Global Counterinsurgency: Strategic Clarity for the Long War

Abstract

Though policy initiatives since the attacks of 11 September 2001 have positively influenced certain agencies and processes within the US government in their efforts to secure America, some steps have worked at cross purposes and limited the nation's effectiveness in countering the threats it faces.1 One entrenched policy that inhibits clear analysis and understanding of the threat is the continued framing of this global struggle as a "War on Terrorism" (WOT). Words have consequences in shaping understanding and framing potential courses of action. The broad use and narrow connotations of the term WOT have cultivated a widespread, erroneous intellectual paradigm for dealing with both terrorism and insurgencies. This false strategy conflates a single tactic into the overall characteristic of a diverse number of enemy organizations, who exercise terrorism as just one tool. Continuing to frame the conflict as a war against terrorism alone serves to mischaracterize the enemy, obscures an understanding of the techniques they employ, distorts the challenges posed, and impedes the development and implementation of a strategy for countering their impact.2

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Sep 01, 2008
Accession Number
ADA490623

Entities

People

  • Daniel S. Roper

Organizations

  • United States Army War College

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Biomedical
  • Energy and Power Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Antiterrorism
  • Counterinsurgency
  • Counterterrorism
  • Criminals
  • Governments
  • Guerrilla Warfare
  • Marine Corps
  • Military Organizations
  • National Security
  • Security
  • Societies
  • Terrorism
  • Terrorists
  • United States
  • Violence
  • War Colleges
  • Warfare

Readers

  • Political Violence and Terrorism Studies.
  • Systems Analysis and Design