StormWarning’s Counterterrorism

Regurgitating the news is one thing, offering predictions and insights, or analyzing events as they unfold is another. But public record provides my Year-End Observations for 2006. This post reviews (and “self-grades”) those predictions. In the next post, I will look ahead to 2008. History has a funny way of unfolding before your eyes. This gives me (and my readers) a gauge of whether my insights mean anything, or, if on balance, how full of shit I am.

Preface (from last year’s post): Blogdom has created many “instant experts in counterterrorism.” Some know more than others. My interest and involvement in terrorism and counter-X (including counter-narcotics) originated back to the middle 1990’s…it didn’t begin the morning of September 11^th. Alas, while I am somewhat of an expert in my field that falls within the realm of homeland security, and I am an avid reader of original source documents relating to terrorism and security, and I am what some people would call a “policy wonk” when it comes to Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, but of course, I am not really an expert in counterterrorism (nor do I purport to be one). So, you should take what I write with a grain of salt…and I will also add (as some people have read before), I write Storm Blog anonymously for a few very good and personal reasons. Among those are that many of my business relationships could be compromised by the opinions expressed here. Also, I write under my real name elsewhere, and do not wish to have that situation compromised either).

Last year, I started my predictions by quoting from Doug Farah’s year-end blog from 2006:

The primary lesson I take away from 2006 is that we often do not believe what we see in front of us, to our own detriment and danger.

So let us start by reviewing the situation as I viewed it last December 30th (with my reflected comments shown highlighted following each):

1. The spread of global terrorism – I believe that we have yet to grasp the nature of the enemy. In fact, I believe that largely, we do not really know our enemy at all. Partially, that is because we continue to approach this Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) more in a conventional way than in what I see it to be. The GWOT is as much a battle of societies and sociology as it is a battle between suicide bombers or insurgents and those who seek to stop their attacks with guns and tanks. This is also less about nation states sponsoring terrorism than it is the transformation to terrorism of disenchanted, disadvantaged individuals who seek answers to their plights through the social structure that is available to them. Not that much unlike gang mentality, men and women are attracted to jihadist or terrorist groups (cells) by a desire for social bonding. The stated hatred for the West and America (and therefore Israel) becomes the byproduct of adopting the jihadist, fundamentalist Islamic ways…[edited]. What this means is that no single terrorist is now essential to the jihad…its the system, not the organization. However, the “parent company” of al Qaeda, as contrasted with the al Qaeda clones, will remain a force behind the spread of terrorism.

As a result, I can see no immediate end to the spread of Islamic, al Qaeda style jihadist terrorism. Already we have indigenous or nearly indigenous systems of jihadist terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, and some, despite current proclamations of the pushing back of the ICU, soon in Somalia…[edited]

What is clear is that terrorism has continued to spread unrelentedly. What is also clear is that my statement of al Qaeda (parent company or now referred to al Qaeda 1.0) remains a force, while al Qaeda clones (al Qaeda 2.0) continue to wreck havoc. Also, the recruitment of new jihadists continues. Further, one of the new developments has been the move of the jihad to within the prison system here in the U.S. to recruit new homegrown terrorists. I contend that many will continue to make the mistake of damning all Muslims (and thus all of Islam) for the continuing spread of the jihad. These “many” have a great difficulty differentiating between political and religious Islam. Unfortunately, this misconception will continue to cause distrust and unrest in the U.S. and in the World. Frankly, you cannot read most conservative websites or blogs and read about the distinction. To this “observation” I give myself an “A” even though some of this should have been obvious.

2. The Middle East and its affect on Global instability (the 3 “I’s”) –
Israel: Nothing has been settled in the Middle East. Israel continues to be a target of various terrorist organizations ranging from Hamas and Hezbollah to Fatah and al Aksa Martyrs. But beyond that, the Palestinian State as it is, remains unviable. As long as that continues, there is no hope for a peaceful settlement in Israel.

While visible terrorism has been somewhat lessened during 2007, the fact remains that pressure from Hamas and Hezbollah to Fatah and al Aksa Martyrs continues. The Annapolis conference was worthless in the context of bring peace to the region, IMO. Agin, perhaps obvious to the astute reader, but nonetheless, on point. Another “A” I do not deserve. There will be no peace in the Middle East so long as Israel exists. And it will, unless…“B”

Iraq: Today’s execution of Hussein in Iraq, for all of his crimes against humanity, will not end the violence there. In fact, after a lull, perhaps because of the Muslim holiday of Eid, it is likely that another upsurge in violence will occur. Just how long the experiment in democracy in Iraq can last before full scale sectarian conflict erupts remains one of the key questions. Frankly, I believe that this is one of the most underestimated elements of the War in Iraq, and therefore one of the most likely sources of violence in the months ahead. Also as discussed by Evan Kohlmann in his “State of the Sunni Insurgency in Iraq: 2006″

Here is the link to Evan’s blog and the discussion of the Iraq Insurgency.
The influence of al Qaeda in Iraq has expanded, not contracted, since the death of Zarqawi in June 2006. The consolidation of Sunni groups under the al Qaeda influence and banner. The future impact of this cannot be calculated in my opinion. AQI will continue to be an issue to be dealt with.

I stand, perhaps alone among many, believing that the effort to install a “democratic” government in corruption riddled and strife torn Iraq remains an elusive if not unachievable goal. This story has not seen the last chapter written, and may not even during 2008. But AQI is not dead and gone (just as in Afghanistan – below- the Taliban is not dead and gone). We mistake a lull in activity for victory.

It appears that stability is close to hand in Iraq than I thought. The surge has “worked” and violence is down. Whether or not the Iraqis can provide their own security, I believe was shown by their asking for the U.S. to remain in-country to provide just that, security. The sectarian and religious violence has abated somewhat, but continues. AQI is not dead. I grant myself a “B.”

Iran: How will Iran turn out? The year 2007 will give us answers about how deranged Ahmadinejad really is, or whether, like many leader like him, there is a driven substance to his madness. Are they, or will Iran go nuclear in 2007? The nuclear issue in Iran will certainly be raised this year. We can only pray that Iran’s threats do not happen, ever. But there is absolutely no reason to expect that 2007 will be a year in which nation state sponsored terrorism will cease. Is there a possibility of conflict? Could be…lots of sabre-rattling already. I hope that there won’t be another U.S. military front opened in Iran, but who really knows?

Iran in fact did go nuclear in 2007 (or at least threaten to do so). At the same time, the contradictory NIE makes “gaming” the situation in Iran very difficult. The wild card in Iran became Russia’s assistance in building and feeding the reactors, something that occurred only late in the year. An apparently brokered cessation of sponsorship of the insurgency in Iraq was unexpected. I grant myself a “C+.”

3. Global Instability– We do not live in a safe world.
Lebanon and Syria: Syria’s intentions have yet to be fully revealed. Their support of terrorism is known. What their intentions are relative to weaponry (especially the possibility of nuclear or chemical/biological weapons) remains speculative. And it remains to be proven or disproven whether Syria is a bigger player via Hussein’s weapons. The pieces of the Middle Eastern chessboard are complex.

Syria is a seriously flawed country and situation. The possibility that Syria and not Iran is the country harboring nuclear weapons intentions (again, late in the year), is problematic. As a Ba’athist regime, Syria continues to represent a threat to regional stability both as a sponsor of terrorism (Hezbollah) and as a direct aggressor. Lebanon remains unstable. I grant myself a “B.”

The Philippines: Despite the recent death of the leader of Abu Sayyaff (“Abu Sayyaf Chieftain Khadaffy Janjalani Reported Killed”) to think that the years’ long conflict in the Philippines will stop would be naïve. I look for an expansion of Abu Sayyaf related terrorist attacks and a closer linkage with the global terorrist movement.

Abu Sayyaf remains a major threat to stability in the region, and they have in fact, become a close clone of al Qaeda. . I grant myself a “B.”

Afghanistan: I continue to find it a bit mind blowing to believe that in some quarters people believe that Afghanistan is stable and that the Taliban is out of the picture. Today I believe that I read one article in which Karzai pleaded with the people to stop supporting the foreigners (“strangers”) who were fighting with the Taliban. Karzai will have a tough time staying alive, let alone stay in control of this fragile balance between peace and a re-Talibanization. The Taliban are not “dead” as NATO boy once insisted. I wonder how far their resurgence will carry them.
AFGHANISTAN: Karzai vs. the Warlords
Afghan leader urges end to Taliban insurgency

Unfortunately, Afghanistan, I believe, remains on the brink. Afterall, how long can appeasement work? The White House, in fact, has admitted that much has gone wrong and that many of the strategies and goals remain to be accomplished. Clearly the Taliban are back, despite the many of them who have been killed. Their recruitment continues. I grant myself an “A.”

Myanmar (Burma): This is another area of instability, and even with the recent death of the leader of the insurgency, Bo Mya, continuing violence and unrest should be expected. Can it spread to the rest of the region? Of course! Myanmar borders Thailand where Islamic stresses continue.

Thailand: The south of Thailand continues to be an area of violence and growing Muslim influence. As written, “Three killed in Thailand’s restive south” Drive-by shootings and bombings occur almost daily in Thailand’s three southernmost Muslim-majority provinces of Yala, Narathiwat and Pattani, where an Islamic insurgency that flared in January 2004 has killed more than 1,900 people. Why should we expect this violence to stop?

Myanmar became a center of World attention for a period while the priests mounted a counter-campaign. It has faded from the news, but that, in itself, does not mean anything. Thailand was relatively quiet, although the Islamic rebellion in the south of the country remains. In combination, I grant myself a “B.”

4. The Internet and terrorism – It has been well documented that the jihad is being spread through the Internet. What is often not discussed is that through the Internet and through access to global media (television especially), the ways of the West are brought to those who become the new terrorists. This is something that we cannot stop. It is simply something that needs to be understood and considered.

Clearly, the use of the Internet both as a tool for training and simulation, as well as a tool of aggression through cyber-terrorism became well publicized in 2007. I grant myself an “A.”

5. Secure Identification Documents – In a way, IMO, the term “secure document” is a non-sequitor. Certainly, the federal government would argue that the Transportation Workers Identification Card or the Common Access Credential both represent secure documents. As time passes, perhaps with all of the regulations (HSPD 12 and FIPS 201 for example), these will prove out. But how about the electronic passport (e-passport)? Is it secure? If you believe the numerous and increasing reports about the RFID chips embedded in such secure documents being cloned, then you’ve got to wonder if they are truly secure. Thus, I believe that the recent upsurge in identity theft and the relationship of forged and counterfeit documents to illegal immigration will continue. I’d watch for additional disclosures of phony documents to play a role in the events of 2007.

While progress is being made toward implementing the government forms of secure ID, much work remains to be accomplished in providing fool proof and secure identification for our citizens and travelers. Other than the revelations of security breaches like the TJ Max debacle, there was not much publicity about the role of phony documents in terrorism. I grant myself a “B-.”

6. Border (In)security – This blog has had many posts during the past year on our insecure border with Mexico, and the impact of illegal immigration. Not the Democrats and not the Republicans can stop this. IMO, building a wall, whether virtual or physical, is only a small measure. Unfortunately, the Border Patrol and ICE are not capable of performing the National Security roles needed to protect US citizens from terrorists or drug lords flowing across the Southern border with Mexico. It may be time for militarizing the border. There! I said it. Perhaps we need to go beyond sending National Guard to the border as was done in Arizona. Yes, suspend the Posse Comitatus Act.

Here is a link to a very good article from the Journal of Homeland Security, “The Myth of Posse Comitatus.”

The security of our northern and southern borders remains problematic. The flow of illegal immigrants across our border with Mexico is often and well documented. Only because it is so obvious, I grant myself a “B.”

7. The continuing merging of the War on Terrorism and the War on Drugs - While this is related to the issue of border security, I see the intertwining of drugs and terrorism to continue in the New Year. Why is this important? Not only do illegal narcotics represent a serious threat to our Nation, but the illicit drug trade also presents opportunities for terrorist funding. There is an unquestionable linkage (at least in my mind) between terrorism and illegal narcotics, and that connection is very dangerous.

There should be no question of the cross-over of counter-drugs and counter-terrorism. Further, the impact of the narco-wars on the Mexican side of the border are clear. Unfortunately, I must grant myself an “A” here.

8. Attacks – I have no crystal ball and while we can all pray that nothing like September 11th 2001 (New York, Washington DC) or July 7th 2005 (London) or March 7th 2004 (Madrid) or October 1st 2005 (Bali) ever repeats it would be naïve to believe that another major attack will not occur. It has been pretty quiet lately. It is unrealistic to expect this quiet to continue for much longer. Whether or not we in this country have become too complacent, and whether that attack will occur on our soil is beyond my speculation. Watch the Pacific Rim and South Asia.

The attacks have been sporadic and less spectacular. None have occurred in the United States, although there have been documented attempts (JFK Plot for example). If it is proven that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto was an attack of al Qaeda (as suspected), then, as others have also stated, this shift in tactics could be a very serious development in the future. I must grant myself a“B” here.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
a. The “next” terrorist attack, wherever it occurs, will be unconventional. The most likely form is a radiological weapon or dirty bomb. We can only hope that it is limited in scope (my guess is South Asia). Another anthrax type attack is not beyond imagination.

Wrong. Didn’t happen (thankfully), although the likelihood of a future event remains high.. Grade: “D.”

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
b. Terrorism and the growth of Islamic, fundamentalist jihadism will occur in the Western Hemisphere:
· There will be further and growing social and political instability in Mexico
· Hugo Chavez’ influence in South America will expand as he continues to provide financing for insurgency activities (and watch for his involvement outside of SA).
· The Tri-border region of South America will once again be on our radar screen…Tri-border transfers ‘funding terror’
The tri-border area, where Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina meet, is a lawless region where drugs trafficking, gun running and counterfeit goods are rife. The BBC has now found documents showing the suspicious transfer of large sums of money to the Middle East, which investigators believe goes to fund terrorism.

I think that the essential elements for terrorism emerging in the Western Hemisphere are there. Mexico is a serious problem in my opinion. Chavez continues to stir the pot. The recent disclosure of Iran’s “playing footsie” with Ortega in Nicaragua in something to be watch closely. Not much of note was public about activities in the Tri-Border region. On balance, I grant myself “B” here.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
c. Karzai’s government in Afghanistan will succumb to increasing pressures from the previously “defunct” but resurrected Taliban. To a degree, this will be a result of Pakistan’s willingness to negotiate and make concessions with the Taliban. Watch Pakistan closely and we’ll see how stable even the Musharraf regime is at the end of 2007 (after all, Musharraf took power in a coup). Since the border between these two countries is arbitrary, I’d expect the influence of the Taliban to expand on both sides. On the extreme end, I wonder if one or both will still be alive.

Karzai is still in power (somehow), despite the fact that the Taliban have been resurrected. Poppy cultivation is at record levels. The question of how long he will remain in power (or even alive) is now even more important given the assassination of Bhutto last week. The instability of Pakistan, even before the Bhutto “martyrdom” was evident. No one could have predicted Musharraf calling for a suspension of rights and the institution of martial law. Clearly, the Taliban (al Qaeda) has re-exerted its power on both sides of the border. I grant myself “B” here, although it could be argued that a higher grade is warranted.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
d. The Iraqi conflict will expand, leading to a separatist movement by Kurdistan. This will both inflame the Shi’a and Sunni segments of the Iraqi Government, but also enrage Turkey. I simply cannot see Turkey standing by and watching the emergence of democracy in Kurdistan idly.

Kurdistan is not quite a reality at this moment, but Turkey is certainly flexing is power. I’ve read that some people believe that Turkey will soon become a fundamentalist Islamic state. I’m not so sure of this, but clearly, Turkey’s influence in current and future events is likely to be strong. I grant myself “A” here.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
e. Despite the recent successes of Ethiopia in “routing” the ICU in Somalia, Somalia will become the next battleground in the Global War on Terror. This will hasten the U.S. military establishing the Africa Command, which will be brought into the fighting, opening a potential third battlefront.

The Africa Command is a reality. Somalia remains on the edge. Other parts of Africa are beginning to boil over. The “prediction” was a but premature. I grant myself “B” here.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
f. Continued terrorists attacks in India and the skirmishes between India and Pakistan on their border will continue to flare-up, leading to a nuclear showdown. The Pakistani-Indian nuclear stand-off could well accelerate.

The nuclear showdown has not occurred. Kashmir remains a major element of contention between these two countries. The escalation of the nuclear race between the two is evident in recent events. I grant myself “B+” here.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
g. Putin and Russia will move further away from its friendly position with the West and with the U.S. Putin is dangerous, even if “trusted” by GW (question: Russian democracy?). The fall-out from the Litvinenko murder by Polonium 210 is still unresolved, and probably will be the most blogged and unsolved “about” during 2006. IMO, the only way that it is an important event is if it is shown that it was smuggling operation gone bad and that Polonium 210 could be used in a dirty bomb. Otherwise, despite the attention paid to it here and elsewhere, it was a “Grade B” spy movie.

This is no longer a case of if, but a question of when, IMO. Putin has re-exerted his power. While the Litvinekno saga has faded from the headlines, the fact remains that Putin is now in line to become a new dictator. Often in 2006/2007, I wrote about the coming of the next Cold War. With Russia now supplying HEU to Iran, it is closer to being. I grant myself “B+” here, if only because I didn’t see a Russian-Iranian connection brewing.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
h. Despite all of the other rhetoric, the Democrats will have little choice but to maintain the stance of the Global War on Terrorism, even if open debate and budget battles create uproars within the conservative communities.

No real proof either way, although the efforts to de-fund the War in Iraq and Afghanistan argue that I missed this one. The Democrats are more stupid than I thought (although, as I’ve recently written, it doesn’t really seem to me that any candidate for either party truly understand the nature of this War, or the nature of the enemy. I grant myself a “C” here.

9. Wild Ass Guesses –
i. Senator Clinton will not run for President (I’m still not even sure that she will win the Democratic nomination, but this is still over a year away). But don’t look for Al Gore to try to run again. Neither will John Kerry.

Too early to tell regarding Hillary and the Democratic nomination. If she is the nomineee, I simply do not see her winning (as long as the Republicans run a decent candidate (bucking the apparent trend, that means neither Rudy nor Fred. I grant myself an “incomplete.”