Colleagues: I asked a few experts from the law enforcement and counter terrorism communities to provide policy recommendations or thoughts regarding what the United States should do to counter the growing threat from Islamic jihadists. Their responses are below. Obviously, given the authors’ association with LE and CT activities their recommendations tend to lean in favor of increased surveillance and other steps to counter these threats. I will ask others who come from a background closer to wanting to protect civil liberties to do a follow up piece.
-Ty
A Few Words on Countering the Terrorist Threat
Please remember there is no magic bullet that will solve the problem with one shot. We are dealing with a complicated problem. On the other hand, the problem is not insoluble….Most of the terrorist groups that were functioning during the 1970s and 1980s have passed from the scene or abandoned terrorism for non-violent activity. The IRA in Northern Ireland and the Muslim separatists on Mindanao in the Philippines are cases in point.
It seems to me that the best way of tackling the problem is by distinguishing between long range solutions and more immediate ways of thwarting terrorist plans.
Long Range Solutions: The French now require Imams to take courses on French culture and civilization. The Dutch require Muslim newcomers to learn something about morality and culture in the Netherlands. In other words, there are techniques for better integrating immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa into their surroundings. We should be especially sensitive to second generation Muslim citizens since this group is the one for whom ISIS and al-Qaeda have the strongest appeal. Saudi Arabia and some of the Persian Gulf sheikdoms should be encouraged to withdraw support from the Salafist/Jihadi cause. It would probably help,too, if the United States reduced its ‘footprint’ in the Muslim world.
Dealing with immediate problems: Improve human intelligence. The bigger the terrorist group, the easier it should be to penetrate (in the case of terrorism, success typically breeds failure). Offer a way out. In a number of countries (Italy, Colombia), offering individuals some way out has produced significant numbers of defectors. Also, even with a group of presumed religious fanatics, money sometimes talks. Bribery is not out of the question. Do a better job of countering jihadist propaganda on the Internet.
- Leonard Weinberg, Foundation Professor Emeritus, UNR is a recognized international expert on terrorism.
/////////
These latest events highlight the end of the nation-state which has been dying since the third and fourth Yugoslav Wars and the growth of globalization. The rest of the world has basically shifted to the market state, but Islam is still centuries behind and clings to its ideological state – the umma. Islam does not recognize national borders or nationality but wants the entire world eventually to be part of the Islamic caliphate. It is all a bad joke since they cannot agree among themselves, but it is a powerful propaganda tool to attract adherents. As Marco Polo observed, “The militant Muslim is the person who beheads the infidel, while the moderate Muslim holds the feet of the victim.” This Muslim exclusiveness and refusal to integrate creates the potential of 5th columns in non-Muslim countries, thereby threatening modern civilization. This ideology must be eliminated or drastically changed to bring it into the 21st Century (The calls for reformation by Presidents al-Sisi of Egypt and Essebsi of Tunisia are starters). In the meantime, there will be constant threats of violence.
It is premature for the US to become involved militarily in this Muslim civil war, but we will be affected by their actions and we need to put mosques, Islamic organizations, and people under surveillance and shut down any sedition or treason. Since it is impossible to protect every soft site from our power grid to stadiums to synagogues to shopping malls, it appears that the only solution is armed people, permitting the open carry of weapons (as in Israel) to deter attacks or deal with them immediately.
- COL/Dr Richard Hobbs is a prolific writer on Islamic topics, including his recent book, “World War IV: Islamofascism, the Third Jihad, and Other Threats to the U.S.A.“
////////
The most important investigative tools in our efforts to combat Islamic Terrorism or Muslim extremism, or whatever the US Administration wishes to call these increasingly violent attacks worldwide, are the ability of US Intelligence Agencies to develop and maintain long term intelligence assets – both physical and electronic. Physical asssets ( ie. A mole in these various terrorist cells) are extremely hard to develop due to a cultural bias against anyone not a native born Muslim and a direct family member. A good one is a treasured resource and his or her identity must be protected at all costs. Sharing of valuable intelligence from such sources between the US and our most trusted allies ,while essential, is often fraught with danger as it takes only one indiscrete slip to undermine years of development effort. Therefore, an ongoing challenge for the US will be to insure that we have the proper safeguards in place to protect the identity of assets and perhaps win back some of the lost confidence of our allies that we are able to do so. The same goes for information coming from some of our own assets and shared with our allies so as not to alert the enemy to our methods and tactics.
This is not easy in a society such as ours where leaks are aggressively pursued by the press and Congressional members and staffers are targeted for the inside scoop. We as a Nation of Laws must trust our Intelligence agencies to be aggressive in this battle and never give encouragement to the enemy by passing restrictive regulations and then publicizing what our agents can and cannot do in Terrorism investigations. Stating publically, for example, that we will investigate and bring to trial Government agents who are considered “overly aggressive” in defending our country is sheer MADNESS.
- Robert Gast formerly served as Assistant Director of the FBI
//////
“Terrorism is theater. The true target is the audience watching.”
Bryan Jenkins – RAND Corporation, International Terrorism Bureau.
No nation, the USA included, has the resources to protect all possible terrorist targets. Thus the USA must focus on probable targets. However, this in itself would stretch America’s security forces to their limits. “Probable targets” would include symbolic sites or places where mass casualties could occur. Terrorism is like water, it follows the path of least resistance!
In the 60’s and 70’s the USA was faced with Marxist ideological “revolutionaries.” Today we face Islamic extremist ideologues. Their goals are the same; to change our nation to make us bleed. The main difference between the two extremist groups is that the Jihadists are fully prepared to die for their cause. In fact, they target civilian society, after significant planning, with the expectation of being killed by security forces.
So how does the USA protect itself against terrorists intent on killing as many citizens as possible before being exterminated by the police or military?
- Read their mail. In other words, use all means, HUMINT or technological, to access what is being sent out via Al Qaeda and Islamic State electronic communications. Identify the publishers of these death manuals. Hack them. Distort their messages. If possible, determine who is reading these manuals on how to spread death and destruction. The Boston Bombers learned how to make pressure cooker bombs from “Inspire”, the AQ magazine. Follow the electronic trail.
- Focus on possible Jihad suspects. This includes the wannabes and those who have traveled to the Middle East. Put resources into surveillance and when necessary pressure these individuals. Put them on the defense. It is an old LE (law enforcement) technique. Putting pressure on a suspect often causes them to make a mistake. Then you act. This may mean drawing resources off of “probable” targets, but the French learned recently that they had too few personnel trying to monitor too many possible Jihadists in their midst. Lastly, develop confidential informants. There are several covert means LE can use to establish CI’s. Use whatever it takes.
- Playing only defense against today’s domestic terrorists is a losing game plan. Law enforcement must aggressively investigate and pursue today’s terrorists. For every attack that is carried out, regardless of the deaths of the perpetrators, in the world of Islamic extremism, that is a victory against the infidel! Every “victory” against the West brings in more recruits and more money. Get laws implemented that will allow for playing offense against our domestic Jihadists that do not violate Constitutional limitations. However, keep in mind that our Constitution is not a suicide pact!
- Mumbai, Nairobi, Peshawar: All major victories in the eyes of the extremists pulling the strings behind these horrific attacks. And the world was watching. Yet the terrorists were killed, save one in Mumbai. The end result–many deaths and major media coverage. More recruits and funding.
- Our prison system is a major source of recruiting converts. The prisons are required in most states and federal to provide religious services to inmates. A shortcoming reported numerous times in the media and before Commissions has been that the Imams allowed to preach have not been thoroughly vetted. Are Muslim extremists being allowed into our prisons to convert and recruit Jihadist terrorists? The findings are – yes. Two potentially dangerous groups come to mind. Many of the members are “converts” from our various prison systems.
- Monitor questionable Mosques that permit Imams to preach violence against America and the West. I was advised by FBI agents, just before the first World Trade center bombing, that they were banned by the then Attorney General from surveillance of a Mosque in Washington, DC, that was known to bring into the USA extremist Imams preaching destruction to the West. These types of restrictions must end.
We are a nation of Constitutional protections. Even for those who would do us harm. However, Congress can provide the legal means or fine tune the Patriot Act to allow for law enforcement to fight the terrorist threat – that is growing worldwide.
- Lawrence Martines is a former Commander of an anti-extremist unit in a major US law enforcement agency.