Print

Mail

wiki links

'Soft talk, big stick' the only policy

`In a democracy like the US, these types of terrorist acts are not preventable.'

"Speak softly but carry a big stick" was one of US President Teddy Roosevelt's favorite adages. A return to that approach is one of the lessons the US should take from Tuesday's terrorist attacks.

As I write this commentary no group has claimed responsibility for the attacks, but informed analysis certainly points to Osama bin Laden and one or more fundamentalist Islamic groups. I will assume that analysis to be correct for the purposes of this commentary. These terrorist attacks by bin Laden bring into sharp and immediate focus a number of realities that the US ought to heed.

It is war. That is the first lesson. There is a fundamental difference between a criminal investigation and a war. Crime is against the state, but no one crime puts the state's survival in jeopardy. War in contrast throws the state's survival into question.

I agree with Senator Diane Feinstein who said "This is an act of war against the United States ... Any country or other entity who would harbor the terrorist responsible for this tragedy is an enemy of the US and we must respond militarily. Today is a dark day in our nation's history."

It is an "asymmetric war" -- the use of terrorist methods to strike at weaknesses in the societies of Western countries. It is called "asymmetric" because the two sides are not mirror images of each other. One side is usually rich, developed and Western; the other is none of those things. Asymmetric is not the same as traditional warfare, nor is it the same as guerrilla warfare. It is a different kind of warfare that requires different kinds of tactics and thinking.

It has shown the failing of HUMINT -- human intelligence -- as opposed to intelligence derived from high technology sources. An article in Jane's Defense Weekly on Tuesday pointed out in answer to the question of how the US intelligence community was caught unaware by these terrorist acts: "While national technical means continued to receive high levels of funding for surveillance satellites ... human-based intelligence capabilities have withered. Areas such as analysis, linguist skills, cultivation of agent networks, and `tradecraft' ... have suffered a lack of resources."

It can't be prevented. In a democracy like the US, these types of terrorist acts are not preventable. To prevent such things from occurring requires a police state, which is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and civil liberties. It is simply the cost of freedom.

It can be solved. This is where Roosevelt's "speak softly but carry a big stick" comes into play. By "solved," I mean "resolved." The resolution of terrorist acts involves finding the people, the groups and the "host nations" responsible and ending -- by whatever means necessary -- their ability to repeat their terrorist acts.

"By whatever means neces-sary" is a phrase made famous by Malcolm X and it implies the use of force. In war that is acceptable, in fact, it is necessary. America's response to these terrorist attacks ought to be swift and final.

The phrase also implies brooking no interference or sandbagging as occurred with the Yemeni government over the investigation of the attack on the USS Cole. If foreign governments attempt to sandbag the investigation of the attacks they should be viewed, to use the criminal law phrase, as "accomplices after the fact" to the attacks. As the old Texas Ranger saying goes, "You ride with outlaws, you hang with outlaws."

The US could take quite a few useful lessons from Israel in responding to terrorist attacks. The unfortunate reality is that Israel has had lots of experience dealing with Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. It's response tends to be swift, sure and focused. It is an example well worth following. A large part of that example would be "carrying a big stick."

Brian Kennedy is an attorney who writes and teaches on criminal justice and human rights issues.
This story has been viewed 6453 times.