Richard WarnickAndrew Bacevich: Let’s Investigate ‘Covert’ Raids
This week, the New York Times published leaked information about Special Operations Forces and CIA raids in Syria, Pakistan, Somalia and elsewhere. These raids targeted “suspected militants” in the hope of degrading the capabilities of al-Qaeda and other groups in “15 to 20 countries.”
Recent “covert” operations included a September 3 air assault into Pakistan and a similar cross-border raid into Syria on October 26. I put the word “covert” in quotes because obviously they can’t be kept secret. People tend to notice this kind of thing. We Americans are usually the last to know, thanks to the reluctance of our news media, but we always find out eventually.
Given that intelligence experts have told us that al-Qaeda is stronger than ever before, we can be forgiven for wondering if these raids are helping or hurting U.S. national security.
In HuffPo, Andrew Bacevich writes:
Having learned about this secret war being conducted on their behalf, Americans now have an obligation to find out more. That obligation is both moral and political. The moral obligation is to ascertain whether or not the people we are killing are in fact terrorists, that is, members of organizations engaged in actively plotting attacks against the United States. If we are killing people who are not terrorists, then these special operations attacks are profoundly wrong. Indeed, in that case, they amount to little more than state-sponsored terrorism of the sort that Washington quickly and rightly condemns in others.
The political obligation is of a different sort. The issue here becomes one of effectiveness: even if these operations are actually netting some bad guys, are we in fact reducing the overall terrorist threat as a consequence? Or are the attacks merely creating propaganda opportunities that Islamists exploit to promote anti-Americanism, while recruiting new jihadists to replace those just eliminated? Can we be certain, in other words, that we are not simply engaging in an endless game of whack-a-mole?
Bacevich calls for the incoming presidential administration to conduct an investigation to answer two key questions: Are we doing the right thing? Are we doing the smart thing?
November 11th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Those seem like more than reasonable things to find out. I think Obama can be counted on to ask those and more. Something tells me that nobody is going to get a blank check with this president.
November 11th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
From the AP yesterday.
Seems like Obama may be taking one step after another into Bush’s shoes. I know Richard W, that you are convinced that Obama Will resend those orders the moment he takes office, right?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
RO:
Please restate your analysis without the cynicism and rhetorical questioning.
November 12th, 2008 at 7:10 am
R.O. — Bacevich says President-Elect Obama and his national security team ought to plan on re-thinking how our military is being employed in the so-called “War on Terror.” I agree.
November 12th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Obama the Paul,
I didn’t see anything cynical in my statement. I am encouraged that Obama appears to be adopting some of the tactics used by the current administration in the war on terror. As for rhetoric, I don’t think it is a given that Richard W. believes that Obama will actually resend Bush’s orders concerning covert ops. Doing so would make it difficult politically to reinstate them if needed. While he may be hoping, I imagine Obama’s statements on the issue have him seriously questioning what will happen. We certainly know from Richard’s last post what he would like to see happen.
November 12th, 2008 at 10:36 am
RO,
Are you familiar with all of Bush’s EOs? Are there any that you would like to see reversed?
Curious minds want to know.