| FPIF Special Report
A Secure America
|
|||
|
|||
|
V. Changing CourseThe sobering reality of terrorism is that it constitutes a threat to individual, national, and international security that can never be completely eliminated. Despite America’s best efforts, there will always be ideologues, fanatics, and alienated groups that may resort to terrorism to express their frustration and to make their political point. No single component of the framework outlined above is an adequate response to terrorism. Only by joining all four strategies—pursuing prevention and preparedness, strengthening the international framework for multilateral action, defending and promoting civil rights, and addressing root causes—will the U.S. government be able to tell the American people that it is doing all that it can to prevent future terrorist attacks. Our proposed security strategy would be more effective at making the U.S. a safer place for all its citizens. It would also have the added advantages of improving the nation’s quality of life by improving public safety, health care, and air quality. The 9/11 Commission has accomplished a great deal by placing this debate at the forefront of policy debates. But its recommendations focus somewhat narrowly on intelligence operations and congressional oversight without addressing the broader foreign policy, military, and homeland security issues that are equally important to constructing an effective response to terrorism. Its contribution, while essential, remains inadequate to forging the comprehensive strategy necessary to effectively combat terrorism. Combating terrorism should not become a crusade that trumps all other policy concerns. Commitments to environmental protection, human rights, democratic political transitions, economic development, poverty alleviation, disarmament, and gender equality—to name a few of the stated U.S. policy goals—must remain strong. But neither can counterterrorism simply be appended to these policy imperatives. The challenge is to construct a national security policy that demonstrates America’s new commitment to protecting U.S. citizens by incorporating effective counterterror measures into the national security strategy. At the same time, American citizens must demand and U.S. foreign policy must assert a renewed commitment to constructing an international framework of peace, justice, and security that locks terrorists out in the cold—with no home, no supporters, no money, and no rallying cry. With that response, the events of September 11, 2001, will indeed have changed America and the world. This framework for a new counterterrorism policy represents the views of FPIF co-directors and staff but does not necessarily reflect the views of either the FPIF Advisory Committee or the board members of FPIF’s two sponsoring organizations, the Interhemispheric Resource Center and the Institute for Policy Studies. John Gershman, <john@irc-online.org>, who is a co-director of Foreign Policy In Focus (online at www.fpif.org), was the principal author of this reform agenda along with Emira Woods, Erik Leaver, Miriam Pemberton, Emily Schwartz Greco, Theo Rose, and Julie Ajinkya. We appreciate the advice, comments, and criticisms offered by Robert Alvarez, Sarah Anderson, Tom Barry, Salih Booker, Elsbeth L. Bothe, John Cavanagh, Marcus Corbin, David Cortright, Kristen Dawkins, Margot Dick, Lloyd J. Dumas, Rev. Dr. Robert W. Edgar, John Feffer, Van Gosse, William D. Hartung, Colleen Kelly, Michael Klare, Charles Knight, Lawrence J. Korb, Saul Landau, Jules Lobel, Steve LaMontagne, Robert K. Musil, Dan Smith, Joe Stork, Joe Volk, Bruce Zagaris, John Zavales, and Stephen Zunes while not holding them responsible for any of the positions or conclusions herein. Executive Summary | Introduction | A Failed Policy | A New Framework | Changing Course | Endnotes
|
|||