The war on terrorism: what progress?

The third anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America, the recent atrocities committed by Chechen terrorists in a school in Beslan, Russia, and the upsurge in violence in Iraq has once again forced the international community to do some soul-searching in the war against terrorism.

Just where is this war going? Have we got the right balance between seeking a political solution and going for a military option? And when is a unilateral war justified to root out the causes of terrorism and prevent terrorist acts from taking place?

Ever since September 11, American foreign policy has shifted towards unilateralism; so much so that the outgoing European External Relations Commissioner, Chris Patten (a British Conservative, please note), last Wednesday told the European Parliament that "neo-conservative unilateralism" in Washington had failed to solve international problems while sending trans-Atlantic relations into decline. This, certainly, has not benefited the war on terrorism.

After the September 11 attacks, we witnessed the destruction of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which had broad international support, and which was, in my opinion, definitely the right thing to do; and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist regime in Iraq, which divided the West and remains a very controversial issue to this day.

We have seen terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia, Spain, Morocco, Indonesia and Russia, to name a few, and the situation in Iraq is still very fluid with hostage-taking and bomb attacks on the increase. In Russia, the recent terrorist atrocity in Beslan has been used by President Putin to increase his grip on power and this is indeed worrying.

There are mixed feelings today about just how effective military force has been in the fight against terrorism. Osama bin Laden knew that the September 11 attacks would widen the gulf between the West and the Muslim world, and provoke a military response from the West. He also knew that it would be extremely difficult to defeat al-Qaeda militarily.

In a way he was right. Although some important arrests have been made of key al-Qaeda figures, Bin Laden himself has not been captured, terrorism has not been defeated and relations between two of the world's greatest civilisations have certainly not improved.

On the other hand, this is certainly not the time to shy away from the military option and to try to defeat terrorism only through political means. What is needed is a correct balance, and this therefore implies increasing diplomatic efforts at solving disputes in the Muslim world while being prepared to use force wherever necessary.

I very much doubt, for example, that anyone can argue that the military overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan was not justified. The country was a major base for al-Qaeda and this is no longer the case, except of course, in certain border areas where, for example, it is believed bin Laden is still hiding. Today, despite many difficulties, the people of Afghanistan have a better future ahead of them.

Iraq is a much more complicated story. I always maintained that an American military occupation of an Arab country, and a very proud one at that, in today's circumstances, would cause a lot of problems.

Let me make one thing clear: sooner or later Saddam's regime had to be confronted. Saddam Hussein, a bloodthirsty dictator, was a threat to the stability of the entire region, who had invaded Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990, and made a mockery of the international community by refusing to co-operate over his weapons of mass destruction programmes for over 12 years.

Just imagine how the United States would have been criticised had it done nothing about Iraq - it would have been called weak and indecisive. Neither do I believe that the lack of United Nations authorisation for the overthrow of the Iraqi regime made this wrong in principle, although such support is always preferable.

Nato's bombing of Kosovo did not receive UN backing, but it was still the right thing to do. However, the problem with Iraq is that the Americans committed so many mistakes in the aftermath of a brilliantly executed military campaign that the situation has become almost hopeless.

Of course, everyone wants the Americans to succeed in Iraq and for Iraq to become a shining example of democracy in the Middle East, but the brutal fact is that the American presence in Iraq has instigated a violent Islamic fundamentalism that previously did not exist in the country. It also gave al-Qaeda another 'cause' to exploit.

Perhaps the time has come to consider a carefully planned, slow withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq. This would have its risks, of course, and could lead to a complete breakdown of law and order, as the Iraqi security forces are still ill-equipped and ill-trained, but does anyone see any light at the end of the tunnel in Iraq?

To make matters worse the Israeli-Palestinian dispute seems to be going from bad to worse and this has definitely contributed to fanning the flames of international terrorism. Here a political situation is badly needed and the international community has been unable to convince both sides to make any concessions.

It is particularly unfortunate that the US has been unwilling to use its immense influence over Israel to convince it to return to the negotiating table. It is a great pity that the US seems to accept Israel's line that the Palestinian cause is nothing but an extension of the global Islamic terrorist movement.

Of course, the murderous suicide bombers have made this look possible and have only made a bad situation worse, but the terrible plight of the Palestinian people has certainly given al-Qaeda another cause to exploit.

Some sort of acknowledgment of the legitimate concerns of the Chechens is also needed as the world battles terrorism. The aftermath of the Beslan atrocity is hardly the time to ask Russia to re-think its policy in Chechnya but it is a fact that President Putin's tough line in the region has got nowhere.

While military action is an important tool in the war on terrorism, it will hardly produce results on its own. Surely it is not right to label all Chechens who want independence or more autonomy terrorists? Here again, Mr Putin has linked the Chechen war to the international Islamic terrorist movement.

One has to admit, however, that Chechen militancy has not been created by al-Qaeda but exploited by bin Laden and his henchmen. The solution in Chechnya lies in Russia and a willingness by the Kremlin to seek a political solution backed by military action when this is necessary.

The fact also remains, however, that no political solution anywhere will satisfy the al-Qaeda terrorists, who simply hate the west and want nothing but open war between Islam and the West. The balance needed is one which seeks political solutions to end support for al-Qaeda in the Muslim world and at the same time advocates strong military action and intelligence work to defeat the terrorists.