Losing the fight against terror

Faceless cowards savagely murdered 201 people in Madrid last Thursday. They tried to spread fear through the hearts of men, women, and children. But Spain stood up to the sadistic terrorists with all the force of the human spirit, teaching us a lesson in courage and solidarity that we should never forget. My heart goes out to the millions of brave Spaniards who gathered in the streets of Barcelona, and Sevilla, and Zaragoza to show the terrorists that no bomb can ever destroy our faith in humanity.

All indications point to Al-Qaida's direct involvement in Madrid's bombings. That means that this organization is still operational and that it can potentially attack targets in the United States. We cannot ignore the fact that Al-Qaida is still a grave threat. So we should all be asking ourselves one simple question: how well is this country defending itself against the possibility of another 9/11? The disturbing answer to this question is that the Bush administration is not doing what it should to defend this country.

What happened in Madrid is a wake up call to all of us. The victims of the train bombings have reminded us that we are still at risk. But more importantly, they have exposed America's flawed understanding of the nature of terrorism. Terrorism is not a conventional enemy and it therefore cannot be fought in conventional ways. That is a fundamental lesson that this country's leadership has yet to learn.

Let us consider Bush's record in fighting terrorism. When the United States was attacked in 2001, the Bush administration responded with an impressive display of military power. A few weeks after the twin towers fell, the U.S. military invaded Afghanistan, whose Taliban rulers had provided a safe haven for Osama bin-Laden. Going to war is never pleasant, but this seemed a just war if there ever was one. In March of 2003, the Bush administration succeeded in convincing a more reluctant public that waging war against Iraq was essential in the ongoing fight against terrorism. The casus belli this time was the imminent threat posed by Hussein's WMD and his alleged links to Al-Qaida. Once again, the Bush administration decided to deal with the threat of terrorism by taking military action against a sovereign state.

Yet, the simple truth is that despite the fact that this country has gone to war twice in the last three years, it is still just as vulnerable to terrorist attacks. This country has spent billions of dollars of taxpayers' money and sacrificed the lives of hundreds of American soldiers in a failed pursuit that is more likely to increase the number of terrorist recruits than decrease it. In the process, America managed to squander the enormous good will the world had offered in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. By acting unilaterally and in repudiation of diplomacy and international organizations, the Bush administration has damaged long-lasting friendships and alliances throughout the world. In the meantime, the U.S. government is diverting finite resources from Homeland Security and from detective work to immensely costly occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has failed to engage in constructive diplomacy with potentially dangerous countries like North Korea and Iran. It has failed to pressure the Saudi government to reform its school system and to cut off its financial support for Al-Qaida. And while America was busy bombing Iraq and Afghanistan, Pakistan's top nuclear scientist was revealing nuclear secrets to the Axis of Evil. Is it just me, or is there something fundamentally wrong with this picture? America did win two wars, but it is losing friends, encouraging future resistance, and losing sight of the real threats to the security of this nation. If this is the aftermath of the "War on Terrorism," Bush's wars will set a new standard for the term 'Pyhrric victory.'

Terrorist organizations are the ultimate non-state actor, and that means that they cannot be dealt with in conventional military operations. Terrorist cells operate in the shadows, oftentimes independently of one another. Organizations like Al-Qaida are loose networks of disciplined fanatics who rely on a complex web of financing and communication. Terrorism is also a borderless phenomenon and it is not an easy target for even the smartest bombs in the U.S. military arsenal. Bombing a few caves in Tora Bora might destroy some cells, but it will not kill this Hydra of a thousand heads.

Fighting terrorism successfully is more about police and investigative work than it is about military might. It requires sharing intelligence with other nations and cooperating closely in matters of legal agreements, criminal profiling, and civil transportation. Given its borderless nature, terrorism must be tackled multilaterally. This, of course, can be exceedingly difficult when you alienate the international community by pursuing an arrogant and reckless foreign policy. Bush's militarism seems more like an act of vengeance than a carefully crafted policy to combat terrorism.

I do not care if you are a Republican, Independent, Democrat, or Green, but if you think this country is doing its best to protect its citizens, you might be setting yourself up for a rude awakening. National security should stay above partisan politics. This is not an issue of political persuasions. It is an issue of common sense and doing the best thing for America's safety. My hope is that we do not have to suffer the horrors of another Sept. 11 to realize that.

Rodrigo De Haro is a senior majoring in International Relations. He can be reached at deharo@tuftsdaily.com.