Give Deterrence a Chance: A Strategy Against Al Qaeda

Abstract

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. terrorists. While deterrence is contained in the strategy, it is apparent from the application of the strategy that deterrence has not been used or that its use is effective. In application, the strategy has been heavy on defeat and light on deter. It relies on the military, but does little to weave all other aspects of national power to help solve the problem of terrorism. Deterrence has many short comings as a strategy in application against terrorism but these problems can be overcome. This paper will discuss deterrence and terrorism and provide a strategic framework for its use. GIVE DETERRENCE A CHANCE: A STRATEGY AGAINST AL QAEDAFrom the beginning, the War on Terror has been both a battle of arms and a battle of ideas -a fight against the terrorists and their murderous ideology. In the short run, the fight involves the application of all instruments of national power an influence to kill or capture the terrorists; deny them safe haven and control of any nation; prevent them form gaining access to WMD [weapons of mass distruction]; render potential terrorist target less attractive by strengthening security; and cut off their sources of funding and other resources they need to operate and survive. In the long run, winning the War on Terror means winning the battle of ideas. Ideas can transform the embittered and disillusioned either into murderers willing to kill innocents, or into free people living harmoniously in a diverse society.─National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, September 2006 Deterrence can be part of an overall strategy for combating terrorism. In practice, the United States has placed considerable emphasis in the defeating terrorists (militarily) in the Global War on Terror (GWOT) and less on deterrence (defend and denial). The above passage from the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism shows have both defeat and deter strategies. We kill or capture terrorists (defeat), deny them the safe haven of rogue states (denial), dry up the funds that let them operate as an organization (defeat and deny) and render targets less attractive (defend). While military action in the GWOT is indispensable, it the argument of this paper that deterrence can support and strengthen strategies used a...

Green zero valent iron nanoparticles dispersion through a sandy column using different injection sequences

“…The mixture of this tea extract with the ferric solution allowed the reduction of the Fe3+ leading to the formation of gnZVI as described by Hoag et al (2009) and Machado et al (2013).…”

No End in Sight? US Policy on Targeted Killing by Aerial Drone Strikes: a Legal-Political Assessment

“…An early RAND report claimed that "…, the empirical record shows that even hardened terrorists dislike operational risks and may be deterred by uncertainty and risk" (Davis and Jenkins 2002, xii). Although US strategy in its "War on Terror" has been focused on defeating Al Qaeda and its affiliates (Hoag 2007), the belief that targeted killings in particular also have a deterrence effect has been carried over to the Obama administration.…”