The War on Terror: Goals, Enemies, and Prospects for Victory

Introduction and Background

On August 23, 1996, Osama bin Laden publicly declared war against the United States via an Islamic decree (fatwa). The major difference between this war and the previous conflicts the U.S. had been involved in is that the enemy in this case was motivated solely by religion. Almost two years later, on February 22, 1998, Osama bin Laden issued another fatwa, this time enjoining every Muslim to take up arms and kill American civilians and military personnel, as well as their allies. In August 1998, al-Qaeda fighters simultaneously attacked U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing over 200 people and injuring many others. These fighters believed that by their actions they were initiating a jihad to protect their faith. They also held the notion that America had been the initial aggressor in this conflict and had struck the first blow years before the September 11 attacks, in which hijacked planes were crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

America responded to the September 11 attacks by declaring war against al-Qaeda and terrorism broadly. In early February 2003, the American government under President Bush released the National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, which was subsequently revised in September 2006.

The first time the phrase "war on terror" was used was in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. On September 20, 2001, while addressing a joint session of Congress, President Bush stated, "Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."¹ From that moment, the phrase "war on terror" was adopted by the public, the media, and the government itself, and it came to represent the counter-strategies put in place by the Bush administration, as well as the new sectors of military activity and intelligence gathering established through newly developed anti-terror legislation.

Although this phrase has been used broadly to describe a wide variety of aims, policy guidelines, and actions, the major moves made specifically under that banner are far more complex than mere words suggest. Even though the basic aims of the war on terror have been pursued vigorously, several years later the story of the war is filled with controversial accounts and unconfirmed reports of immoral conduct. With accounts of torture and other illegal acts becoming increasingly common, there has been a growing demand for accountability that can no longer be ignored.

The 9/11 attacks on America's Pentagon and World Trade Center did not provoke a reaction from the United States alone. The attacks caused a global awakening to the menace of terrorism, and a concerted war on terror was launched with the United States at the forefront. This war has involved battles in Middle Eastern countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, and thousands have lost their lives as a result.²

The 2006 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism focuses on the unique set of problems posed by terrorism and aims to address them through two strategic actions. The short-term action involves the total dismantling of al-Qaeda. In this regard, the United States and its allies have achieved considerable success in capturing and killing al-Qaeda leaders and operatives, and have driven the group underground. Nonetheless, this terrorist organization bears certain similarities to the mythical Hydra: the successful elimination of one member of the network only leads to two others taking that person's place. The long-term aim of the U.S. strategy is therefore to foster a global atmosphere intolerant of terrorism and its activities.³ The identified path toward realizing these goals is to encourage democracy in Islamic nations—a move intended to bring about genuinely progressive leaders who can supply the basic needs of the millions of Muslims who have rejected terrorism but still seek improved standards of living.

For over two years immediately following 9/11, al-Qaeda was struck on all sides: leaders, followers, and sympathizers alike. Apart from the overthrow of the Taliban and numerous killings and imprisonments worldwide, a number of al-Qaeda leaders were arrested, their finances were frozen, and several further attacks were thwarted.⁴ Despite these efforts, al-Qaeda was still able to meet, plan, and sometimes successfully carry out attacks that demonstrated a higher level of sophistication than before 9/11. For this reason, it would be erroneous and misleading for the U.S. and its allies to claim the upper hand in the war against terror, especially when considering the rise of the Islamic State and the broader turmoil in the Middle East more than sixteen years after 9/11.

Problem Statement and Research Purpose

President Bush and his administration maintained that the war on terror was aimed at bringing those who planned and executed the 9/11 attacks to justice. Despite this stated goal, the war has faced numerous setbacks over time. These include the withdrawal of joint anti-terror forces such as the British, as well as the growing perception that the war, rather than reducing terrorist activity, has instead served as an incentive for more recruits to join terrorist ranks. This research analyzes how far the war on terror has progressed, provides deeper insight into the nature of the conflict, and offers guidance on how its core objectives—reducing or eliminating terrorism—might still be achieved.

Purpose of the Study

The overarching aim of the war on terror is to bring an end to all forms of terrorist activity, with particular emphasis on the al-Qaeda network in the Middle East, as represented by the 2006 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism. This research aims to determine, from multiple perspectives and in light of recent worldwide events, whether the objectives of this war have been achieved.

Research Questions

To accurately achieve this purpose, three guiding questions have been identified:

i. What exactly does the War on Terror mean?

ii. Who are the opposition?

iii. Can the United States emerge victorious?

This research consulted previous studies examining anti-terror wars and activities since 9/11. One notable development is the increased academic interest in the topic and the collaborative effect this has had on researchers. The concerted effort has produced a more rigorous approach to information gathering, despite a continuing reliance on literary sources. An increase in empirical and quantitative analysis has also been observed. Application of deductive statistical analysis to field data from terrorist activities has experienced a threefold increase since 9/11, which has had significant effects on the accuracy of conclusions drawn from such studies.⁵ These advances are still in their early stages compared to the level of coverage in other fields, but represent a welcome development.

Research Design and Methodology

Site and Sample

The resources used in this research were drawn from Google Scholar and EBSCOhost archives. From both sources, the materials consulted include official documents, reports, book reviews, research papers, articles, and press releases.

Research Methods

For both online sources, the search phrases "American war on terror" and "war on terror" were used as keywords. Selection criteria included document type and date of publication, with a preference for documents published after 9/11. Selected documents were further scanned for content relevance by analyzing each document's abstract or executive summary.

Theoretical Model

This report is formatted after the UK's Research Assessment Exercise,⁶ a program that has established that collaborative publications are consistently of higher research quality. Accordingly, this research focuses primarily on peer-reviewed journal publications from the relevant period.

Data Organization

Every document used as a reference was written after the 9/11 attacks. Sources were selected in chronological succession up to present-day publications in order to develop a comprehensive picture of the war on terror. A close analysis of the selected documents reveals several recurring themes: what prompted the war on terror, the short-term effects caused by the war, the impact of U.S. foreign policy on majority-Muslim Middle Eastern countries after two years, and the solutions identified during the course of this global struggle against terror. The selected sources were produced by a variety of organizations, including universities, independent researchers, and government offices.

What the War on Terror Entails

The most fundamental function of the American government is to protect the American people and the homeland. Concerning the war on terror, the Bush administration set its targets on destroying al-Qaeda and its affiliated terrorist organizations, as well as establishing democratic governments that would reduce their operational freedom. A reassessment of the strategy guidelines confirms that the safety of Americans and the American homeland is the top priority. The next most important objective for both the Bush and Obama administrations was the total destruction of al-Qaeda and its sister organizations, as reflected in their respective strategy guidelines.⁷ In the strategy document, this objective is ranked either first—insofar as it neutralizes America's greatest threat—or second after homeland safety, in five of the major strategic guidelines.

Whether fostering democratic principles ranks as the next major aim of the war on terror remains a matter of debate. The anti-terror strategy document released by the Bush administration listed the creation of an unfavorable environment for terrorism—an action directly involving the promotion of democratic principles—as the third objective. In other sources, fostering democracy was treated as the ultimate solution to the problem of terrorism and the most effective means of securing the American homeland.