Yesterday, an Oxford University think tank released a study, which amounted to an autopsy on the Bush-Cheney regime's failed "war on terrorism," and called for a new approach aimed at achieving "sustainable security." (See Hard Rain Journal 6-14-06). Today, Foreign Affairs, the premier publication in the field of US diplomacy, weighs in. The prestigious journal recently surveyed 100 leading figures, including former Secretaries of State, former CIA Directors, former NSA Directors, and luminaires of the foreign policy establishment in the debut of its Terrorism Index. Of course, the results are not startling to anyone who has followed Words of Power, or any other news and opinion source not carrying the filthy water of the Bush-Cheney regime (which disqualifies almost all of the US mainstream news media). You will probably not hear this survey cited on the Sunday morning network and cable TV news shows. You may not even hear it read into the record on the floor of the US Senate. But it is a hunk of the truth. So here are some of the salient data points, brought to you via the Canadian press, which is still vibrant and relatively independent --
Washington is failing to make progress in the global war on terror and the next 9/11-style attack is not a question of if, but when. That is the scathing conclusion of a survey of 100 leading American foreign-policy analysts. In its first "Terrorism Index," released yesterday, the influential journal Foreign Affairs found surprising consensus among the bipartisan experts. Some 86 per cent of them said the world has grown more, not less, dangerous, despite President George W. Bush's claims that the U.S. is winning the war on terror. The main reasons for the decline in security, they said, were the war in Iraq, the detention of terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay, U.S. policy towards Iran and U.S. energy policy. The survey's participants included an ex-secretary of state and former heads of the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, along with prominent members of the U.S. foreign-policy establishment. The majority served in previous administrations or in senior military ranks....Almost 80 per cent of the analysts said widespread rejection of radical Islamic ideologies is crucial if terrorism is to be eradicated, but that goal requires "a much higher emphasis on its non-military tools." Across the board, they rated Washington's diplomatic efforts as abysmal, with a median score of 1.8 out of 10. 62% of those polled identify Saudi Arabia as the premier incubator for terrorists More than two-thirds said the United Nations and other multilateral institutions must be strengthened....Some 82 per cent of participants said a pressing priority for the U.S. is to end its dependence on foreign oil....The Department of Homeland Security, created in the aftermath of 9/11, was rated for effectiveness at only 2.9 out of 10....Almost 62 per cent identified Saudi Arabia as the premier incubator for terrorists. It has helped halt the flow of money to terrorist networks and now has 30,000 troops guarding its oil fields, but Saudi leaders have been slow to move against extremist elements inside the country, says the report. Asked what presents the single greatest danger to American security, nearly half the analysts said loose nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. Only 4 per cent said Iran....
Linda Hurst, War on terror called failure, Another 9/11 `inevitable,' experts conclude, Washington's diplomatic efforts rated 1.8 out of 10, Toronto Star, 1-15-06
Geopolitics, Terrorism, Peak Oil, Energy Security, Environmental Security, Energy, Sustainable Resources, Renewable Energy, Alternative Energy, Iraq, Bush, Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, 911