Chicago bomb plot: International cooperation is not cost free

Yet, future international cooperation could be undermined if the post-election political climate in Washington results in budget cuts for foreign aid programs that help strengthen friendly countries and international cooperation.
 
According to U.S. officials, Saudi Arabia officials had given the U.S. earlier warnings of a potential but unspecified attack and then later quickly passed on additional details when received from their inside source, reportedly a “turncoat.” Abu Dubai officials found one bomb device, hidden in a computer printer toner cartridge, before it was loaded onto an outbound plane. British authorities found the second after it already had been flown on one plane and was awaiting transshipment from a British airport to the U.S. It was a good example of international cooperation, described in detail by Canadian Press.
 
There have been numerous other incidents involving international cooperation, some publicized –including Jordan thwarting plots to blow up an American hotel in Amman and cooperation among the Europeans in countering the current reports of potential attacks. There also is good bi-lateral cooperation, such as between France and Spain to counter the Spanish ETA terrorist group whose members move across the border and others that have not been publicly disclosed. Good cooperation, some of which has not been made public, also exists between the U.S. and Asian and African countries.
 
As Tom Ridge, the first Secretary of Homeland Security said last week at the Homeland Security Policy Institute, even in cases where countries strongly disagreed with American policies, the security and intelligence agencies cooperated “hands in glove” with the United States.
 
He was not specific, but may well have had in mind Saudi Arabia and some other Middle Eastern countries. In addition, despite the policy disagreements with some European countries concerning the U.S. invasion of Iraq and other issues, intelligence and law enforcement agencies remained good.

An interesting sidelight of the recent bomb plot is that although the bomb parcels were addressed to a synagogue and another Jewish institution in Chicago, the tip that thwarted the attack came from Saudi Arabia. One bomb package was detected in Abu Dubai. Both Arab countries and their media are opposed to Israel and their media attack Jews. Whether the Saudis were aware of the addresses or that the bombs were — according to British officials– apparently rigged to explode via a timing mechanism before reaching the Chicago Jewish institutions is unknown. Regardless, they apparently cooperated quickly

Bin Laden’s original target, for those who forgot, originally was the Saudi Kingdom because it hosted American and other “infidels” before Saddam Hussein was defeated in Iraq. The plot was claimed by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, an affiliate of the main Al Qaeda.
 
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE STILL NEEDED

Yemen, one of the world’s poorest and most unstable countries, is becoming a major recipient of U.S. counterterrorism, military, and economic aid, such as development assistance and child survival programs.

It is one of the many countries in the developing world that have poor economies, shortages of jobs and poor education and legal systems, where terrorists have obtained footholds and attacked American targets or friendly host nations. The Chicago parcel bombs and the Christmas Day underwear bomber plots originated in Yemen, terrorists used Kenya and Tanzania to bomb the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and other fundamentalist attacked Australian and other western tourists in Bali and Jakarta, Indonesia.

Countries with weak governments and sometimes volatile political situations are vulnerable to being used by terrorists, either as staging grounds for attacks elsewhere or attacks on embassies or other foreign presences. Claiming that poverty or despair is the main or cause of terrorism, is one of these myths fashionable in some circles—many terrorism leaders come from well-to-do backgrounds. I don’t buy it. But terrorists have found fertile recruitment grounds where governments are weak and there are large numbers of young men who cannot find jobs and a sense of self worth except, in their eyes, by joining a radical fundamentalist cause.

Basically there are two aspects of U.S. foreign assistance that can help counter terrorism. The first includes the more general programs such as development assistance and economic support funds which are intended to help strengthen the recipient country as a whole. These funds are in greatest danger of being slashed by the new Congress if members take a wide sweeping approach to cutting federal budgets instead of evaluating programs on their merits.

The other aid programs are more specialized. For example, the State Department’s Antiterrorism Training Assistance (ATA) Program that helps strengthen the capabilities of law enforcement officials in friendly countries through such courses as explosives detection, airport security and crisis management. Using State Department budget funds, Treasury, State and Justice run programs to help other countries, including those in the Gulf, to counter terrorism financing. Similarly, the State Department, the Justice Department and FBI provide various programs to improve law enforcement and strengthen legal systems and the Defense Department has its specialized programs.

Some of these are relatively small and often overlooked in the complex budget. For example, the State Department’s ATA program, which has often been cut in one House or another as part of across-the board cuts, is seeking $205 million for FY 2011. The final appropriation is expected to be decided in an omnibus appropriations bill awaiting the “lame duck” session as Congress failed to pass most of the individual appropriations bills before the election.

The State Department also is developing a new program to counter radicalization. The Department’s Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Ambassador Daniel Benjamin, has told Congress that the program is needed “to keep those at risk of radicalization from becoming violent “ and “to beat back the Al Qaeda narrative.” The administration is seeking $15 million to fund counter-radicalization efforts in high priority countries. Current indications, judging by the House Appropriations Committee, are that if the initiative is funded, Congress will cut the funding request by two thirds, to $5 million. Yet, countering the radicalization of susceptible men and women is an important necessity in countering Islamic fundamentalist violence.

Strengthening international cooperation against terrorism has taken many years of diplomatic effort –predating 9/11– in bi-lateral one-on-one meetings with other countries, in multilateral settings such as INTERPOL and international summit meetings and direct contacts and relationships between intelligence services and law enforcement officials. But it also takes money — a very small part of the overall U.S. budget– for programs to strengthen the economic and national security of friendly countries who often are the first line of defense for American citizens, whether at home or abroad.

This is part of the reality of good government and national security that cannot be overlooked now that the midterm Congressional elections are over. The counterterrorism effort is not a simple matter of Defense Department military actions, or Homeland Security’s work within our borders. Cooperation with our international partners, and our efforts to build up their capacity to fight terrorism themselves, is critical to the long-term effort to make Americans safer.

Members of the new Congress will have to get beyond slogans and deal with the world as it is, where bombs and weapons of mass destruction can come packaged and transported in many diverse ways. 

Michael B. Kraft is a Washington based counterterrorism consultant/writer and a retired senior advisor specializing in legislative and budget affairs in the State Department Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism. He is currently working on a book on U.S. government counterterrorism programs.  He  previously served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff and as national security legislative assistant to Senate and House members where he also worked on foreign assistance issues.