Alternative Insight

The Contradictory Alliance in the War on Terrorism
United States, Russia and Israel are combining efforts


The United States, Russia and Israel are developing a growing alliance in a war against terrorism. Russian President Vladimir Putin cited common interests against terrorism and announced support for George W. Bush's candidacy. The U.S. wants closer cooperation with Russia in order to curtail Kremlin assistance to Iran's nuclear developments and assure that Putin will prevent his nations' weapons from falling into the hands of Al Qaeda and its allies. After the Breslan school massacre killed hundreds of Russians, Russia and Israel started to coordinate intelligence. U.S and Israeli intelligence have cooperated for many years and the U.S. has supported Israel's aggressive tactics in the Palestinian territories.

The coalition of cooperation is a contradiction in the War on Terrorism. Each terrorism faced by the three nations is unique, has different roots and requires different strategies to expunge it. The alliance will result in a more internationalized and expanded terrorism and will unify rather than separate the disparate terrorists. The more chilling scenario has the war against terrorism evolving into a combining of forces in a war against all opponents.

The Terrorism Faced by each of the Alliance's Members

RUSSIA
In Chechnya, the Russian government faces an insurrection that smoldered during the Soviet era but was contained by harsh repression. The Islamic content of Chechnya is not the cause of the insurrection; it only adds to the cultural disparity between the central Russian government and the local Chechen province. In this situation, religious fanatics fuel the insurrection.

Russia' problem is strictly local but can spill over into other provinces, such as Dagestan. Without total cooperation from local people, insurrections of this type defy solution. If the Russians internationalize the insurrection and make it an accomplice of a global terrorist effort, its strategy will invite larger quantities of external physical, military and moral support to the insurgents. It's difficult to struggle against a fanatical terrorism of this type. It's catastrophic to form alliances that stimulate alliances of terrorists that can enlarge the scope and scale of their actions rather than preferably confining them.

ISRAEL
Israel is not struggling against an insurrection in its own lands; it has caused an insurrection by usurping lands owned by Palestinians. It is not fighting to maintain its own territory. It is fighting to gain new territory and, at the same time, is bringing about the total destruction of the Palestinian community. Israel has cause to form alliances that will support its aggressive actions. Making it seem that the legitimate Palestinian rebellion is part of a larger international plot to destroy western civilization diverts attention from Israel's own military actions. An example of Israel's intent to subvert the War on Terrorism occurred after the recent bombings of hotels in the Egyptian Sinai. Israel quickly linked Al-Qaeda to the bombings and vigorously publicized its unwarranted conclusion. Egyptian authorities arrested local Egyptians and a Palestinian as accomplices in the terrorist action. No link to Al-Qaeda has been determined.

UNITE D STATES
The United States is still uncertain of the reasons it has become fertile soil for terrorism. Its government claims that "they hate us" and "are jealous of us." Who 'they,' in plural, exactly are and why 'they' hate and are jealous, has not been completely explained. The United States is legitimately concerned about Russian nuclear weapons falling into hands of terrorists, but the reasons for its support of Israel's aggressive policies that generate hate and terrorism are unclear. If it would enhance America's security and protect its citizens and not jeopardize America's stability and its economic prowess, the U.S. would be wise to quietly soothe grievances that cause terrorism. The U.S. has refused any compromise and has declared a fight to the finish - of whom?

Contradictory Alliance in the War on Terrorism

Each of the three nations has a different definition of terrorism and the terrorists have different reason for actions against them. Since each counter-terrorism policy requires a different strategy, how can a collective approach assist in resolving the individual situations?

America wants to keep Al-Qaeda's terrorism off its shores and establish battlegrounds where it can use its military might to crush the loosely federated terrorist organizations. Russia would rather confine the Chechen terrorists to a limited area and slowly reduce that area. Israel, where Palestinian suicide bombers have not been linked to any other terrorist activity, wants to expand the anti-terrorist sphere of operation, engage almost the entire world in anti-terrorist activities and gain sympathy for its policies in the occupied territories. The anti-terrorist activities of the three nations are not compatible. They make the disparate terrorist activities more compatible.

The close ally of an enemy becomes inseparable from the enemy and eventually becomes the enemy. Rebellious and terrorist organizations on all continents will be pushed into joining forces and assisting one another in what they will regard as a common struggle. Terrorism will expand and grow and the terrorists will become more motivated and solidified.

Russia's best strategy against the Chechen rebellion is containment and then hope that with time, the insurrection will lose adherents and support.

Israel's best strategy to reduce suicide bombings, if that is its main pursuit, is to dismantle the settlements, cease its occupation of Palestinian territory and stop collective punishment of Palestinians in its operations against terrorism.

America's best strategy is complex, but it should include the recognition that:

The failures of the alliance against terrorism:

Rather than being smooth and well-planned, the operations for each nation in its War on Terrorism will be disjointed and the conflicts will become clouded - mass killings of ever growing enemies and a possible diversion of the war against terrorists into a war against all opposition.

Results of the Cooperative Strategy

Each member could take advantage of the alliance and, under a vague identification with anti-terrorism and assurance of multilateral support, attack opposition. The U.S. is eager to take action against Iran. Israel has Syria and Lebanon in its bore sight. Russia has increasing conflict with Georgia and the Baltic states. And that's just on the start menu.

The universal sweep of the coalition's anti-terrorist actions and its need to portray solidarity can result in any nation, individual or agency that contradicts the actions, being labeled as disturber of the solidarity and a supporter of terrorism. Spying and its confusion, intelligence and its incompleteness, eagerness to apprehend and its errors will bring mistakes that wantonly accuse, wound and kill.

If America's war in Iraq, Russia's war in Chechnya, and Israel's war in the occupied territories are samples of additional actions in a War on Terrorism, then the world is due for mighty shocks. No side will admit defeat. Fighting against groups and not nations does not permit armistices or declarations of victory. The commitment is open-ended and victory will only be realized when the last combatant dies. Mass killing and destruction of vast areas of the world will be the result. The herbicide can kill everything down to the roots but if it does not destroy the causes for weeds, new weeds will return.

alternative insight
november, 2004

 MAIN PAGE

contact alternativeinsight