Found this on www.janes.com (fwd)

Jane's progress report on the War on Terrorism, one year in.


Follow this link:
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jid/jid020905_1_n.shtml

Or simply read this:

05 September 2002   Al Qaeda: one year on

As the first anniversary of the terrorist attacks against the US approaches, 
there has been the predictable round of media features focusing on the 
successes and failures of the 'war against terrorism'. Unfortunately, the 
evidence suggests that most of the initial 'war aims' have not been achieved. 
JID investigates why.

Perhaps the first and foremost mistake in the immediate aftermath of 11 
September was to personalise the conflict. By making Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin 
Laden the main target, anything short of a confirmed death or a living captive 
was doomed to fall short of popular expectation.

The second error – and this may prove even more costly in the longer term – was 
to assume that a military victory over the Taliban regime in Afghanistan would 
inflict severe damage on Al-Qaeda's operational capability. In fact, although 
the Taliban did provide invaluable political patronage for Bin Laden and his 
network, Al-Qaeda was never truly dependent on the Taliban.

Although it is true that the ousting of the Taliban has certainly ended the 
training of Al-Qaeda's foot-soldiers in Afghanistan – and this is no small 
achievement – what has not been stopped is the group's ability to raise funds 
or operate its international network of sleeper cells and safe houses. In fact, 
in the view of many within the Western intelligence community, Al-Qaeda is 
probably stronger now than it was before 11 September.

The reasons for this are complex, but key factors include the enormous growth 
in grassroots support for the group throughout much of the Islamic world.

Repeated attempts by leading Western politicians to portray the militants as a 
tiny faction without mainstream support is admitted privately to be more 
reflective of a general concern to avoid giving the impression that the 'war 
against terrorism' is actually a 'war against Islam'.

Of course, it is undeniable that a great many Muslims (particularly those 
living in the West) were genuinely horrified by events of 11 September. 
However, it is also impossible to suppress the fact that Al-Qaeda and its 
leader enjoy widespread popular support throughout the Middle East. What the 
group has managed to do, with notable success, is to combine powerful 
anti-Western sentiment with proof that it has the capability of striking at the 
heart of the US. At a time when Washington is seen as Israel's key ally, it has 
been very easy for Al-Qaeda to present itself as the Islamic world's means of 
striking back against unequal forces. The West underestimates the attraction of 
Al-Qaeda's propaganda message to many Muslims at its peril.

Another key political mistake has been to focus on secondary distractions, such 
as the ‘axis of evil’, while soft-peddling on the principal sponsors of 
Al-Qaeda: Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The unpalatable truth is that these two 
‘allies’ of the West have played an undeniable role in the growth of Bin 
Laden's group into an international terrorist network.

445 of 965 words <!--short As the first anniversary of the terrorist attacks 
against the US approaches, there has been the predictable round of media 
features focusing on the successes and failures of the 'war against terrorism'. 
Unfortunately, the evidence suggests that most of the initial 'war aims' have 
not been achieved. JID investigates why.

Although it is true that the ousting of the Taliban has certainly ended the 
training of Al-Qaeda's foot-soldiers in Afghanistan – and this is no small 
achievement – what has not been stopped is the group's ability to raise funds 
or operate its international network of sleeper cells and safe houses.

99 of 965 words



Copyright 2002 Jane's Information Group. All rights reserved.