Al-Qaeda, Arabic for “the base,” was intended not as an international terrorist organization but as a hub (or base) to connect similar movements around the world. While within al-Qaeda there was indeed a hierarchy, its overal purpose is to unite Islamists worldwide to help foment an Islamic revolution, not to actually control or run the groups.
In order to combat terrorism, states must learn to adapt and collaborate amongst themselves, and within and among their various agencies (e.g. DEA, FBI, CIA, ATF, IRS). The ATF deals with explosives, the IRS tracks money, the DEA investigates drugs and the FBI domestic terrorism. All of these agencies are responsible for a slice of al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups operations. Since Hizballah sells drugs out of the Bekka Valley (DEA), receives funding from abroad (IRS), has contacts abroad such as America (FBI) and is a terrorist group (CIA), coordinating information and attacks on such a group is difficult.
Yesterday, the German news Tagesschau reported on a little known group, the Alliance Base which is working to counter global terrorism. Founded in early 2003, the group, based in Paris and whose working language is French, consists of 11 intelligence agencies from six countries (USA, UK, France, Germany, Canada and Australia) who regularly share intelligence and coordinate counterterrorism operations.
Alliance Base, headed by a French general assigned to France’s equivalent of the CIA — the General Directorate for External Security (DGSE) — was described by six U.S. and foreign intelligence specialists with involvement in its activities. The base is unique in the world because it is multinational and actually plans operations instead of sharing information among countries, they said. It has case officers from Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Australia and the United States.
It seems that despite superficial political disputes, Europe and the United States are indeed working together which is good news. Viewing the graphic below, we see what was the approximate structure of al-Qaeda in the beginning: a hub (or base) of Islamist groups.
After 9/11 with the U.S. aggressively attacking the organization across the globe, the central node or cell, al-Qaeda which itself was a traditional hierarchy, was largely disrupted and faded into the background, yet the damage was already done. From Afghan mujahadeen fighting Armenians in Karbagh to Arabs fighting Russians in Chechnya and Chechnyans fighting Americans in Afghanistan, al-Qaeda’s organizational mission had already been accomplished, although they have failed overall in creating global Islamic revolution. As John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt noted in Networks and Netwars (Hat Tip to YH),
[...] the all-channel has been the most difficult to organize and sustain, partly because it may require dense communications. But it is the type that gives the network form its new, high potential for collaborative undertakings and that is gaining new strength from the information revolution.
[...] Decisionmaking and operations are decentralized, allowing for local initiative and autonomy. Thus the design may sometimes appear acephalous (headless), and at other times polycephalous (hydra-headed).
[...] The capacity of this design for effective performance over time may depend on the existence of shared principles, interests, and goals – perhaps an overarching ideology – which spans all nodes…members do not have to resort to a hierarchy because “they know what they have to do.”
Nothing could be clearer, the global terror network we face is both headless and multiheaded. But, as the graphic above has shown, taking out a single cell or node does very little to disrupt the network or the connectivity within it. Thus, both the nodes and information flows (which makes up the majority of the links in international groups) have to be targeted. In addition, like the internet, certain people have more links than others. Instapundit has more incoming and outgoing links than Coming Anarchy for example and thus would be a higher value target. Thus, the red nodes in the graphic below represent the best targets.
Similar to Thomas Barnett’s discussion of flows between the Gap and Core, the flows of information and money which create links between the various terror cells or nodes have to be disrupted as well as nodes targeted and destroyed. A simple strategy would be Identify, Isolate and Destroy but successful attacks will require more flexibility,coordination and individal autonomy on the part of intelligence agencies and law enforcement. The Alliance Base seems to be a good start, as is rendition and the recently admitted-to CIA prisons.
P.S. I know I’m deep in tdaxp territory here, so I’d appreciate any comments and/or criticisms from Dan and Mark on this.
A good analysis. The GWOT has been successful in dismembering al Qaeda as an enemy. al Qaeda as an operational entity is largely destroyed, and has been unable to repeat its earlier feats. Additionally, John Ashcroft’s strategy of “running interference” has worked well, throwing up innumerable small hastles and chances of detection that, when summed, make it very hard for terrorists to go through.
Speaking of attacking the hubs. I wonder if anyone has ever considered attacking suicide bombers by targeting their immediate families? Of course, an abhorrent idea! But if Ali Al-Hamzi was signing the death warrant of his wife and children, and mother, by committing the act, I wonder if those alleged virgins would seem so appealing. Ah yes, using terror to counter terror. And yes, I’m sure we hung some people at Nurenburg for similar acts, but look at the plus side. No orphans running around proclaiming that their Dads were martyrs. Perhaps fewer moms proudly lauding their sons sacrifice.
Lirelou’s idea is worth taking seriously. Suicide bombers appear to be motivated by a sort of altruism to the general world, and even Rational Choice theorists argue they are doing their actions to benefit their families or other close kin. Turn those benefits into losses, and you should see the frequency of those attacks go down.
Of course, thanks to the Bush Administration’s success, we don’t face many suicide bombers in this nation. And thanks to their failures, our problems extend far beyond them in Iraq.
Lirelou – Intriguing idea (and you might be joking) but..
Such a tactic might be useful for one reason you mentioned – it could help end blood feuds/the viscious honor cycle; but even then, we have extended families and tribal ties that are sometimes just as important.
So now, even though our “glorious martyr” Abu Nour’s entire family was rocketed into oblivion while watching the Arabic version of The Simpsons one night (that Umar!), 3rd cousin Youssef picks up the
Kalashnikov to fight the Crusaders/Zionist Entity/Zionist Crusaders.
Oh, and sweet Aunt Fatima is SO proud of her nephew! And Youssef has been assured by the local blind, half-educated hate monger imam Khalid that his mom, pop and little sisters’ deaths will be martyrdoms and indeed VICTORIES for the jihad!
Basically, morality aside it might not even be effective due to twisted Salafi logic.