Are Winning Or Losing The ‘War On Terrorism’?

How does a country ever know if it’s winning or losing this murky ‘War On Terror’ anyway?Are We Winning Or Losing The ‘War On Terrorism’?By Cliff Montgomery – May 4th, 2007In confronting the murky issue of terrorism, what does it mean to “win”? And how would one even know it’s been achieved?Terrorist and counterterrorist forces may both feel that they are succeeding in their goals, according to a Mar. 12th, 2007 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report. And depending on their particular objectives, they may both be right.We quote from this timely report below:“How one perceives and measures progress is central to formulating and implementing anti-terror strategy. Perception has a major impact, as well, on how nations prioritize and allocate resources. On the flip side, the parameters used to measure progress can set the framework for the measurement of failure. The goals of terrorists and those who combat them are often diametrically opposed, but may also be tangential, with both sides achieving objectives and making progress according to their different measurement systems.”Within the context of these competing views and objectives, terrorist activity may be seen as a process which includes discrete, quantum-like changes or jumps often underscoring its asymmetric and nonlinear nature. An approach which looks at continuous metrics such as lower numbers of casualties may indicate success, while at the same time the terrorists may be redirecting resources towards vastly more devastating projects.”Policymakers may face consideration of the pros and cons of reallocating more of the nation’s limited resources away from ongoing defensive projects and towards preventing the next quantum jump of terrorism, even if this means accepting losses.”Measurement of progress, or lack thereof, may be framed in terms of incidents, attitudes and trends. A common pitfall of governments seeking to demonstrate success in anti-terrorist measures is over-reliance on quantitative indicators, particularly those which may correlate with progress but not accurately measure it, such as the amount of money spent on anti-terror efforts.”As terrorism is a complex multidimensional phenomenon, effective responses to terrorism may need to take into account…the evolving goals, strategies, tactics and operating environment of different terrorist groups. Although terrorism’s complex webs of characteristics–along with the inherent secrecy and compartmentalization of both terrorist organizations and government responses–limit available data, the formulation of practical, useful measurement criteria appears both tractable and ready to be addressed.”Rising costs of anti-terrorism efforts have become an increasing problem. The vast land area of the United States and widespread U.S. interests abroad are impossible to protect entirely. Billions of dollars have been spent to develop anti-terror technologies, establish crisis management training and enhance security staffing throughout the country.”Whether these expenditures are cost-effective, or whether the money would be better spent, for instance, building secular schools in Islamic countries or promoting public relations efforts aimed at young Muslims, remains an important policy question. Developing robust measurement criteria might assist government officials in answering such questions.”It is unclear just how much the United States spends overseas annually in non-military areas to combat terrorism, but the amounts are in the billions of dollars. For FY2004, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) put the figure at $11 billion. At home, dollar amounts spent on terrorism-related security by the 50 states are elusive as well, but FY2006 appropriations for the Department of land Security topped $30 billion.”Among the various U.S. government agencies involved in anti-terrorism efforts, there is currently no common set of criteria for measuring success. Although over four years have elapsed since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, many agencies are still attempting to establish and define precise criteria and standards, without which they cannot measure organizational performance.”Uncertainty with respect to both strategies and measurements makes it difficult to describe progress accurately and to demonstrate progress to the public or U.S. allies…”A common misconception is that by increasing expenditures the nation is necessarily making good progress. As a practical matter, the nation cannot secure everything, everywhere. Terrorist operations are relatively inexpensive to organize and carry out, especially in comparison to the damage they may inflict, or the cost of trying to prevent them from happening. Consequently, spending more money may not necessarily increase security proportionally.”Moreover, some suggest that the United States is bleeding itself dry economically, like the Soviet Union did in its attempts to match western military spending during the cold war.”Some contend that the biggest threat to democracy from terrorism is not destruction of property and life, but rather an inexorable erosion of civil liberties worldwide. Other concerns are loss of international unity due to policy differences, loss of opportunities due to budget and policy constraints, and reduction of U.S. stature and public relations image abroad. These and many other factors form a mosaic of measurements that highlight the complexities of analyzing progress.”