the Moscow Olympics and refrain from
ratifying the SALT agreements. On the other hand, militant Muslims
throughout the Middle East and beyond saw the invasion and revolution as
cause for a holy war - Jihad.
The rivalry between Shiites that account for about 16% of the Islamic
population and Sunnis that account for almost all of the rest dates back to
the death of Muhammad in in the year 632.[1][8] The Shiites supported the
successorship of Ali and the Sunnis accepted Abu Bakr. This disagreement was
never resolved and served as a setting for more bloodshed than the 'war on
terror' and the Israel-Arab conflict combined.
Though rival sects within Islam, both extreme Shiites - mainly represented
by Iran and the Hezbollah - and Sunnis, represented by organizations like
Hamas and Al-Qaeda, serve as the key players in the global jihad.
These militants simultaneously compete and cooperate with one another. Both
seek to destroy the perceived infidels and establish their leadership and
supremacy within the Muslim world Al-Qaeda in the September 11, 2001
attack and in subsequent strikes, Iran in its sponsorship of Hezbollah and
Hamas rocketing of Israeli cities and its promise to develop nuclear weapons
to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. While each movement aspires to
lead the newly established Islamic empire, they both agree it should be an
Islamic realm, cleansed of infidel presence or power. This is why they often
cooperate with one another against the common enemy, as the Sunni Hamas does
with the Shiite Hezbollah against Israel. Both movements, the militant
Sunnis led by Al-Qaeda, the militant Shiite led by Iran, declare repeatedly
that the destruction of Israel is merely one step towards achieving their
larger goal of bringing the downfall of the West. Israel simply happens to
be the closest Western target. Militant Islamists do not hate the West
because of Israel, they hate Israel because of the West. They see it as the
quintessential representative of the free and, in their eyes, hedonistic and
corrupt Western civilization they despise so much.[1][9]
The Iran Hezbollah Al-Qaeda Connection
The NIC emphasizes that as an ever-morphing decentralized movement,
terrorism is in many ways much more difficult to uncover and defeat than
nation states. Terrorists are able to easily communicate, train and recruit
through the Internet, and their threat will become "an eclectic array of
groups, cells and individuals that do not need a stationary headquarters",
the council's report says. "Training materials, targeting guidance, weapons
know-how, and fund-raising will become virtual (i.e. online)." [1][10] This
threat is vehemently multiplied when nation states serve as sponsors of
terrorism.
Today Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the
world.[1][11] The Shiite cooperation between Iran and its terrorist proxy
Hezbollah against the West goes as far back as 1983 with the murderous
attacks against American and French peace forces in Lebanon. This
cooperation has yet to cease.
The joint Shiite-Sunni venture between Iran, Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda against
the West has also been evident on many occasions:
* In an indictment against an al-Qaeda operative responsible for the
attack on US embassies in Tanzania and Nairobi that resulted in hundreds of
fatalities, the US Justice Department alleged that bin Laden had stated
privately
that Al-Qaeda should put aside its differences with Shiite
Muslim terrorist organizations, including the government of Iran and its
affiliated terrorist group Hezbollah, to cooperate against the perceived
common enemy, the United States and its allies... Thus, the indictment
explained: Al-Qaeda also forged alliances
with the government of Iran and
its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together
against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United
States.[1][12]
* The 9/11 Commission states: senior Al-Qaeda operatives and trainers
traveled to Iran to receive training in explosives. In the fall of 1993,
another such delegation went to the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon for further
training in explosives as well as intelligence and security.[1][13]
* In a statement published by the US attorney General following the
Al-Qaeda bombing of the Khobar Towers, it was charged that "elements of the
Iranian government inspired, supported, and supervised members of the Saudi
Hezbollah. In particular
the charged defendants reported their surveillance
activities to Iranian officials and were supported and directed in those
activities by Iranian officials".[1][14]
* There are even reports that on July 26, 2002, bin Laden and his family
received safe harbor from Iran as American forces began closing in on him in
Afghanistan.[1][15]
At Irans annual World Without Zionism conference held in October 2005,
Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad told his audience, We are in the
process of an historical war between the "world of arrogance" and the
Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years. He
elaborated by emphasizing, the annihilation of the Zionist regime will
come... Israel must be wiped off the map... and God willing, with the force
of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States
and Zionism". "Very soon, he proclaimed about Israel as a stain of
disgrace [and] will vanish from the center of the Islamic world and this
is attainable. [1][16]
Many naïve observers dismiss the militant Islamic zeal for conquest as the
outcome of frustration and will pass with time. This is a dangerous mistake.
Unchallenged, this ideology will grow with time. If Iran develops nuclear
weapons it will be the first time in history that an extreme ideology bent
on destruction of "infidels" and world domination will have nuclear
weapons.[1][17]
The former Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu, was recently
approached by a 12 year old social studies student in New York. The
youngster asked the former Prime Minister if he could give him a statement
to bring back to class that summarizes the current state of international
affairs. In response, Mr. Netanyahu said, "today is 1938 and Iran is German"
and pointed out that the main difference is that today's Iran is not leaving
any room for doubt concerning her intentions to make use of weapons of mass
destruction.
Confronting the Threat
Iran can and must be stopped. It is the pressing issue of our time as Iran
strives for nuclear weapon capability and reiterates its intent to use it
against the West. The Iranian threat intertwined with that of the global
terrorism jihad, calls for a joint international effort of defining and
confronting the threat.
The internationally accepted definition of war is the wide
spread use of force, between sovereign States, by means of their
military[1][18]. That definition is outdated as it ignores terrorism. Yet,
the "jihad" that has been launched against the "infidels" is undoubtedly a
global war and should be confronted as such. In fact, President Bush has
said that the war against global jihadism is more than a military conflict;
it is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century.[1][19] The
international community should recognize this struggle and act accordingly.
The unrevised American policy concerning Iran, and their terrorist allies
was made clear by President Bush in his State of the Union Address: "Iran
aggressively pursues [weapons of mass destruction] and exports terror," Bush
declared, "while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for
freedom. ... States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an
axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world".[1][20]
The diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to refrain from pursuing nuclear
capabilities have been fruitless, and have only provided Iran with more time
to plan and develop weapons of mass murder.
The free world can not limit itself to talk while Iran plots to kill.
* The Author is an ICT Research Fellow and a Partner at the Naveh Kantor
Even-Har Law firm.
[1][1] The End of History? The National Interest, by Francis Fukuyama,
Summer 1989.
[1][2] "The Errors of Endism" The National Interest, by Samuel Huntington,
Fall 1990
[1][3] "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs, 72 (3) Summer,
pp.22-49, Samuel Huntington, 1993
[1][4] Ibid.
[1][5] "Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground" by Dana Priest, Washington Post
Jan.14, 2005
[1][6] "Fighting Terrorism", by Benjamin Netanyahu, Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, New York, 2001. p. 129
[1][7] Excerpt from soon to be published book - "Fat Man, Thin Man", by
Benjamin Netanyahu (2007)
[1][8] "Why They Fight And what it means for us" by Peter Wehner, Wall
Street Journal, Jan. 9, 2007
[1][9] Excerpt from soon to be published book - "Fat Man, Thin Man", by
Benjamin Netanyahu (2007)
[1][10] "Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground" by Dana Priest, Washington Post
Jan.14, 2005
[1][11] "Why They Fight And what it means for us" by Peter Wehner, Wall
Street Journal, Jan. 9, 2007
[1][12] "Negotiate with Iran? How many Americans do they need to kill
before we get the point?" by, Andrew McCarthy National Review Online
December 8, 2006
[1][13] 9/11 Commission report p.61
[1][14] US Attorney General announcement, June 21, 2001
[1][15] "Bin Laden's Iran alliance" by Richard Miniter Washington Times,
October 27, 2004
[1][16] Remarks by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during a meeting
with protesting students at the Iranian Interior Ministry, October 25, 2005
[1][17] Excerpt from soon to be published book - "Fat Man, Thin Man", by
Benjamin Netanyahu (2007)
[1][18] Dinstein, Laws of War (Tel Aviv, 1983) pg. 14, O. Detter, 5-9, The
Law of War, 2nd edition, Cambridge 2000.
[1][19] "Why They Fight And what it means for us" by Peter Wehner, Wall
Street Journal, Jan. 9, 2007
[1][20]President George Bush's State of the Union address on Jan. 29, 2002
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.intellnet.org
Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods,
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,'
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
