The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the U.S. response—the global war on terrorism—have changed the world, and the terrorist enterprise that we know as al-Qaeda has changed with it.

The current status of al-Qaeda’s network remains unclear, but it is certain that it and other terrorist groups continue to threaten the lives and well-being of Americans, at home and abroad, and the security of our friends and allies. This continuing danger leads to ongoing U.S. and international efforts to monitor, disrupt, and dismantle terrorist groups before they can cause large-scale destruction to our people or our interests.

The objective of this RAND Corporation study, undertaken as part of a project entitled “Beyond al-Qaeda: Countering Future Terrorist and Other Nontraditional Threats to U.S. Security,” is to understand the shape of future threats to the United States and U.S. security interests from terrorist and other extremist organizations. We do this through analyses that draw together the various threat strands that are informing current U.S. thinking in the war on terror. The study looks specifically at four sources of threats:

1. Al-Qaeda. We examine how al-Qaeda has changed since September 11, the loss of its operating base in Afghanistan, and the death or capture of key operatives; and we assess what forms the al-Qaeda threat to the United States and U.S. interests take now and might take in the future.

3. Violent Islamist and non-Islamist terrorist and insurgent groups without known links to al-Qaeda. These groups threaten U.S. regional interests, friends, and allies, as well as other nontraditional threats.

4. The nexus between terrorism and organized crime. In each case, we examine how the presence of these threats affects U.S. security interests, and we identify distinct strategies that the United States and the U.S. Air Force may take to neutralize or mitigate each of these threats.

The results of the study are reported in two volumes. This book is the seccond of the two; the first, by Angel Rabasa, Peter Chalk, Kim Cragin, Sara A. Daly, Heather S. Gregg, Theodore W. Karasik, Kevin A. O’Brien, and William Rosenau, is entitled Beyond al-Qaeda: Part 1, The Global Jihadist Movement.

This research builds on previous RAND Project AIR FORCE work on counterterrorism, notably the following:

• Angel Rabasa, Cheryl Benard, Peter Chalk, Christine Fair, Theodore Karasik, Rollie Lal, Ian Lesser, and David Thaler, The Muslim World After 9/11, MG-246-AF, 2004
• Nora Bensahel, The Counterterror Coalitions: Cooperation with Europe, NATO, and the European Union, MR-1746-AF, 2003
• Kim Cragin and Sara Daly, The Dynamic Terrorist Threat: An Assessment of Group Motivations and Capabilities in a Changing World, MR-1782-AF, 2004
• Lynn Davis, Steven Hosmer, Sara Daly, and Karl Mueller, The U.S. Counterterrorism Strategy: A Planning Framework to Facilitate Timely Policy Adjustments, DB-426-AF, 2004
• David Ochmanek, Military Operations Against Terrorist Groups Abroad: Implications for the United States Air Force, MR-1738-AF, 2003.

This research was sponsored by the Deputy Chief of Staff for Air and Space Operations, U.S. Air Force (A3/5), and conducted in the Strategy and Doctrine Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE.

Research for this project was completed in September 2004. This book should be of value to the national security community and to interested members of the general public, especially those with an interest in combating the blight of international terrorism.

RAND Project AIR FORCE

RAND Project AIR FORCE, a division of the RAND Corporation, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and development center for studies and analyses. PAF provides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives affecting the development, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future aerospace forces.

Research is performed in four programs: Aerospace Force Development; Manpower, Personnel, and Training; Resource Management; and Strategy and Doctrine.

Download Beyond al-Qaeda: The Outer Rings of the Terrorist Universe

PDF version, 1.2MB, 216Pages.

Angel Rabasa • Peter Chalk • Kim Cragin • Sara A. Daly • Heather S. Gregg • Theodore W. Karasik • Kevin A. O’Brien • William Rosenau

© Copyright 2006 RAND Corporation

Conclusions and Recommendations:

From a policy perspective, the first-order question is whether the trajectory of insurgent and terrorist groups outside the global jihadist movement will bring them closer to that movement. To answer this question, we examine what factors could affect this outcome and what the U.S. policy response should be. The second-order question is what level of threat these groups represent for U.S. regional interests, including the security of U.S. friends and allies, and what the U.S. policy response should be. (See pp. 161–166.)

With regard to convergence with al-Qaeda, the groups that generate the greatest concern are the Islamist groups that share aspects of al-Qaeda’s worldview. Of the groups examined, only two—Egypt’s al-Wa’ad and the Iraqi insurgents—have developed since bin Laden’s notorious 1998 Khost fatwa against “Jews and Crusaders.” The other groups were well established and active, and had articulated their own agendas prior to al-Qaeda’s emergence in the international arena. Therefore, they can be assumed to be less receptive to al-Qaeda’s ideology of global jihad than the groups that have emerged since that time.

Among these groups, the majority interpret their jihad much more narrowly than groups affiliated or associated with al-Qaeda. Hezbollah’s interests center on Lebanon and its immediate vicinity; Hamas is focused on the Palestinian issue; and the GIA on overthrowing the Algerian government. In the groups for which association with al-Qaeda might be operationally attractive, external and internal factors have held such tendencies in check. For example, Hezbollah appears to be influenced by its ties to Syria and Iran, as well as by its involvement in Lebanese politics. Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya appears to be concerned about carving out some political space to operate in Egypt.

Even some of the non-Islamist groups could also decide to cooperate with al-Qaeda or other Islamist groups for their own reasons. For example, many of these militant groups now maintain representatives in the criminal and black market world. This interconnectivity allows terrorists to acquire weapons as necessary, perhaps even to expand their capabilities. It is also important to stress that some terrorist groups could shift their worldview, thus adopting an agenda similar to al- Qaeda’s. Alternatively, others could simply capitalize on a perceived anti-U.S. trend, shifting the focus of their attacks toward U.S. targets to increase their own potential through alliances with more capable al-Qaeda affiliated groups or simply to gain greater recognition.

A recent RAND study analyzed factors that caused terrorist groups to adjust their intentions (e.g., ideology or worldview) and their capabilities. Specifically, the study isolated the following three key factors that cause terrorist groups to shift from their chosen paths: (1) counterattacks by security forces; (2) external support from states or other militant organizations; and (3) gain or loss of popular support.

To those, we add a fourth: general shifts in the international security environment—such as that brought about by the U.S.-led global war on terrorism. Some extremist organizations, such as the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), have tried to distance themselves from al-Qaeda to reduce their exposure to the global war on terrorism.

Similarly, according to a well-informed Sri Lankan source, the global war on terrorism has reduced international tolerance of LTTE terrorism and influenced the LTTE’s decision to enter into peace negotiations with the Sri Lankan government.

A potentially dangerous shift can be seen in the emerging Hamas- Hezbollah nexus, as seen in the March 14, 2004, attack in the Israeli port of Ashdod. The significance of this attack was not the number of casualties; indeed, Hamas has killed many more in single suicide bombing attacks. But rather, it demonstrated—especially to Israeli counterterrorism experts—Hamas’s ability to hit more strategic targets.

Given the qualitative leap in Hamas’s efforts, it might not be a surprise that Hezbollah financed and, indeed, allegedly planned this attack. Yet this degree of aid and coordination is greater than anything seen before in the Hamas-Hezbollah relationship. From an Israeli viewpoint, some security officials have stated that this attack motivated the government to assassinate Sheikh Ahmad Yasin. But the Ashdod attack also holds other, more global implications for the war on terrorism.

First, it demonstrates that Sunni and Shi’ite militants will work together, given a mutual enemy. In this case, the enemy is Israel, but this does not preclude cooperation between Sunni and Shi’ite militants against the United States. Second, up to this point, Hamas was facing significant counterterrorism pressure from the Israeli government.

Thus, it could have been more willing to take strategic guidance from Hezbollah: not just aid, but actual suggestions for types of attacks and targets. Parallel counterterrorism efforts by the United States and its allies in the war on terrorism could provoke other nonaffiliated terrorists to accept guidance from al-Qaeda in the future, as Hamas did from Hezbollah. Finally, in the case of Hezbollah, one potential explanation for the shift in its aid is that Hezbollah may be struggling to sustain attention and support now that Israel has pulled out of southern Lebanon. Greater involvement in the Palestinian resistance could help Hezbollah increase its momentum and support. It is therefore possible that Muslim anger at the U.S. presence in Iraq could similarly provoke shifts in the agenda of Hezbollah or other groups vis-à-vis the United States, as these groups continue to vie for local recruits and support.

The bottom line is that these groups have political aspirations as opposed to outright murder and mayhem. Because of their political agendas, they are more likely to accept political rules and social norms acceptable to a majority than are al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

Beyond the question of convergence, it is important to keep in mind that just because some of these groups have not joined the global jihadist movement, they should not be dismissed as unthreatening. Some represent deadly threats to the states that they seek to subvert; others, like Hezbollah, could suddenly emerge as global threats.

Visit Beyond al-Qaeda: The Outer Rings of the Terrorist Universe RAND's Web Page

Acknowledgments:

The authors of this report wish to thank all those who made this study possible. First, we thank our sponsors in the U.S. Air Force and particularly Lt Col John Jerakis, our point of contact in the Office of Regional Plans and Issues (USAF HQ A5XX); Terrence M. Doyle, Office of Plans and Policies (USAF HQ A5XS); and the staff of the U.S. embassies and Defense Attaché Offices that facilitated our work overseas.

In this regard, we thank Col James Tietjen, former U.S. Air Attaché in Singapore; Lt Col Benjamin Coffey, U.S. Assistant Air Attaché in London; and Maj Guermantes Lailari, U.S. Assistant Air Attaché in Tel Aviv and an astute analyst of Islamic extremist movements.

We owe a great debt to the reviewers of this manuscript, Brian M. Jenkins, Rohan Gunaratna, and Thomas A. Marks, and to Lieutenant Commander Youssef Aboul-Enein of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, whose comments greatly improved the manuscript. Any shortcomings are entirely the responsibility of the authors. We also express the appreciation for the collaboration that we received in our work on this study from the State Intelligence Agency of Indonesia (BIN), the National Intelligence Agency of Thailand, the Security and Intelligence Division of the Ministry of Defence of Singapore, the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center of the United Kingdom, and other agencies.

We are also indebted for invaluable insights into terrorist networks to Zachary Abuza, Martin Kramer, Elie Karmon of the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT), Herzliya, Israel; the staff of the International Center for Political Violence and Terrorism Studies of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies of Singapore; Carolina Hernandez and the Institute for Strategic and Development Studies of the Philippines; and Thailand analysts Paul Quaglia of PSA Asia and Anthony Davis.

Within RAND we cannot fail to acknowledge the important contributions to our understanding of al-Qaeda finances made by the RAND Air Force Fellow, Lt Col Steve Kiser, and the work on the charts illustrating the links between terrorism and crime by the RAND Navy Fellow LCDR Mark Edwards. We also thank Andrew Hoehn and Alan Vick, the Director and former Acting Director of the RAND Project AIR FORCE Strategy and Doctrine Program, under whose auspices this research was conducted; David Shlapak; and many other colleagues such as John Parachini, Brian Jackson, and John Baker, who—although not part of this project—contributed to the cross-fertilization of ideas. We thank our assistants Colleen O’Connor and Natalie Ziegler, and Ursula Davies and Thomas Young, RAND Cambridge summer interns, for their assistance with mapping jihadist networks in Europe and Africa and Douglas Farah and Alexandra Zavis for work on jihadist activities in West, Central, and Southern Africa.

Finally, we acknowledge the invaluable contributions of our editor, Miriam Polon; our production editor, Todd Duft; Project AIR FORCE editor Phyllis Gilmore, for her help with the summary; and our marketing director, John Warren.

Comments (0)

Name

Email

Comment

smaller | bigger

Add Comment