Why do terrorists want nukes?

IN THE NEWS
Some of the recent postings on national security-related blogs--Armchair Generalist, Global Guerrillas, and Liberals Against Terror--touch on the same question: will the current American grand strategy for counterterrorism effectively stop terrorist cells from acquiring nuclear weapons and using them against the United States? Since the Pentagon seems poised to draft a new National Military Strategy (NMS) for counterterrorism, it's a timely topic to discuss.

Although we've had years since 9/11 to "get inside the head" of terrorist groups like al Qaeda, few public discussions of counterterrorism actually try to do that. It's essentialy, since counterterrorism, like any type of warfare, is an exercise, in large part, in understanding your enemy's goals and means, finding out what you can about the enemy's strategy,  and anticipating what the enemy might do in response to whatever actions you take. As Edward Luttwak said in his book on strategy, warfare is not engineering. You're dealing with a live opponent, not inert matter. You can't succeed unless you can understand and outwit the enemy.

In contemporary terms, that means stopping the assumption train about terrorists and nukes, instead of letting it hurdle on forwards. The standard American thinking about the terrorist threat follows this track:

1. Terrorists are determined to defeat the United States.
2. In their minds, the more often they can attack within the United States, and the larger the carnage, the more successful they will be.
3. Therefore, nuclear weapons are extremely attractive, so al Qaeda and like-minded groups will do everything they can to acquire and use them against us.

For people horrified by the 9/11 attacks, that seems to make perfect sense. Why question the train of logic, if al Qaeda hijacked four air liners and crashed them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?

What's missing, of course, is al Qaeda's own grand strategy. The preceding argument skips ahead a few steps, straight to what we presume al Qaeda is doing at a theater or operational level. However, it may be completely wrong, including about how much al Qaeda cells want nuclear weapons, and why.

For al Qaeda and similar Islamist terrorist groups, the final battlefield isn't New York City. Instead, it's Jerusalem, Baghdad, Cairo, and other places where they want their militant, intolerant version of Islam to succeed. They want the entire umma, the body of the Islamic faithful, to live under their interpretation of Islamic law. The United States and the rest of the Western world are powerful figures in this drama, but they're not major players in its final act. (In fact, al Qaeda hopes we won't appear at all.) Of course, al Qaeda wants what they see to be the corrupting influences of the West--secularism, imperialism, etc.--removed from Dar al-Islam, the abode of the faithful--in other words, Islamic countries. They also want to stoke the revolutionary fires in the Dar al-Islam by making big, successful, inspiring attacks against powerful countries like the United States. Ultimate victory, however, is not defined by detonating a backpack nuclear weapon in Times Square.

Does that mean we don't have to be worried about al Qaeda or other groups acquiring nuclear technology? Absolutely not. However, looking inside al Qaeda's grand strategy does change our own strategy significantly.

Yes, there are a few rabid haters of the United States within al Qaeda, eager to make major bonus points by attacking us somehow, somewhere. However, there are also a lot more of what you might call "pragmatists," leaders who are ready to shift strategy to make it easier to reach their ultimate goal, revolution in the Dar al-Islam, faster and more successfully. Nuclear weapons may be attractive, but they may also be a liability, if they create alliances among al Qaeda's enemies that would otherwise not exist. "Terrorist nukes" that unite the overt and covert efforts of the American, European, Egyptian,  Israeli, Syrian, Saudi, and Indian governments are far less attractive than military and political measures that keep these regimes divided. As events in post-invasion Iraq show, the more chaotic and contentious the situation in any part of Dar al-Islam, the more ground al Qaeda can make.

Therefore, American strategy can (and should) have two prongs. The first is what you hear most frequently: Defeat terrorist cells and deny them access to nuclear technology. The second is what you almost never hear: Keep nuclear weapons from being attractive to al Qaeda. The second prong can succeed without achieving total victory along the first.

That should be good news, since we can "secure the homeland" with far less effort than the traditional strategy requires. You are not necessarily fighting an enemy dedicated heart and soul to the nuclear option, so complete physical, mental, and moral isolation (to use the Boyd language) is not required.

If Abu Musad al-Zarqawi had to choose between (1) nuking Washington, DC, and (2) Islamist revolution in Iraq and elsewhere, which do you think he would choose? Keeping the first choice separate from the second is what our counterterrorism strategy, in whatever form (like the NMS), should do.

Comments

[Don Meaker]

If you assume that Al Queda would stop at the Umma, then it would make sense to compromise with them, say we withdraw computers, phones, television, and let them sit in their medieval squalor.

Problem is, we tried that. After all, what was Afganistan but a little Taliban paradise, where they could beat women for not being veiled. And rather than have gratitude to us for permitting that little paradise on earth to them, that was where the 9/11 attacks were planned.

Based on reality, I would suggest that they hold that the entire world must become Umma. Further, their rantings suggest that their Umma is not their goal, except in an intermediate sense.

They want all of us to submit to their Moon God, and to them. If we will not, then they will kill us, as and when they can.

Of course, if that is their goal, and they say it is, then no compromise is possible, and we must kill then as and when we will, right?

[Kingdaddy]

Since the umma is all the faithful, Afghanistan was, for al Qaeda, only a base from which to strike. The Taliban, interestingly, were not as interested in spreading Islamist revolution to other countries, but they were happy to collaborate with al Qaeda.

I'm not saying, "Give al Qaeda what it wants," the keys to the kingdom--of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE...I _am_ saying that their interest in (1) hurting the United States, and (2) nuclear weapons as a way of inflicting that hurt, is as means, not ends.

[ali]

The US is the “far enemy” for Jihadis. Bin Laden has proved with 9-11 that strikes against the far enemy may be difficult but are justified by their RoI. Bin Laden’s cause has advanced rapidly due to our mistimed invasion of Iraq. In America I'd worry more about them hitting the still largely unprotected chemical plants rather than nukes. I’d also worry about nukes too but if terrorists get one it might well get used on the ”near enemy” first and the most likely target is Moscow.

[J.]

I think you've really expressed the ground truth here. Too many "experts" think that because nuclear terrorism might occur, it WILL occur, and they bet on the come in the near term. They need to examine what each terrorist group wants and what their strategy is, and nuking American cities is not going to advance their goals.

I don't worry about US chemical production sites or nuclear power plants at all. We've had them around for decades, and no Bhopal. I think there's a reason, first because it's not as easy as the fear-mongers say it is, and second, it's not in the best interests of any terrorist except the appocaliptic ones. If the FBI can interdict the crazies before they hit, all is well. If they don't, I'm not convinced the damage will be that bad. Look at that train wreck in South Carolina (or was it Georgia?). Tens of thousands of chlorine gas spills out, only eight die from the gas effects.

Nuclear terrorism makes for great movies and TV plots but not for reality (unless you're a contractor trying to get some DHS funds).

[ali]

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/rsepResources/si/oct03/terrorism.asp

[J.]

ali - good link and interesting article, thanks. As for this: "In a May 2003 report, CIA analysts claim that there is a high probability that there may be a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, or Nuclear (CRBN) attack within the next two years."

Somewhere I can dig up the same exact quote in SecDef Bill Cohen's testimony to Congress in the 1990s. And I can also get a DCI quote in the late 1980s to Congress saying "within the next five years." When do we hold these guys to be more factual and less scaremongers? I have no respect for their assessments anymore.

[Steven D]

I think your analysis is insightful with respect to foreign terrorist groups, but not necessarily with regard to domestic ones. How soon we forget that the largest terrorist attack on our country before 9/11 involved the home grown version of terrorism.

I believe that those folks would be more than happy to use a nuclear weapon if they could get their hands on one. It's quite possible that domestic terrorists were behind the anthrax attacks (which are still unsolved, and have never been claimed by Al Queda).

[Kingdaddy]

Good point, Steven. The evidence on the anthrax attacks strongly suggest domestic origins, with a rather half-baked attempt to point the finger at foreign groups.

[ali]

A bit more scaremongering: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/13/60minutes/main583528.shtml
In the US, as in the American built plant in Bhopal,the production systems are designed to cope with sudden peaks of demand and so with very rapid production in mind the vats are huge.

I’ve been in a chemical accident myself. One small drum of acid got speared by a forklift leaked onto some other stuff and produced an acrid cloud that covered several city blocks. It was no worse than tear gas and didn’t kill anyone put a few people in hospital though.

Dick Clark recently gave a talk where he imagined looking back from 2011 on the US Jihadi campaign; this featured amongst other things an executive jet Kamikazi strike on a Chemical plant.

Given that the typical part of the profile of a Jihadi is a technical degree, I don’t think it is beyond their wit to kill their way into a plant take hostage’s noddy suit up and methodically C4 every vat they find, not hard if they’ve got “Compressed Gas Chlorine” painted on them in foot high letters. Logistically this is an immensely simpler operation than the highly detectable, loony tune 9-11 plan. Even if the vats are empty they’d still destroy real estate values (yes it’s that frightening) within a 14 mile radius of anything that looks like a chemical plant, bring the US Chemical industry to its knees as it retools its shutdown production lines, and all the industries that depend on it.

In EU there have long been strict regulations that only allow small amounts of dangerous chemicals to be stockpiled; no such regulations exist in the US, post 9-11 I find this surprising. It suggests that DC is placing the interests of industry lobby groups well in front of defending its citizens; that of course would be nothing new.

[Oscar]

Another point about loose nukes: why not nuke the US in such a way as to lay the blame on someone else? There would be no point in using such a strategy against most of the EU, but the US might be expected to give an extreme reaction. (Recall our treatment of Germany and Japan during the air war phase of WW2.)

So while Jihadis MIGHT NOT want to use them on us directly, they might have good reason to do so INdirectly. After all, the time-warn theory behind much of terrorist activity is to create an over-reaction that increases the number of people who agree with the terrorists.

[Megan]

Can you answer a few questions for me? It is for a project that is due by the end of my school year.

Who are the terrorists?
What have they done since WWII?
Where are they strongest?
What do they want?
Should we give it to them? (should america give it to them)

I really need this information. I have been searching the entire web for these answers and haven't really found was I was searching for. If you can help me, please email me at [email protected]

[sideshowjim]

Just a thought...

But the group Aum Shinryko (or however you spell it), the group who released nerve gas into the Tokyo underground system, were rumoured to be working on nuclear weapon technology.

Seeing as how they are allegedly a doomsday group, should we be terrified? (UK)

[james mcmullen]

i think terrists are homosexual and should all go commit.

[james mcmullen]

i think terrists are homosexual and should all go commit.

[james mcmullen]

terrists are gay. all should go die.

[sildenafil]

excellent this is my favorite hobby I love being at home and watch a good movie or go to the movies with good company is great, the horror genre is the best excellent blog.

[buy meridia]

This terrorist is dangerous for our country USA.

[vibramfiveinger kso]

With several vibram five finger returnees that played last year including three starters, and a large group of talented vibram fivefingers kso newcomers, the linebackers will be the strength of the Reddie defense. Leading the way will be Mike vibram five fingers Wightman, Steve Butrick, Kevin Lloyd and Taylor Stone. Kyle Mathieu, fivefingers kso, Ben Chandler, and Benny Anderson add depth to the Reddie middle four. Mathieu played in all 10 vibram five finger shoes games last season and totaled 17 tackles. The other three are cheap vibram five fingers newcomers, with Aldridge transferred from Indiana State fivefingers shoes where he played in all 11 games on special teams. Chandler comes to Henderson from American River fivefingers kso trek shoes Community College where he was an All-American pick, while Benny Anderson comes to Henderson after having 62 fivefingers shoes tackles, including eight tackles for a loss and one interception last year at Antelope Valley Community vibram fivefingers shoes sale College. Both of the new vibram fivefingers faces logged time at the Nevada County campus previously.Tubiolo split time between Sierra College and vibram fivefingers running American River College, and Eubanks between vibram kso sale Sierra College and Los Rios Community College.Students shuffled through Sierra College's Nevada County Campus Wednesday vibram kso in preparation for another year of school. Hefting backpacks and calling out to old friends, they passed by two familiar faces in new fivefingers kso trek positions. Heather Eubanks and Sam Tubiolo both have taught at the Grass Valley campus before, but each recently vibram fivefingers kso has hired on as full-time faculty an event they found surprising vibram five finger given the budget-slashing in California public education, they said. http://www.vibramfivefinger.org/

[ling]

The articulate beloved can buoy advert to an assortment by a different beliefsrolex watch , commonwealths, and positions running shox , arraying by general delight ("I enjoyed that repast") to acute social attracter ("I beloved blimey married woman")ed hardy jeans. "Beloved" can buoy as well advert specifically to the ablaze trust and affair by amatory beloved, to the love by eros (californium. Grecian actor's line as love), to the aroused familiarity by genetic beloved, or to the passionless beloved that delimitates friendly relationship , to the fundamental unity or cultism by spiritual beloved. on 17878996852005

[newest jordan shoes]

I dont know what to say. This blog is fantastic. Thats not really a really huge statement, but its all I could come up with after reading this. You know so much about this subject. So much so that you made me want to learn more about it.

[Nike Dunk Low]

I was shocked to see a structure as large, loud, overdone and bombastic as this put right smack on the Mall. That's sacred territory man. You can't just put any damn fool thing down there. And right in the middle of it all? Not off to the side like the rest of war memorials? The other memorials are small, intimate and remind you that this vast experience is barely understandable to us. Nike Dunk LowThat’s right; affordable options exist That creates some new consider kicks. Air Jordan Retro ShoesAnd generous ties go for a sweet money.Nike Sb Dunks 2010
Here is a tilt of upmarket dress mbt lami that won’t interrupt your dress shoes are a different gossip. I keep effective him to pause. mbt shoes sale are beautiful posh—children's Mbt shoes on sale shoes are $70 to $85." Custom Jordan Shoes you to hole the turn to get good-looking Mbt kaya .Higher prices for property made from juice products—including toys, Nike SB Dunk clothes, and mbt walking shoes —are having a collision. Nike SB Dunk High The Weis are steep, property shirts aren’t cheap, And with a little maintenance, these pieces.