Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs - Terrorism and counterterrorism

Muddling Through: How Development's Past Shapes Its Future

David Ekbladh — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:45:35 -0500

International development is back. President Barack Obama has given it significance in U.S. strategy not seen since the Cold War. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's much touted "Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review," emphasizes her own belief that it is, "a core pillar of American power."

The Future of Pakistan: A Conversation with Simon Shercliff and Hassan Abbas

Hassan Abbas and Simon Shercliff — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:09:32 -0400

October 30, 2009

Hassan Abbas, a former Pakistani government official and senior advisor to Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center, recently spoke to Simon Shercliff, First Secretary Foreign Security and Policy for the British Embassy, about the future of Pakistan. Their conversation touched on a range of topics, including the militants' recent attacks on the Pakistani military, Pakistan's relationship with India, Pakistan-UK relations, and U.S. aid to Pakistan.

War From Cyberspace

Richard Clarke — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:12:17 -0400

October 27, 2009

The United States thinks that its cyber warriors are the best at offense, with the capability of shutting down enemy air defenses, electric-power grids, rail systems and telephony. Such offensive prowess does nothing to defend our own networks from similar attacks, however, and the current U.S. defense systems protect only parts of the federal government, and not civilian or private-sector infrastructure. No nation is as dependent on cyber systems and networks for the operation of its infrastructure, economy and military as the United States. Yet, few national governments have less control over what goes on in its cyberspace than Washington.

High Cost, Low Odds

Stephen M. Walt — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:34:44 -0400

"...America's odds of winning this war are slim. The Karzai government is corrupt, incompetent and resistant to reform. The Taliban have sanctuaries in Pakistan and can hide among the local populace, making it possible for them simply to outlast us. Pakistan has backed the Afghan Taliban in the past and is not a reliable partner now. Our European allies are war-weary and looking for the exits. The more troops we send and the more we interfere in Afghan affairs, the more we look like foreign occupiers and the more resistance we will face. There is therefore little reason to expect a US victory."

Deciphering the Attack on Pakistan's Army Headquarters

Hassan Abbas — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:44:00 -0400

"This was neither the first attack on an army structure in the country nor the most deadly — but it is unprecedented given the extent of the breach of the GHQ security, the confusion that it created in its initial stage (raising concerns about the safety of army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani), and its timing vis-à-vis the planned launch of a ground military operation in South Waziristan. It could be a transformational event for the army — cementing its resolve against local militants, bridging internal divisions and forcing a review of its intelligence estimates. However, jumping to conclusions without a thorough investigation and reacting rashly based on preconceived notions would be highly counterproductive. Additionally, though Pakistan's nuclear installations are not in the immediate vicinity of GHQ, the nature of the attack raises questions about how security agencies would react if a future attack targets any of the nuclear weapons facilities."

Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Evolving Forms of the Nuclear Genie

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:34:59 -0400

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen traces nuclear terrorism in the 21st century beginning with theory and practice, analyzing the implications of 9/11 and weighs in on the reconstruction of the global nuclear order.

Keeping a Lid on Homegrown Terror

Lorenzo Vidino — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:27:04 -0400

"...[A]ggressive counterterrorism tactics and improved intelligence sharing have allowed US authorities to dismantle cells and keep the country safe. At the same time, though, the United States seems to be lacking a long-term strategy to confront the threat. Authorities have been unable to conceive a policy that would preemptively tackle the issue of radicalization, preventing young American Muslims from embracing extremist ideas in the first place."

Europe's New Security Dilemma

Lorenzo Vidino — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:32:46 -0400

Several Muslim countries have formulated various programs to fight extremism. From Saudi Arabia to Indonesia, authorities have devised more or less comprehensive measures to deradicalize committed militants and prevent the radicalization of new ones. This soft approach to counterterrorism has also been adopted by some European governments. The 2004 Madrid and 2005 London attacks, as well as the arrest of hundreds of European Muslims who had been involved in a variety of terrorist activities, have clearly shown that radicalization is a problem in Europe. Over the last few years, various European governments have decided to combat radicalization processes among their Muslim population by enacting various counterradicalization programs, acknowledging that they cannot simply arrest their way out of the problem.

Iran, the Middle East, and International Security

Kayhan Barzegar — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:21:21 -0400

"In the years since the September 11 attacks and the onset of crisis in Iraq, Iran's consolidation of its political-security role in the Middle East, and its impact upon regional and international security systems has been the focus of attention in international and Middle East security studies. The prevailing view in the West and the Arab world is that new political-security and geopolitical developments have changed the balance in regional power and political structure in favor of Iran. Accordingly, this situation has had negative effects on the United States' strategic interests, its regional allies in the Arab world, and on Israel's position. During recent decades, preserving a 'balance of power' policy between the regional actors has been the basis of American foreign policies in the region, especially in the Persian Gulf. The recent developments have unbalanced power equations in favor of Iran."

Obama's AfPak Metrics Miss the Mark on Pakistan

Hassan Abbas — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:23:23 -0400

"It is quite striking that framers of the metrics have avoided the merest mention of Pakistan-India relations as a factor in understanding which way the wind is blowing in Pakistan's security environment. While the Obama administration has every right to wish that Pakistan delink its rivalry with India in the Kashmir region from its policy towards Afghanistan (and consequently in Federally Administered Tribal Areas), one cannot ignore the prevailing ground realities."

Keeping Up with the Indians

Paul Staniland — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:58:27 -0400

"Neither Americans nor Indians always understand how threatening their military strength can look to weaker countries. This dynamic is clearly at play in the case of Pakistan — Indians feel that they are self-evidently not a threat, while Americans are often baffled that Pakistani security elites care so much about India, which to the U.S. looks like a positive force for stability and democracy. At the end of the day, however, the world does not look the same from Rawalpindi and Islamabad as it does from Washington, and the U.S. needs to remember these differing goals, incentives, and fears as it pursues its vital interests in the region."

The Cruelty of Britain's Extradition Policy

Azeem Ibrahim — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 01:01:58 -0400

"[T]o stay as close to America as possible, Britain signed a new extradition treaty with the US which gave more protection to Americans than to Brits. Passing into law as the Extradition Act 2003, it made it easier for America to extradite British suspects than it was for Britain to extradite American ones. As things stand today, if Britain accuses an American of plotting a terrorist attack against London, the US government will only allow him on a plane to face justice if Britain shows that it has enough evidence to mount a good case against him. But if America accuses a Brit of plotting an identical attack against New York, Britain must put him on a plane to the States without so much as asking America to show that it has a good case at all. It is a lopsided legally-sanctioned double standard, and previous ministers have admitted as much."

ID Cards — A Government Mandated Facebook?

Azeem Ibrahim — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:47:42 -0400

"The quantity of arguments for ID cards looks like an attempt to hide a lack of quality. The government has been hard-pressed to explain how ID cards will make us safer. It is true that they will make it easier for, say, customs officials to ascertain that you are who you say you are. But that can already be done for everyone who has a passport. It is true that biometric chips might make the process more accurate. But that argues for biometric passports, as another recanting ex-home secretary, David Blunkett, has pointed out. If you want to make identification more accurate by introducing a biometric chip, that does not entail spending £3 billion in a recession on an entirely new biometric ID card scheme."

How America Is Funding Corruption in Pakistan

Azeem Ibrahim — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:51:43 -0400

"For the last eight years, U.S. taxpayers' money has funded hardly any bona fide counterterrorism successes, but quite a bit of corruption in the Pakistani Army and intelligence services. The money has enriched individuals at the expense of the proper functioning of the country's institutions. It has provided habitual kleptocrats with further incentives to skim off the top. Despite the U.S. goal of encouraging democratization, assistance to Pakistan has actually weakened the country's civilian government. And perhaps worst of all, it has hindered Pakistan's ability to fight terrorists."

Reclaiming Islam

Azeem Ibrahim — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 22:09:35 -0400

"In Britain, the radicalisation process has been exacerbated by a gaping lack of mainstream Islamic education for the young, and a dearth of advice on how to apply the rules in a business context. When Islamic companies have needed advice in accordance with mainstream interpretations of Islamic law, there has been no organisation qualified to provide it. This gap has often been filled by scholars who interpret Islamic law in ways that are not appropriate to modern life. In some areas it has been filled by extremist preachers, unqualified in Islamic law and theology, normally from outside Europe, who have replaced traditional pietistic, apolitical Islam with an ignorant, pamphlet-based Islam which emphasises politics. So the best answer to the question of what we can do to break the link between foreign policy and radicalisation is simply to educate our young people in genuine, authentic Islamic teachings. Then, if they encounter radical narratives, dubious theology or ignorant preaching, they will be able to see these for the perversions of the religion that they really are. The fact that the vast majority of extremists have not undergone this process reinforces the point."

The Armageddon Test

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 14:23:48 -0400

How much nuclear material has leaked, and is it in the hands of terrorists, in storage somewhere, or still in circulation? No one knows for sure, but the task of cleaning up the nuclear black market amounts to an Armageddon test for global intelligence. The standard for success is unforgiving: all nuclear material must be recovered before it finds its way into an improvised nuclear device.

U.S. Aid to Pakistan—U.S. Taxpayers Have Funded Pakistani Corruption

Azeem Ibrahim — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:58:16 -0400

The United States must not provide Pakistani institutions with incentives to act counter to U.S. foreign policy objectives in the future. It has done so in the past. But until the spring of 2009, no comprehensive overview of the full funding to Pakistan was possible as the figures were kept secret. Those figures, as well as a full analysis of what is known about how they were spent, can now be evaluated. The available information paints a picture of a systemic lack of supervision in the provision of aid to Pakistan, often lax U.S. oversight, and the incentivization of U.S. taxpayer–funded corruption in the Pakistani military and security services. The author believes that this is the first attempt to present an overview of U.S. aid to Pakistan since 2001, evaluate it, and present recommendations on how to ensure that mistakes are not repeated and lessons are learned.

US Must Wake Up to Reality in Pakistan

Appu Soman — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:24:48 -0400

"The most important non-state actor in Pakistan is the army. Normally, a country's army constitutes its ultimate instrument of legitimate force. But the Pakistani army is independent of the civilian government. It considers its interests as separate from those of this government. It has acted more like a mercenary force, reluctant to assume responsibility for defending the country against internal threats. It maintains links with some of the very elements that threaten the country's security."

Dynamics of Maritime Terrorists Threats to Russia and the Government's Reponse

Simon Saradzhyan — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:00:02 -0400

Simon Saradzhyan identifies actors that have the capacity and motivation to commit acts of maritime terrorism against Russia. Saradzhyan also reviews Russia’s maritime and freshwater infrastructure and activities before outlining selected scenarios of terrorist acts that could take advantage of vulnerabilities in this infrastructure and facilities.

Foreign Students are an Opportunity, Not a Threat

Azeem Ibrahim — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:42:45 -0400

"...[W]e should resist the temptation to react to the fear of terrorism by turning inwards, reducing ties to foreign countries, and denying more students entry. Reducing the number of foreign student Visas would be counterproductive. The US tried it after September 11th, but has now reversed its approach, realising the harm it is doing. To do the same would be to be cowed into becoming a more closed society. We must remain open, outward-looking and vibrant. It is precisely many of these foreign students who will help their countries to reduce terrorism over the long run."

Improving Russia-U.S. Relations: The Next Steps

Thomas M. Nichols — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:22:40 -0400

There is no endemic reason for Russian-U.S. relations to be as tense as they have become over the past several years. Th is situation is largely due, on one side, to mishandling of Russian affairs by both the Clinton and Bush administrations, and on the other by the obvious manipulation of anti-Americanism for domestic gain by the Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev administrations in Russia. Unfortunately, this means that only unilateral U.S. action can undermine the cynical policies of the Russian leadership and restore dynamism to the Russian-U.S. relationship.

Enhancing Full-Spectrum Flexibility: Striking the Balance to Maximize Force Effectiveness in Conventional and Counterinsurgency Operations

William D. Anderson, Jr. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:43:21 -0400

With the United States currently engaged in difficult and taxing counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, renewed emphasis has been focused upon the country's capabilities and priorities vis-à-vis this type of warfare. Within the military, the Air Force has been especially and increasingly criticized for being too enamored with a Cold-War era conventionally minded force structure and for not shifting aggressively to meet the threats of COIN-style conflicts that many predict will be pervasive throughout the Global War on Terror.

This paper addresses the conceptual capabilities and limitations of air power in COIN in order to illuminate how the Air Force can leverage the distinct asymmetric advantage that air power presents across the spectrum of conflict. This asymmetry is founded upon a clear U.S. superiority in air power capabilities combined with the unique flexibility inherent in air power. An understanding of air power's efficacy in COIN, measured against conventional requirements and capabilities, will inform decisions on appropriate force structure and employment.

The Fight for Pakistan's Soul

Hassan Abbas — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:54:29 -0400

"...[A] lot depends on the state's capacity to hold the Swat area and re-establish civilian institutions there. And, even if the state succeeds, re-asserting control over Swat will only be the first step. The Taliban is spread throughout the NWFP and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. "Punjabi Taliban" militants from the fighting in Kashmir against India continue to shuttle between the Punjab heartland and the Northwest Territories, posing another serious challenge to government authority."

Reliable Sources: Raising the Stakes of the Interrogation Debate

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:42:30 -0400

"Espionage is an art form, not a science. One never masters the art of intelligence, but is ever humbled by its elusive and myriad forms of expression."

Paula Dobriansky and John Gieve Named Senior Fellows

Beth Maclin — Wed, 27 May 2009 10:15:32 -0400

Ambassador Paula Dobriansky, under secretary of state for democracy and global affairs under President George W. Bush, and Sir John Gieve, former deputy governor of the Bank of England, have joined the Belfer Center as senior fellows.

Q&A with Rory Stewart

Rory Stewart — Wed, 27 May 2009 10:07:03 -0400

Rory Stewart is the Ryan Family Professor of the Practice of Human Rights and director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard Kennedy School and a member of the Belfer Center Board of Directors. A former officer in the British Army and deputy governate coordinator with the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, Stewart spent two years walking 6,000 miles across Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Nepal - a journey he describes in his critically acclaimed book The Places in Between.

Center Scholars Suggest Way Ahead for U.S. in Afghanistan, Pakistan

Sharon Wilke — Wed, 27 May 2009 10:00:37 -0400

"We have a clear and focused goal to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future," President Barack Obama said in a statement on March 27, 2009. Several members of the Belfer Center community comment on President Obama's plan.

Taking Democracy to the People

Joseph S. Nye — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:17:56 -0400

May 13, 2009

"Equally important to the foreign-policy methods used to support democracy abroad are the ways in which it is practised in the United States. When Americans try to impose democracy, they tarnish it. When they live up to their own best traditions, they can stimulate emulation and create the soft power of attraction. This is what Ronald Reagan called the 'shining city on the hill.'"

Pakistan Can Defy the Odds: How to Rescue a Failing State

Hassan Abbas — Tue, 12 May 2009 12:41:51 -0400

"Is Pakistan collapsing? How far are the Taliban from Islamabad? Can al-Qaeda grab the country's nuclear weapons? These are the types of questions raised every day by the American media, academia and policy circles. And these are critical issues, given the nature of the evolving crisis in Pakistan. The approximately two dozen suicide bombings in 2009 so far, 66 in 2008, and 61 in 2007, all of which have targeted armed forces personnel, police, politicians, and ordinary people not only in the country's turbulent northwest but also in its major urban centers, indicate the seriousness of the threat. A major ammunition factory area located close to some very sensitive nuclear installations in Wah (Punjab) was targeted by two suicide bombers in August 2008, an act that sent shudders across the country's security establishment...."

Irreparable Damage

Thomas Hegghammer — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:31:31 -0400

"The bottom line is that the damage caused by Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib is irreparable and the end of U.S. torture will not in itself make the United States safer from this generation of jihadists. Ending torture in the United States is obviously important, but it will only bring security benefits if it is part of a broader policy package that includes pressure on allied regimes to do the same."