Brian Michael Jenkins is considered to be one of the leading authorities on terrorism and international crime. A decorated combat veteran and former captain in the U.S. Army Special Forces, he served in Latin America and for three years in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. He initiated the RAND Corporation's research on terrorism in 1972. From 1989 to 1998, Jenkins was Deputy Vice Chairman of Kroll Associates, an international private investigative firm. Jenkins returned to RAND in 1998. He also directs research on transportation security at the Mineta Transportation Institute, and is an advisor to the International Chamber of Commerce. In 1996, President Clinton appointed Jenkins to be a member of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security. Jenkins also serves as a member of the Comptroller General's Advisory Group. He is the author of Unconquerable Nation: Knowing Our Enemy, Strengthening Ourselves (2006). His latest book is Will Terrorists Go Nuclear? (2008).
Major Nidal Malik Hasan is a disputable terrorist in the twilight between political extremist and everyday mass murderer. At a glance, his homicidal rampage looks a lot like what used to be called “going postal”—a deepening sense of personal grievance culminating in a homicidal rampage directed against co-workers, in this case, fellow soldiers. For Hasan, “going jihad,” reflects the channeling of obvious personality problems into a deadly fanaticism. Hasan’s profile looks familiar. Descriptions of his inability to connect with others, absence of close relationships, passive rigidity, personal disillusion, frustration at not being able to alter his life’s course indicate a… Read more
My comments are a late entry. Not because I disagree with the views of others who already have commented on whether the United States should be trying to assassinate al Qaeda's leaders, but because I had to carefully re-examine the evolution of my own thinking. In 1987, I wrote a lengthy essay addressing the question, "Should our arsenal against terrorism include assassination?" I offered five arguments why it should, and ten why it should not. But first a word on context: In the 1980s, we were confronted primarily by Middle Eastern terrorism, in some cases, supported by… Read more
Closing Guantanamo and moving the remaining detainees to a location in the United States will not increase the danger of terrorist attacks in the United States, nor will it endanger nearby communities. Numerous dangerous terrorists are already being held in U.S. prisons—convicted assassins, bombers, hijackers, and those responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and other terrorist acts. Not to mention the Alphabet bomber, the Unabomber, and other mentally disturbed serial murderers, most of them in maximum-security facilities. U.S. prisons also hold 145 persons who have been convicted in the United States of plotting terrorist attacks, supporting terrorist groups,… Read more
In a word, no. I have been highly critical of a number of things done in the name of the Global War on Terror. The imperial assertions of unlimited executive authority, the transparent and ultimately unsuccessful attempt to place terrorist detainees beyond the protection of international law or the jurisdiction of U.S. courts, the promotion and use of coercive interrogation methods—and the disgusting parsing of the precise meaning of torture and the public defense of its use—were strategic blunders. They produced nothing that could not have been achieved by adhering to existing rules and international norms. I know that not… Read more
A recent Pentagon study concluded that Mexico, like Pakistan, could suffer a “wholesale collapse of civil government,” which would cause a major national security problem for the United States. The report understandably has attracted attention here and has caused alarm in Mexico, where any U.S. concerns about border security summon bitter memories. In 1848, half of what was then Mexico was lost to the United States as the result of a war, which both sides eagerly sought. And during the Mexican Revolution, the last time the United States deployed large numbers of troops on the border, General Pershing invaded Mexico… Read more
Al Qaeda has become many things and therefore must be assessed from different angles. Al Qaeda is the heir to a long tradition of jihad, the banner carrier and symbol of a radical expression of faith, the author of the world’s most spectacular terrorist attack, a tiny army holed up in Pakistan, a global network of like-minded extremists, the source of a persuasive narrative, an active communications system augmented by an on-line army, a brand name that still has value although it has been tarnished by its excesses in Iraq, a conveyer of individual and societal discontents, a magnet for the… Read more
Addressing this question seriously would require a lengthy treatise. In a blog essay, one can do little more than touch upon some of the key issues. Following the trajectory of the question, my own comments will focus on dealing with terrorist adversaries, while recognizing that the United States confronts a broad array of security challenges that create diverse intelligence demands, from uncovering and preventing nuclear proliferation to combating narcotics smugglers in Northern Mexico. To begin with, reforming intelligence is not the issue. That implies a legislative solution. What is needed are improvements. Progress has been made. As a consequence of… Read more
There is no single explanation why terrorists dispatched, instructed or inspired by al Qaeda have not carried out another attack in the United States. Instead, there are many hypotheses that analysts debate as to their relative importance. In the spirit of that debate, I have attempted to weigh the contribution of various initiatives based on a total scale of 100 points. “Fighting them there means not fighting them here.” This assertion was frequently offered as support for the war in Iraq. It implied that American forces were tying down al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq who otherwise would have been available… Read more
The debate over withdrawal of American forces from Iraq has effectively ended: Troops will begin withdrawing in early 2009. The withdrawal will be complete somewhere between mid-2010 and the end of 2011, in accord with the expressed determination of the incoming Obama administration and the wishes of the Iraqi government. The pace of withdrawal will depend on local security conditions. If the security situation continues to improve, the withdrawal may accelerate. However, if the security situation sharply deteriorates, the withdrawal is unlikely to be reversed. There will be no second surge. What is not yet entirely clear is what type… Read more
Actually Vice President-elect Biden was on solid historical ground. He was not implying that there is a band of bad guys hiding in some cellar conjuring up a crisis specifically to take on Obama. It is simply that, many new American presidents have confronted major foreign policy crises within their first year in office. Six of the nine most recent American presidents confronted foreign policy crises during their first year in the White House—actually eight, if we take into account that Presidents Johnson, Nixon, and Ford inherited on-going wars, as will President Obama. Broadening our historical horizon underscores the drama… Read more
Related Link: http://www.willterroristsgonuclear.com
