Seven years after 9/11, the Bush administration still lacks a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy at home or abroad. A bipartisan commission this week gave the administration a C for its terrorism prevention efforts. “Massive gaps” remain in implementing the 9/11 recommendations. Meanwhile, global terrorist incidents are on the rise and extremist groups across the Middle East are expanding their influence. Many of these failures can be traced back to the administration’s decision to divert resources to Iraq – a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. The result: today al Qaeda has established a new safe haven on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border and once again threatens the homeland while Iraq has become a recruiting and fundraising vehicle for jihadists. Seven years after 9/11, the American people deserve better.

RATHER THAN FOCUS ON THOSE WHO ATTACKED US ON 9/11 THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN DISTRACTED BY IRAQ

The Afghanistan-Pakistan region, where the 9/11 attackers plotted and trained teeters on the brink. The state of affairs in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region is grim. Retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, in a harrowing assessment, said that Afghanistan – where the 9/11 attacks originated – “is in misery,” a result of poor coordination, inept management, and a dearth of resources and troops. Indeed, violence is up 40% along the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and the Taliban have grown so brazen that they now mount attacks directly on U.S.-ISAF military bases. In northwest Pakistan, Taliban forces are resurgent, having carried out bombings that killed 200 people in the last two weeks of August alone. In a troubling sign, al Qaeda has reconstituted, and is now capable of “blending into Western society,” and putting together the “last element necessary” for an attack on the U.S. [General Barry McCaffrey, 7/30/08. LA Times, 6/25/08. NY Times, 8/19/08. NY Times, 8/13/08. AP, 8/29/08. GAO, 4/17/08]

Rather than focus on the greatest threat, the Bush administration has consistently diverted resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq. After years of neglect President Bush announced yesterday that he is finally sending some additional troops to Afghanistan, but this is too little too late. The New York Times reports that “the White House shifted its sights, beginning in 2002, from counterterrorism efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan to preparations for the war in Iraq.” According to current and former military and intelligence officials the war in Iraq has consistently diverted resources and high-level attention from the fight against al Qaeda. Intelligence officials report that by 2006, the Iraq war had drained away most of the C.I.A. officers with field experience in the Islamic world. “You had a very finite number” of experienced officers, said one former senior intelligence official. “Those people all went to Iraq. We were all hurting because of Iraq.” In fact, “when American military and intelligence officials requested additional Predator drones to survey the tribal areas, they were told no drones were available because they had been sent to Iraq.” [NY Times, 6/30/08]

Military officials have also warned about how the war in Iraq is hurting the fight in Afghanistan. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen has asserted that more U.S. troops are needed in Afghanistan to help control an increasingly active insurgency but, due to the war in Iraq, insufficient forces are available for such action. “I don't have troops I can reach for, brigades I can reach to send into Afghanistan until I have a reduced requirement in Iraq,” Mullen said. “Afghanistan remains an economy of force campaign, which by definition means we need more forces there. We have the ability in almost every single case to win from the combat standpoint, but we don't have enough troops there to hold. That is key to the future of being able to succeed in Afghanistan.” In the most blunt assessment of all, General Dan McNeill, former NATO commander for Afghanistan, called the regional mission an “under-resourced war.” [Washington Post, 7/2/08. New York Times, 7/2/08]

HOMELAND SECURITY HAS BEEN COMPLETELY NEGLECTED

A bipartisan panel of experts led by Lee Hamilton and Warren Rudman gave the U.S. government a C for its current response to preventing catastrophic terrorism. The bipartisan Partnership for a Secure America gave the United States an overall grade of C for its efforts on preventing chemical, nuclear and biological terrorism. The government received a total of three D's, eight C's and seven B's. The D’s were in critical areas such as the U.S. government’s ability to coordinate nuclear security programs across the government and sustain these programs in the long-term. [Washington Post, 9/9/08]

The Bush administration is not doing nearly enough to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. A new report released by the House Homeland Security Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee has found that the Bush administration has not done nearly enough to implement the provisions of the Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007. While the report found that the Bush administration has taken some steps, it concluded that massive gaps remain on key areas including: (1) aviation security; (2) rail and public transportation security; (3) port security; (4) border security; (5) information sharing; (6) privacy and civil liberties; (7) emergency response; (8) biosurveillance; (9) private sector preparedness; and (10) national security. [House Homeland Security and Foreign Affairs Committees, 9/08]

On nuclear terrorism, the single most dangerous threat facing the United States, the bi-partisan Hamilton-Rudman commission gave the Bush administration a C. Considering that President Bush himself has declared the cross section of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism the greatest threat facing the United States, one would think it would be a top priority. Instead a bipartisan panel found that while port security has improved there is not enough follow through on international counter proliferation programs and even worse little coordination within the U.S. government or long-term thinking of how to sustain these programs. [Partnership for a Secure America, 9/10/08]

TERRORISM AROUND THE WORLD HAS GROWN WORSE UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION

Extremists are gaining ground in Algeria and North Africa. Since 2007, Al Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQIM) - a Sunni group that previously called itself the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) - has been raising its profile in Algeria. The group was responsible for multiple coordinated attacks against targets in Algeria this past August that that killed more than 60 people. [BBC News, 8/20/2008. NPR, 8/20/08. Council on Foreign Relations, 7/31/08]

Gaza has become a haven for extremists. “Gaza is the latest evidence that most of the trends are pointed in the wrong direction. It’s yet another gain for radical forces. It's another gain for Iran. It's another setback for the U.S., Israel and the Sunni regimes,” said Richard Haass, head of the State Department’s policy planning staff in President Bush’s first term and President of the Council on Foreign Relations. “What is needed is a U.S. presence, or at least engagement in the process that can provide encouragement, flexibility and ideas for bridging solutions for problems that seem intractable,” but this has not happened under President Bush. [Washington Post, 6/16/2007. Middle East Progress, 6/12/08. Washington Post, 6/10/2007]

Destabilization in Lebanon is a direct result of failed U.S. Middle East policy. For the past year, Lebanon has been wracked with instability and extremist violence. The Cedar Revolution is a distant memory, new terrorist organizations have emerged, and Hezbollah is ascendant. The Bush administration touted Lebanon as a major success story in 2005 but then let its attention drift, and the country slipped into an electoral crisis. In 2007, Fatah Al Islam – a group of Islamic militants from various Arab nationalities occupied the Nahr al Bared refugee camp in Tripoli, using it as a base to attack army positions and resulting in the destruction of the majority of the camp. Worst of all, “Hezbollah today stands unquestioned as the single most powerful force in Lebanon. By routing government-allied militiamen in hours last week, as the army stood by, it proved it can occupy Beirut at will.” [AFP, 1/20/08. Washington Post, 6/19/2007. Washington Post, 5/18/08]

IRAQ HAS UNDERMINED THE U.S. STRATEGY FOR COMBATING VIOLENT EXTREMISM

When the Bush administration took its eye off the ball and invaded Iraq, it created a recruiting tool and “cause célèbre” for extremist groups. The nation’s 16 intelligence agencies agree that Iraq is fueling global terrorism. “We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere. The Iraq conflict has become the ‘cause célèbre’ for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.” [NIE, 07/07]

Experts do not believe that the Bush administration’s policies have made us safer. Today, only 21 percent of experts agree with the statement that the U.S. is making headway in the fight against terrorism. Overall, 71 percent of terrorism experts believed that “the world was growing more dangerous for Americans and the United States.” [CAP Terrorism Index, 8/19/08]

Fighting in Iraq has allowed extremist operatives to gain hands-on experience and export their deadly skills. Terrorism experts Dan Byman and Ken Pollack assert that “Iraq has fostered a new brand of jihad, providing a place where budding Salafi insurgents gain combat experience and forge lasting bonds that will enable them to work together in the years to come.” Insurgents formerly operating in Iraq are exporting their know-how to global hotspots, including the restive Afghanistan-Pakistan region. “Mullah Dadullah, a key Taliban commander, gave an interview to Al Jazeera in 2006 in which he explained how the Iraq War has influenced the Taliban. Dadullah noted that “we have ‘give and take’ with the mujahedeen in Iraq. Pakistani Journalist Hamid Mir observed that Afghan insurgents had received ‘on the job training’ in Iraq.” [Annals of American Political Science, July 2008. Mother Jones, March/April 2007]

The U.S. invasion of Iraq solidified and intensified worldwide unfavorable views of the United States, particularly in Muslim nations. In its most recent survey on this topic, the Pew Global Attitudes Project reports that “Since 2002… the image of the United States has declined in most parts of the world. Favorable ratings of America are lower in 26 of 33 countries for which trends are available. The U.S. image remains abysmal in most Muslim countries in the Middle East and Asia, and continues to decline among the publics of many of America's oldest allies. Favorable views of the U.S. are in single digits in Turkey (9%) and have declined to 15% in Pakistan. Currently, just 30% of Germans have a positive view of the U.S. – down from 42% as recently as two years ago – and favorable ratings inch ever lower in Great Britain and Canada.” [Pew Global Attitudes Project, 6/27/2007]