Welcome to BASE21

Phase 2 likely to focus on destroying cells worldwide

U.S. President George W. Bush recently warned Iraq and North Korea against producing or selling weapons of mass destruction. The statements have raised speculations that these nations may be the targets in Phase Two in the war on terrorism.

Although debates still rage within the administration, the next phase of the war is unlikely to include another major military strike. Instead, it will focus on destroying terrorist cells around the world through military and intelligence assistance, special operations and economic and police actions.

U.S. President George W. Bush warned Iraq and North Korea on Nov. 26 that Washington might view their weapons programs as contributing to international terrorism. Responding to a question about Iraq, Bush said countries developing "weapons of mass destruction that will be used to terrorize nations ... will be held accountable," according to the Associated Press, and he cautioned Pyongyang against proliferation, saying, "Part of the war on terror is to deny terrorists weapons."

Bush's comments have heightened already rampant speculation that the United States may set its military sights on Iraq or even North Korea as the war in Afghanistan winds down. Despite rumored debates within the administration, a major military strike on another nation is unlikely in the near future. Rather, Phase Two in the war on terrorism will involve low-key attacks on terrorist cells and support networks through military and intelligence assistance, special operations and economic and police actions.

Washington's ultimate goal in the war is to prevent any future attack on U.S. soil or against U.S. assets abroad. Its first priority, then, is to destroy the operational capabilities of the al-Qaida network, which is believed to have facilitated the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington. Al-Qaida's diffuse structure means Washington's next battle, which has already begun, is taking place in the broader global arena, where cells and coordination nodes have been little affected by the fighting in Afghanistan.

The idea of follow-on military action in Iraq, Somalia, Sudan or even North Korea has been bantered about since Sept. 11. Iraq in particular was the subject of intense speculation, both for alleged links to al Qaida and contact with one of the Sept. 11 hijackers and because of the connections between the current U.S. administration and that of former President George Bush, who prosecuted the 1991 war against Iraq.

U.S. media have been rife with rumors and leaks of a heated debate between the Defense and State departments regarding the dangers and opportunities of "finishing" the work of the former Bush administration: fomenting the downfall of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. State Department officials are concerned that an assault on Iraq would only weaken the tenuous coalition against terrorism - particularly among Washington's Islamic partners, whose cooperation is vital to tracking down and breaking terrorist cells and communications networks.

More recently, Washington has floated North Korea as another potential target. North Korea is accused of producing and storing biological weapons and developing and selling missiles to clients in the Middle East. More important, from a political viewpoint, targeting Pyongyang would bolster Washington's case that the war on terrorism is not a war on Islam.

Despite the debate over what to do once operations in Afghanistan wind down, it is unlikely that any major military operation will take place soon. Politically, striking Iraq would threaten cooperation from other Arab and Islamic nations. The Arab League and Syria already have sternly warned Washington that any attack on Iraq or another Arab nation would lead to the dissolution of the coalition. Even Egypt has indirectly cautioned the United States against striking Iraq.

Logistically, an attack on Iraq, beyond a slight intensification of the day-to-day bombings in the northern and southern no-fly zones, would take months to prepare. As for North Korea, the one potential political benefit - demonstrating Washington is not solely targeting Islamic nations - would be far outweighed by the political backlash from South Korea, China and even Russia and Japan.

Instead, while Washington is issuing not-so-veiled threats against Baghdad and Pyongyang, the real operations of Phase Two are already under way. By warning "rogue nations" and other countries that might consider aiding terrorists, Washington hopes to scare them into compliance. At the same time, the United States is working with nations around the world to track down, disrupt and liquidate terrorist cells and their communications and financial networks.

This second phase of the war, which began at the same time if not before the attacks on Afghanistan, will be more clandestine and less media-friendly than the bombings of Kabul. Information in this phase of the war will trickle and seep out, appearing perhaps as many unrelated incidents. Far from being uncoordinated, however, this broader international phase involves close cooperation and intelligence-sharing among the United States and its coalition partners.

Phase Two comprises everything from shutting down bank accounts and financial networks to small-scale special operations strikes on suspected terrorist camps or coordination nodes. It also includes a heavy emphasis on getting other nations to take the primary role in cracking down on terrorists and their supporters within their own borders. U.S. military aid to the Philippines is a key example of this.

Although Washington is sending advisers to Manila, it is relying on the Philippine government and armed forces to actually prosecute the war against the Abu Sayyaf militants and rogue elements of the Moro National Liberation Front, which are suspected of ties to al Qaida and Egyptian terrorist groups. In other countries, such as Tanzania and Ethiopia, Washington is coordinating massive debt-forgiveness programs to help buy the support of local governments. Other African nations, such as Kenya, are also potential recipients of debt forgiveness.

In Sudan, Washington's special envoy is working with the government to bring about an end to nearly two decades of civil war. Washington's relationship with Khartoum has been slowly improving over the past year as the government seeks to shed its label as a sponsor of terrorism and avoid being targeted again by U.S. cruise missiles.

Europe, too, is catching suspected terrorists, detaining those thought linked to al Qaida or the Sept. 11 attacks and shutting down bank accounts and financial networks believed to support terrorism. Even as financial and law enforcement agencies carry out much of Phase Two, discrete military actions remain likely, though on a small scale.

Defense planners have suggested targeted strikes against terrorist training camps and bases, either by missiles and bombs or by special operations teams on the ground. Other possibilities include high-seas interceptions of arms and personnel shipments between terrorist cells, particularly in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Washington also is calling on Europe to participate in small, joint military operations in areas where governments may be unwilling or unable to root out terrorist operations.

The fighting in Afghanistan is still far from over, and a resolution even after the last Taliban stronghold falls will be difficult. And the destruction of the Taliban was simply a means to an end, not a goal in itself. Washington's primary objective is to annihilate the operational capabilities of international terrorist organizations in order to protect U.S. soil and assets. Part of that means ensuring no nations give sanctuary, overtly or tacitly, to terrorists.

Although totally eliminating a threat against the United States is impossible, Washington is taking the war to the terrorists - hitting them simultaneously around the world and thus undercutting their ability to regroup, formulate or carry out planned attacks. Ultimately, Washington may find it expedient to carry out another large-scale military strike against a nation-state like Iraq or Somalia. Such an operation, however, would come only after all other means of denying terrorists sanctuary in these nations had been exhausted.

This, however, remains a long way off.