I think that this question is on the same level as asking how many angels can swim in the head of a beer and so is unanswerable in terms of the political realities surrounding international terrorists.
That said I do not believe there is a military solution to terrorism under most conditions but the military does have parts to play. Rather, terrorists should be treated as criminals and police methods coupled with effective intelligence gathering and sharing should be sufficient to thwart that vast majority of terrorist outrages on home soil. Realistically you will probably never stop them all regardless of the methods or amounts of firepower used.
Terrorists and their organizations are not nation states and so I would submit that the legal ban on political assassination cannot apply to them since they are effectively criminal entities. Their nature also renders them extra-territorial, they move freely across international boundries and may receive covert or overt support from certain nation states that might have similar agendas. Historically projecting military power across international borders constitued an irrevocable act of war. The most extreme example of this was World War One where Austria-Hungary had solid evidence that the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was engineered by Serbian military intelligence. The only legal option after the failure of (half-hearted) diplomacy was a formal declaration of war and we all know how well that worked out. What would the world today look like had they sent a covert hit squad to Belgrade and executed the shadowy Colonel "Apis", the man behind the murder plot, in his bed? No doubt there would have been formal protests but probably no world war would have resulted.
Essentially America has put terrorist leaders around the world on notice: you cannot hid and your friends in high places cannot save you. Period. A 5.56mm double-tap awaits those who see themselves as leaders of their movements and terror applied to innocents will now be returned to sender. This is the role that the military is best suited to play in the fight against global terrorism. the controlled application of precision violence delivered up close and personal. This is how you deal with terrorists, not with airstrikes or drones (although they may have applications in some situations).
International relations have changed since 2001 and surgical strikes may be expected to cross borders under certain circumstances. Since it is inconcievable that members of the Pakistani government and or military had no knowledge of OBL's whereabouts regardless of what their PM says, those nations that nurture or ignore the terrorists in their midst can expect the sort of action seen on 1 May 2011.
Sometimes it will go wrong and the cost of failure will always need to be measured against the potential gain. However, if the fear of a bullet in the head while watching Iranian Idle causes future terrorist leaders to scatter and isolate themselves from their followers as their only defence, the US Special Forces will have won an important round for all of us.
Bravo Zulu gentlemen. We owe you.
Apologies for the wall of text.
|