September 17, 2001
Bush Weighs His Options
Decisive retaliation is predicted in the wake of horrendous terrorist attacks
By JIM MCTAGUE
President Bush has made it quite clear that the U.S. is at war with international terrorism. He's also made it clear that the conflict will not be short, sweet and antiseptic. The U.S. is resolved at this juncture to get the job done, even if it means a high rate of casualties among our troops. After a brief pause to allow the nation to begin mourning the thousands who were murdered in New York and Washington last week, our military will begin to take action against terrorist networks, even if it means sending troops into countries that harbor them without a polite knock at the door. "We must get the roots as well as the branches," said Secretary of State Colin Powell.
"He's putting Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Afghanistan on notice that we will go in with or without permission if that's what it takes to bring a terrorist network down," says Tom Keaney, executive director for foreign policy at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies in Washington.
President Bush has an array of military options at his disposal, ranging from tactical nuclear weapons to smart bombs and cruise missiles. Experts predict he will respond with a new kind of warfare that lies somewhere between an old-style conventional military campaign and a bombing campaign. Nuclear weapons are out of the question, they say, because their use would send the wrong message at a time the U.S. is trying to reduce the number of weapons of mass destruction around the world.
To truly root out terrorism, Bush will have to do more than roll up terrorist networks, such as the Al-Qaeda, which is headed by the infamous Osama bin Laden. Experts say Bush will have to complete the unfinished business of Operation Desert Storm -- namely the killing of Iraq's Saddam Hussein.
"Saddam lives for revenge," says Laurie Mylroie, author of Study of Revenge: Saddam Hussein's Unfinished War Against America. She says America should bomb Iraq immediately and send in the Army again if that's what it takes to get the rogue dictator before he commits an even greater atrocity, like killing hundreds of thousands of Americans with a biological agent.
"The future action may not reach the scale of Desert Storm in terms of the deployment of manpower. But it will be several rungs above launching a cruise missile strike and hoping for the best," says Keaney.
A former B-52 pilot, Keaney believes the U.S. would like to use its Special Forces in actions against terrorists. "They won't try to capture Kabul or police Afghanistan," he predicts. If a larger force is required to hold some territory temporarily, the U.S. will be willing to commit the manpower, even if it means taking casualties. NATO, too, can be expected to supply intelligence, as well as air cover, ships and elite troops, to the war effort.
The U.S. can also apply economic warfare against the nations that harbor these networks, including blockades and destruction of infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, and power plants. Bush also has the option of taking down offending regimes, according to Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute in his organization's annual Handbook for Congress.
The cost of prosecuting the war at the moment is not an issue. Both parties in Congress have made it clear that they will spend whatever it takes to respond to the terrorist threat. Initial estimates range from $20 billion to $50 billion.
A time for mourning, soon to be followed by a time for retribution: Experts expect George W. Bush to strike -- and strike hard -- at a variety of targets in the Middle East.
Keaney says it's yet to be determined who is responsible for the attack. And though Osama bin Laden is a prime suspect, it's quite possible that the attack was launched by another network with the same ideas -- with or without state sponsorship. "All it takes to coordinate such an attack is an ability to read a flight schedule and some luck," he says.
Critics of the U.S. intelligence establishment say it will take many months to identify the locations of terrorist hideouts because our post-Cold War-era mechanism relies too heavily on high-tech equipment and not enough on flesh-and-blood spies. But the U.S. probably knows a lot more than it admits, thanks to Israel. "We should move to turn our always hush-hush military and intelligence relationship with Israel into a formal working alliance to wage war," says David Wurmser, a Middle East expert at the American Enterprise Institute. "That country is now the forward base in our war against the anti-Americanism that so many of the region's regimes embrace. Those in the region who protest this will reveal themselves as tentative, fair-weather friends, not real allies."
A new Marshall Plan
Bullets alone will not win a war against terrorism, says Robert David Steele, a former intelligence officer who has been trying to promote change and innovation in our intelligence-gathering bureaucracies. Steele says the nation needs to launch a worldwide Marshall Plan focused on fighting crime, as well as water, food, medicine and energy shortfalls that contribute to global instability inimical to U.S. national interests. No less than $25 billion should be invested in Year One, with $100 billion a year earmarked for the effort by Year Six.
"Those that think terrorism is cowardly or underhanded are destined to fail as leaders," opines Steele. "Terrorism -- especially faith-based terrorism that inspires suicidal martyrs and total loyalty -- is a logical asymmetric response when confronted by conventional superiority. Patience, a strategic perspective and a broad long-term campaign plan are essential."
A risk for the nation as it goes on the offensive is that the war ignites a terrorist onslaught from Muslim radicals throughout the Middle East. That's why the initial U.S. strikes must be credible and devastating, the experts say. Our enemies must be convinced that the consequences of attacking us are too great to risk. There are no other options.
URL for this Article:
interactive.wsj.com
Copyright © 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
For information about subscribing, go to wsj.com |
