Perspective: War on terrorThe War in Afghanistan Started 18 Years Ago to Fight Terrorism after 9/11. Is the U.S. Safer?
Less than a month after the 9/11 attacks, on Oct. 7, 2001, the course of U.S. military operations changed for years to come when Operation Enduring Freedom officially launched, with then-President George W. Bush announcing the action during an address from the White House Treaty Room. That operation ballooned into a multi-front war on terror that has lasted nearly two decades and sparked criticism for its duration and questions about its mission. Since then, the terrorism threat landscape has evolved, with ISIS and homegrown extremists emerging as dangers. Experts say that in thinking about terrorism and terrorist threats, Americans should be aware of two factors. One factor in fighting the war on terror, on experts says, is that “we’re demanding decisive military victories in situations where decisive military victories are not possible.” The second factor is that while the efforts in Afghanistan have worked, the threat and the source of danger to the U.S. has evolved over time. “Over the last 18 years the U.S. has dramatically improved its ability to prevent attacks by foreign terrorist groups,” another expert said. “Unfortunately, however, those same counter-terrorism capabilities are ill-suited to address the current threat facing the United States” – threats which are mostly posed by domestic violent extremists. Most of whom inspired by White Power ideology.
Less than a month after the 9/11 attacks, on Oct. 7, 2001, the course of U.S. military operations changed for years to come when Operation Enduring Freedom officially launched, with then-President George W. Bush announcing the action during an address from the White House Treaty Room.
Bush said that the operation involved “strikes against al Qaeda terrorist training camps and military installations of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan,” and the “carefully targeted actions are designed to disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations, and to attack the military capability of the Taliban regime.”
Meghan Keneally writes for ABC News that that operation ballooned into a multi-front war on terror that has lasted nearly two decades and sparked criticism for its duration and questions about its mission. Since then, the terrorism threat landscape has evolved, with ISIS and homegrown extremists emerging as dangers.
Security experts appear to agree that original goal of Operation Enduring Freedom seems to have been accomplished, but the question of whether or not America is safer today remains up for debate.
Keneally notes that U.S. combat operations in Afghanistan under Operation Enduring Freedom technically ended on Dec. 31, 2014, but were immediately replaced by Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, where U.S. forces remained in the country to continue the coalition of the NATO-led mission focused on training, advising and assisting Afghan groups on the ground as well as additional troops that are focused on counter-terrorism efforts against the local ISIS affiliate. According to the Department of Defense, there were 2,349 U.S. military casualties in Operation Enduring Freedom and 80 such casualties in Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, bringing the total to 2,429 people.
Experts say that in thinking about terrorism and terrorist threats, Americans should be aware of two factors.
One factor in fighting the war on terror, said retired Col. Christopher Kolenda, who commanded troops in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008 and also engaged the Taliban in high-level diplomacy on behalf of the secretary of defense, was that “we’re demanding decisive military victories in situations where decisive military victories are not possible.”
John Cohen, a former acting Homeland Security undersecretary, said that while the efforts in Afghanistan have worked, the threat and the source of danger to the U.S. has evolved over time.
“Over the last 18 years the U.S. has dramatically improved its ability to prevent attacks by foreign terrorist groups,” he said. “Unfortunately, however, those same counter-terrorism capabilities are ill-suited to address the current threat facing the United States.
“Even worse, notwithstanding the fact that the United States has experienced multiple deadly attacks by individuals inspired by extremist ideologies, little has been done to improve our capacity to prevent such attacks,” he added.
One reason is prioritization. Cohen said that the Trump administration “has prioritized the threat posed by those outside of the United States because that supports their immigration agenda. In fact, the primary threat facing the U.S. today comes from individuals who are here.”
Keneally writes:
In the 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment, former DNI Coats said: “Homegrown violent extremists (HVEs) are likely to present the most acute Sunni terrorist threat to the United States, and HVE activity almost certainly will have societal effects disproportionate to the casualties and damage it causes.”
Earlier this year, Michael McGarrity, the head of the FBI’s counterterrorism division, said incidents of domestic terrorism were “on the rise.”
“Where the current White House has the least focus is on white supremacism in the U.S., she said. “And that is of enormous concern because if we think of the number of Americans that have died out of terrorist attacks over the past three years, it is clearly the greatest number of Americans have died as a result of white supremacist attacks,” she said.
