Peter Feaver
Our ongoing war with terrorists inspired by a militant
islamist ideology is the story of the decade. They were at war with us as
the decade opened (and arguably for much of the previous decade), but the United States was not really at war with them until after the 9/11 attacks. The Bush administration's response was a dramatic escalation from the approach that had characterized U.S. efforts in the previous decade: pin-prick retaliatory strikes and a law-enforcement-first approach to taking down the network. Instead, the Bush administration expanded the toolbox in an effort to use all elements of national power -- military, economic, diplomatic, law enforcement, and intelligence, as well as myriad soft-power assets like a counter-narrative to address the appeal of militant Islam. The decade's closing with al Qaeda's near-successful Christmas Day attack on yet another U.S. airplane, dramatizes that the war continues. As with previous long wars like the Cold War, our success depends in part on the ability of each new administration to sustain the effort. The story of the next decade may well turn on whether the Obama administration can build on what worked and learn from what did not.
William Inboden
The 9/11 attacks -- and the fact that they only happened once. The defining impact of September 11th needs little elaboration. But perhaps as noteworthy is that, against all fears and expectations at the time, the United States has not (yet) been hit again with a large scale terrorist attack. President Bush deserves much credit for this, which in time should be judged by history as one of his most significant accomplishments. Last week’s attempted airline bombing on Christmas day is only the latest sobering reminder that the threat is persistent and real. Here is hoping that by the end of President Obama’s tenure in office, preventing another attack will stand as one of his signature achievements as well.
Phil Levy:
The emergence of non-state actors, particularly through terrorism. The decade opened, of course, with the 9/11 attacks. Many of the most challenging foreign policy problems since have revolved around the unconventional nature of this conflict. Who is a prisoner of war when the other side doesn't wear uniforms? Who is responsible when terrorist leaders hide out in the mountains? What counts as victory, or does this go on indefinitely? As much as I would have liked to argue for an economic story, this did more to reshape the global scene.
Thomas
Mahnken:
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. There is simply no way to understand the evolution of American national security policy over the past decade outside the context of the 9/11 attacks. Al Qaeda’s strike on the United States, launched on a clear, cool Tuesday morning, fundamentally redefined American national security policy and is transforming the U.S. military. The struggle against violent Islamist extremism defined the presidency of George W. Bush, but did not end with the inauguration of Barack Obama. Indeed, as the Obama administration has hopefully discovered in its awkward handling of the Christmas airline bombing plot, Islamist terrorism cannot be ignored or wished away.
Dov Zakheim
The surge that worked. Many analysts, myself included, doubted that whatever Dave Petraeus might do would not be enough to prevent the Iraqi civil war from continuing to wreck that country. Capitalizing on, and stoking, the Sunni revival, working with tribes, arguing for the surge and then reorienting his forces to a counterinsurgency posture, Petraeus turned the tide of the Iraq War, and saved the United States from an ignominious withdrawal.
Read More
(3)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE