As the editor-in-chief it is important that those that view this site understand the purpose of this blog is to provide a comprehensive examination of the global war on terrorism. To that end, posts will address the military, political, diplomatic, strategic, matters involving intelligence, and other dimensions of the conflict. On occasion the blog will examine the global war on terror from a regional perspective, whether in Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and elsewhere. There will be select posts that will address the status of the global war on terrorism. In the final analysis, through the blog posts, the editor endeavors to provide useful information that will add to the body of knowledge about the on-going and ever-proliferating conflict that is anticipated to last at least a generation. The information provided below represents an illustration of some of the topics that will appear in subsequent posts.

Africa and The War on Terrorism

One of the signature dilemmas associated with why terrorism is so prevalent in the region of Africa has to do with the continuing presence of a host of variables. With respect to these variables, in the words of Ted Dagne, “The abject poverty, state weakness, the presence of and abundance of ungoverned spaces or safe havens and official corruption have made parts of Africa an attractive destination for terrorist relocation and the conduct of operations.” It should be noted that these variables developed during the pre-9/11 period and proliferated during the post 9/11 periods in the region.

As depicted above, beset by litany of other issues, confronting the threat posed by terrorism has induced a battle for scarce financial resources. Equally important, in a bid for economic and military assistance from the United States after September 11, 2001, many governments in the region have prioritized terrorism over poverty, famine, disease, corruption and other issues within their states.

Second, the presence of Weak and Failed States are critical variables to understand the significance of the evolution of terrorism in Africa. Third, the existence of authoritarian and corrupt governments are other critical variables. Fourth, there are a host of other variables to include the burgeoning expansion of Political Islam, Political Terrorism in Africa, Al Qaeda’s ongoing Transnational Threat, and the nascent presence of groups that are loyal to the ideology associated with the Islamic State. Fifth, it is often overlooked that terrorist groups have existed across Africa throughout much of the post-colonial, Cold War, and post-Cold periods. In the aftermath of Al Qaeda’s transformational attack on 9/11, terrorism exploded across the continent.

There are a host of other issues that will be addressed. For example, subsequent posts will address the role of The United States Africa Command, the African Union (AU), and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Additionally, a host of posts will examine the role major terrorist groups in the region such as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Al Shabab, and Boko Haram, to name a few. In short, future posts will address the extent counterterrorism succeeded and failed to deal with the threat of terrorism in the region. In previous writings, the editor has addressed many of the aforementioned issues (see Africa and The War on Terrorism and Terrorism in Africa: The Evolving Front in the War in Terrorism).

Major Terrorist Groups 

A number of posts will focus on the plethora of major terrorist groups and the extent to which they have contributed to terror-related violence during the “long war” and whether the presence of these same groups will ensure the war on terrorism will indeed last a generation.

The Islamic State is obviously the signature terrorist group of our time. With respect to terrorist- related violence, and when you consider the organization created a Caliphate which currently encompasses shrinking territory in Syria and Iraq (not to mention that ISIS maintains affiliates in nearly 20-plus states around the world), there is no doubt the Islamic State represents the dominant terrorist security threat.

The Islamic State currently dominants the landscape with their caliphate, terrorist sanctuaries, and small stockpile of chemical weapons. However, Al Qaeda still represents the largest terrorist organization in the world. While Al Qaeda Central is not as active, the affiliates of the transnational organization remain threats. Chief among them, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is by far the dominant affiliate. Most worrisome, as the civilian war in Yemen continues, AQAP continues to expand their sanctuary within the country.

AQAP receives significant media attention, but on occasion Boko Haram dominants the headlines due to the numerous terrorist attacks which are launched within Nigeria and outside the country. Within Somalia, Al Shabab has lost considerable territory. That said, Al Shabab remains one of the most dangerous terrorist groups in the world. In Syria, Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (formally Jabhat al Nusra Front) severed their ties to Al Qaeda Central and have increased their attacks against Syrian government forces and those of ISIS.

There are a host of other terrorist groups that remain threats to security around the world. Some examples include Hezbollah, Naxal/Naxalites in India, Tehrik I Taliban and Lashkar-e-Toiba, both of which operate in Pakistan, and the Taliban in Afghanistan are just a few of some the dangerous terrorist threats operating around the world.

Drones and the War on Terrorism

Drones assumed prominence as a counterterrorism tool during the administration of George W. Bush. Drones present a host of options for policymakers. For example, drones can act as a platform from which to conduct intelligence. That is, drones may be used for the surveillance and if necessary the killing of high value terrorists. Additionally, wherever appropriate, drones may be used to gather intelligence on enemy military forces (and they may be called upon to destroy select military vehicles).

In 2008, Bush signed presidential orders that called the targeting of high value Al Qaeda members in the tribal areas in Pakistan. A new era in counterterrorism had arrived. Armed with this new authority, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employed drones as an instrument to conduct operations to target and kill members of Al Qaeda.

Despite campaigning against Bush’s policies, once in office President Barack Obama embraced his predecessors drone policy. Specifically, following a review of Bush’s policy, President Obama made the decision to dramatically accelerate the use of drones.

In particular, President Obama significantly  increased the use of drones to target members of Al Qaeda in Pakistan AQAP in Yemen, and al Shabab in Somalia. During Operation Inherent Resolve against the Islamic State, President Obama authorized the use of drones against the terrorist organization. In another use of the Drones, President Obama agreed to permit drones to conduct surveillance operations to locate the 200-plus young girls that were kidnapped in Nigeria by Boko Haram.  

As will demonstrated in a subsequent post, civilian casualties and controversies surrounding alleged violations of international law have increased the scrutiny of U.S. drone policy by the United Nations and human rights organizations.

The Role of Special Operation Forces and the War on Terrorism 

As noted previously, a host of posts will be designated to address the subject of counterterrorism. One of the more significant instruments of counterterrorism is the role performed by Special Operation Forces (SOFs). In the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, President George W. Bush made extensive use of SOFs.  For example, during Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, SOFs were dispatched to target Al Qaeda and the Taliban. In Operation Iraqi Freedom the largest number of SOFs were deployed since the Vietnam War. The SOFs were deployed to defeat three disparate insurgencies—the Sunni, Shiite, and Al Qaeda in Iraq insurgencies—in the country.

Throughout the tenure of the Bush administration, U.S. SOFs were deployed to train numerous soldiers in allied states around the world. Examples include, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Georgia, and the Philippines, to name a few. When called upon, SOFs participated in a number of operations in Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and elsewhere around the world.  

During the administration of President Barack Obama, SOF utilization continued. The most famous utilization of SOFs involved the mission that killed Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan. U.S. SOFs have engaged Islamists in a host of areas around the world during the Obama administration, most notably in Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. In a surprise to many observers, American SOFs are currently operating in over 135 countries around the world.

Not to be dismissed, allied SOFs have contributed significantly in the war on terror. The British, the French, the Israelis, and recently those from Iraqi Security Forces (ISF), which have battled Islamic State fighters, have participated in a host of counterterrorism missions. Subsequent posts will address the role of these elite fighters from allied states.

The Role of Female Suicide Bombers and the War on Terrorism

Historically, the vast majority of suicide bombers of have been men. In the age of the war on terrorism men are still the gender that conducts the overwhelming number of suicide terrorist attacks. However, female-led suicide attacks continue to rise. The female-led suicide attacks have been conducted in Africa, Europe, Asia and the Middle East.

In an illustration of the point, the former leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed in a U.S. airstrike, ordered a number of female suicide attacks in Jordan.

In Iraq, beginning in 2008, Al Qaeda utilized female suicide bombers to attack coalition check points. Additionally, female suicide bombers were used to attack Shiite pilgrimages. The result of these and other female-led suicide attacks resulted in numerous deaths.

In Chechnya, female suicide bombers, more commonly known as “black widows”, conducted a number of attacks in Russia. For example, on March 29, 2010 two female suicide bombers participated in separate Moscow Metro bombings that resulted in the death of 40 people and over 100 others were wounded in the attack.   

For jihadist organizations female suicide bombers are now considered a major instrument for use against Western military forces and for use as “lone wolf’s” to conduct urban attacks against perceived “infidel” targets around the world. 

Diplomacy and the War on Terrorism

Often dismissed, diplomacy is one of the critical counterterrorism components in the war on terrorism. Most conspicuously, after 9/11 diplomacy represented a vehicle by which states could use to rally other countries around the world to cooperate in a global mission to target Al Qaeda.

For example, the United Nations passed a number of Security Council Resolutions which viewed terrorism as “Threats to International Peace and Security.” In a second example, a subsequent resolution called for “Condemning Violent Extremism, Underscoring Need to Prevent Travel, Support for Foreign Terrorist Fighters.” In a third example, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that created “the Al Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee.” In yet another illustration of global cooperation, the UN Security Council agreed to a resolution that called for the disruption of terrorist financing.

Of equal import, regional bodies such as the African Union, the Arab League, and the European Union introduced their own measures to ensure that member states adopted the measures agreed upon within the UN. Similarly, many of the regional organizations created supplemental measures that were adopted and subsequently implemented.

Diplomacy during the war on terrorism is ongoing and adaptive (an example would be how the UN adopted resolutions to confront the threat posed by the Islamic State). Several bodies, principally the United Nations, demonstrate that soft power is a useful instrument in the war on terror.