Edinburgh Risk Management Iraq


Posted by Admin

Edinburgh Risk Management Iraq

Edinburgh Risk Management Iraq

Before 9/11

The Americans did not believe there to be much threat of attacks in the USA despite previous attacks on their interests and forces abroad and even FBI reports played down the risks. The theme of weapons of mass destruction has certainly being topical in recent years but mainly in relation to their potential development or use by states such as Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as opposed to terrorist organisations.

In Western Europe terrorist organisations such as the IRA and the Basque separatists ETA have tended to target police and security forces or their civilian contractors. Their attacks were aimed at gaining or forcing concessions from the British or Irish and Spanish governments respectively. During the' Long War' with Britain, the IRA found that attacks that resulted in higher civilian casualties such as those at Guildford or Birmingham did not promote their cause but only strengthened the resolve of the British government. Not every nationalist movement has been prepared to compromise and some have combined armed struggle with religious or political fanaticism. A prime example would be the Chechen rebels that have been fighting for independence from Russia since 1991. Despite the best efforts of Presidents Yeltsin and Putin they have not been defeated and have carried out large-scale terror attacks that had killed up to 300 people in Moscow.

After 9/11

In marked contrast is the mentality of Islamic inspired groups such as Hizbollah, Hamas that are virulently anti-Western, and anti-Israeli and resisted Israeli occupation in Lebanon and Palestine. Hamas and Hizbollah may have rocket and suicide attacks but did obtain weapons of mass destruction. They view their struggle as a jihad that must be continued. However most notably of all, there is Al Qaeda that aims to carry out the most deadly attacks possible with the most destructive weapons at their disposal. These groups will often carry out deadly suicide bombings whether on the World Trade Center with jet airliners, on packed buses in Israel or on US led coalition forces in Iraq. These attacks have proved particularly effective, destructive, and deadly.

One must not doubt that Al Qaeda would use chemical or nuclear weapons of mass destruction if it were able to obtain them. It must be remembered that bin Laden is not interested in compromise or achieving objectives but only in total victory or getting vanquished in the attempt. It is the concept of jihad or armed struggle that fires these groups and aids their recruitment of fighters / terrorists but their capabilities are enhanced by financial support, use of technology and training facilities.

As September 11 proved it can be easier to obtain control of jet airliners and crash them into buildings than producing or obtaining weapons of mass destruction. Why bother with the relatively high cost of developing weapons of mass destruction when bombs and suicide bombers are a cheaper more readily available alternative? For the deaths of 19 suicide bombers Al Qaeda managed to destroy the World Trade Center, damage the Pentagon and unleash the deadliest assault the United States had ever suffered.