New Study, "The Need for an Integrated National Asymmetric Threat Strategy"

By Andrew Cochran

On May 8, I was honored to chair one of four panels at a special seminar, "Dealing with Today's Asymmetric Threat," co-sponsored by the National Defense University and CACI International, with assistance from the Counterterrorism Foundation. The purpose of the seminar was to establish a framework for the development of an integrated and synchronized strategy, by the end of the calendar year, to address the asymmetrical threats to United States and global security. My panel, titled, "Global Strategy to Counter Terrorism and Extremism," included Contributing Expert Douglas Farah; VADM Bert Calland, USN (Ret.), former CIA Deputy Director; Jose Rodriguez, former Director of the CIA's National Clandestine Center and the Counterterrorism Center; and Lt. Col. Bill Cowan, USMC (Ret.), FOX News Channel analyst and President of WVC3. My comments included recommendations for the need for continued deployment of joint DOD-Treasury "Threat Finance Cells" and the need to promote the continued work of the non-governmental CT community of nonprofits, journalists, and independent media, including this site. I participated with senior officials at NDU and CACI in planning the seminar and look forward to working with them and the broader community towards the development of the strategy for the next Administration and Congress. Contributing Expert Walid Phares participated in another panel on "Strategic Communications," which explored how to protect security through an effective communication strategy.

CACI International posted the first study resulting from that seminar, "The Need for an Integrated National Asymmetric Threat Strategy," on its website. This outstanding study will join other studies recently released as benchmarks for policymakers in the next Administration and Congress as they develop new policies to deal with various threats worldwide. The study advises developing new strategies for our strategic communications, defense and homeland security, economic assets, and diplomatic power. Some excerpts:

During the Cold War, Western leaders developed a shared consensus on a strategy of deterrence and containment. From that consensus came strength. Today, U.S. security objectives are challenged by multiple states that have strengthened their economies, enhanced their militaries, and gained increased credibility. Rather than dominating, we now compete globally with multiple powers. While America debates the merits of international engagement and nation-building, others have dedicated themselves to securing global influence and key resources across the globe - a strategy that has been described as economic colonialism.” Countries we view as rogue states now enjoy diplomatic, economic, and strategic lifelines from these competing powers.

Nuclear weapons development by Iran and North Korea threatens a new round of destabilizing proliferation. Instability in Pakistan and other potential nuclear states could result in the loss of control of fissile material and technology, providing rising powers and non-state actors increasing parity and the ability to assert local and regional hegemony. The world also faces a pervasive, non-state, non-government set of adversaries, including radicals such as Al Qaida, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). Organized crime groups, such as the Lebanese and Hong Kong Mafias, and crime syndicates from Central America and Mexico, to Nigeria to Russia and Taiwan, also threaten our security. Across the globe, these and other non-state actors have been effective in their asymmetric developments, processes, and actions.

Besides these four key elements, our national approach to dealing with asymmetric threats should include strategies for health, education, emergency response, resource sharing, and nation-building to counter and correct the trend of failing states. The cultures, religions, and ideals in the nations we hope to assist may differ, but the end goal is the same - stable nation-states with the political, economic, social, and security institutions able to provide their people with security, food, clean water, education, prosperity, and hope for the future.

TrackBack