Monday, March 29, 2004
Terrorist sponsored states
In light of Richard Clarke's accusations against Team Bush, Fareed Zakaria has an interesting take on terrorism -- a move away from state-sponsored terrorism to terrorism sponsored states. Obviously, he is making the comparison between Iran sponsoring Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda "sponsoring" Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.
The Bush administration came to office with different concerns. During the 1990s conservative intellectuals and policy wonks sounded the alarm about China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran and Iraq, but not about terror. Real men dealt with states.
Even after 9/11, many in the administration wanted to focus on states. Bush spoke out against countries that "harbor" terrorists. Two days after the attacks, Paul Wolfowitz proposed "ending states that sponsor terrorism." Beyond Iraq, conservative intellectuals like Richard Perle and Michael Ledeen insist that the real source of terror remains the "terror masters," meaning states like Iran and Syria.
Once again, one notices Pakistan being left out of this elite list of states sponsoring terrorism, despite there being incontrovertible evidence of this (and not just from Indian intelligence agencies). I believe this is the single biggest mistake being made by western intelligence -- this strange reluctance to call a spade a spade when it comes to Pakistan to Saudi Arabia. Unless a concerted effort is made (never mind what Musharraf claims to be doing) to cut Saudi financing and the extraordinarily dodgy relationship between the Pakistani army, intelligence services and the militants, this is a scourge that's not going away in a hurry.
The Bush administration came to office with different concerns. During the 1990s conservative intellectuals and policy wonks sounded the alarm about China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran and Iraq, but not about terror. Real men dealt with states.
Even after 9/11, many in the administration wanted to focus on states. Bush spoke out against countries that "harbor" terrorists. Two days after the attacks, Paul Wolfowitz proposed "ending states that sponsor terrorism." Beyond Iraq, conservative intellectuals like Richard Perle and Michael Ledeen insist that the real source of terror remains the "terror masters," meaning states like Iran and Syria.
Once again, one notices Pakistan being left out of this elite list of states sponsoring terrorism, despite there being incontrovertible evidence of this (and not just from Indian intelligence agencies). I believe this is the single biggest mistake being made by western intelligence -- this strange reluctance to call a spade a spade when it comes to Pakistan to Saudi Arabia. Unless a concerted effort is made (never mind what Musharraf claims to be doing) to cut Saudi financing and the extraordinarily dodgy relationship between the Pakistani army, intelligence services and the militants, this is a scourge that's not going away in a hurry.
