Thursday, January 24, 2008

Know the Enemy

The Problem

Four essential facts about this war are not yet widely recognized:

  • We did not start this war that threatens our lives and liberties.


  • The war against the Free World began long before September 11, 2001.


  • We face more than one enemy determined to eliminate us.


  • Terrorist organizations depend on state-sponsors - the non-democratic nations that provide them intelligence, weapons, financial, diplomatic and logistic support.

Much like the fascist and communist enemies that we faced in the last century, the current global threat is driven by a totalitarian ideology - this time, an ideology masquerading as a religion - that seeks not only regional but global domination.

We characterize this ideology as "Islamofascism" (or "Islamism"): a doctrine of ruthless political power that adopts (and distorts) the language of Islam. Islamofascism poses the greatest threat, initially, to legitimate Muslim leaders and communities. The Islamists' first step towards pursuing global jihad is to take control of the religious community, worldwide.

The political successes of Islamofascism have little to do with its inherent appeal, and much to do with two stark factors: First, the threat of brutal reprisal against the majority of Muslims who do not subscribe to this repressive ideology. And second, the flow of money from places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya and Sudan.

No region of the world is immune to the terrorist tactics and political warfare of Islamofascism. The rapidly growing Muslim ghettoes in Western Europe are becoming prime breeding-grounds for Islamic fanaticism - and hence terrorism.

Muslim populations in Africa are increasingly being subjected to the Islamists' harsh, Taliban-style version of religious law known as Shari'a.

Islamofascist organizations and state sponsors have engineered ominous tactical alliances with Russia and China.

Islamism is also a growing threat to Muslim and non-Muslim communities inside the United States.

What Needs to Be Done

Little lasting progress in the war on terror can be expected if we fail to grasp two important realities:

1. Islamofascism is a totalitarian ideology, not a religion. It is about power, not faith.
Islamism promotes political sedition and incitement to violence. It must be defeated.

2. In virtually all cases, Islamism and its terrorist manifestations have been - and continue to be - state-sponsored. Strategies for defeating Islamofascism must address its wellsprings, not just its symptoms.

Contributor: Alex Alexiev

Know the Enemy

The Problem

Four essential facts about this war are not yet widely recognized:

  • We did not start this war that threatens our lives and liberties.


  • The war against the Free World began long before September 11, 2001.


  • We face more than one enemy determined to eliminate us.


  • Terrorist organizations depend on state-sponsors - the non-democratic nations that provide them intelligence, weapons, financial, diplomatic and logistic support.

Much like the fascist and communist enemies that we faced in the last century, the current global threat is driven by a totalitarian ideology - this time, an ideology masquerading as a religion - that seeks not only regional but global domination.

We characterize this ideology as "Islamofascism" (or "Islamism"): a doctrine of ruthless political power that adopts (and distorts) the language of Islam. Islamofascism poses the greatest threat, initially, to legitimate Muslim leaders and communities. The Islamists' first step towards pursuing global jihad is to take control of the religious community, worldwide.

The political successes of Islamofascism have little to do with its inherent appeal, and much to do with two stark factors: First, the threat of brutal reprisal against the majority of Muslims who do not subscribe to this repressive ideology. And second, the flow of money from places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya and Sudan.

No region of the world is immune to the terrorist tactics and political warfare of Islamofascism. The rapidly growing Muslim ghettoes in Western Europe are becoming prime breeding-grounds for Islamic fanaticism - and hence terrorism.

Muslim populations in Africa are increasingly being subjected to the Islamists' harsh, Taliban-style version of religious law known as Shari'a.

Islamofascist organizations and state sponsors have engineered ominous tactical alliances with Russia and China.

Islamism is also a growing threat to Muslim and non-Muslim communities inside the United States.

What Needs to Be Done

Little lasting progress in the war on terror can be expected if we fail to grasp two important realities:

1. Islamofascism is a totalitarian ideology, not a religion. It is about power, not faith.
Islamism promotes political sedition and incitement to violence. It must be defeated.

2. In virtually all cases, Islamism and its terrorist manifestations have been - and continue to be - state-sponsored. Strategies for defeating Islamofascism must address its wellsprings, not just its symptoms.

Contributor: Alex Alexiev

Support the Troops

The Problem

The war currently being fought in Iraq is just one front in the global conflict between the Islamist movement and the Free World. The former Iraqi regime was - like the Taliban regime in Afghanistan - an active sponsor of terrorist groups and agents. Iraq was sheltering and supporting (among other terrorists) a principal terrorist behind the current insurgency, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

The historic first steps toward democratic government in the Middle East, in Afghanistan and Iraq, have already had enormous psychological and political impact throughout the region, prompting democratic concessions on the part of some unelected governments, and giving hope and inspiration to reformers in many countries in the Middle East and beyond.

To lose these pivotal struggles would be to set back the cause of the Free World, perhaps irreparably in some regions - and would establish new centers of enemy activity.

Terrorists - like a malignancy - must be eliminated. They cannot be appeased with concessions or legitimated with a diplomatic band-aid. Not only is it a grave mistake to try to co-opt terrorists. The mere act of negotiating with them can prove to dangerous when diplomacy is used as a tactic to buy time and prepare for new offensives against the Free World.

The key aims of the terrorists in Iraq are to obscure any evidence of progress, and to escalate the costs of securing the new Iraq. The terrorist campaign is designed to lend support to those American voices that demand that we pull out our troops.

An arbitrary deadline for withdrawal would simply encourage the terrorists to bide their time, until they no longer face US troops. It would demoralize and probably alienate our allies, both in Iraq and beyond; it would embolden our enemies; and it would provide further incentives for the killing of Americans and other freedom-loving people in the interest of accelerating our surrender.

What Needs to Be Done

1. Win in Iraq.
  • Maintain military priorities and current troop strength to: deny the insurgents safe-haven and isolate the insurgents from the surrounding population.


  • Be a reliable ally. Make no further concessions to Baathists or other insurgents, and restore the confidence of the Iraqi people in the US commitment to their security and freedom. Reject any timetable or deadline for US forces to withdraw, in favor of a jointly developed goal-driven transition plan.


  • Develop the Iraqi Security Forces. By the fall of 2006, the Iraqi Army, National Guard, police, and other security forces will number 250,000 courageous men and women. These forces need: training in military skills, training in professional ethics and civilian relations, armored fighting vehicles, artillery and mortars, helicopters, communications, as well as logistics and maintenance capabilities.
2. Stay on the Offensive. We need to be mindful that, if we fail to keep our enemies off balance and on the run, we risk having to fight them some day within our national borders. If non-military strategies are insufficient, military options are called for.

3. Transform the Military. Maintain the armed forces we need today - and prepare for the needs of tomorrow:
  • Meet the costs associated with the war effort.


  • Ensure that we sustain our armed forces' technological edge.


  • Continue to field the most professional and best-trained forces in the world.


  • Maintain the ability to project power rapidly and globally. Toward this end, defense spending should be increased: to 4% of GDP in Fiscal Year 2006, 4.5% in Fiscal Year 2007, and 5% in Fiscal Year 2008.
4. Target the leaders of terrorist organizations. To do this, we need to create dedicated combined-arms units, equipped with:
  • elite conventional ground combat elements
  • dedicated intelligence assets


  • unmanned aerial vehicles


  • mobility capabilities
5. Fashion new alliances. The United States must aggressively pursue the creation of new alliances designed to support the long-term global war on terrorism, including:
  • Arrangements that are less formal than the NATO model, yet more durable than the ad hoc coalitions created to support operations in Afghanistan and Iraq


  • Long-term relationships that will support intelligence-sharing, training, and multinational operations
5. Recognize the limits of diplomacy. In general, it is surely better to discuss differences than to fight over them. However, when the real choice is between fighting a weak enemy today or a stronger enemy tomorrow, the diplomatic process may be a dangerous illusion.

6. Provide quality intelligence. To do this, critical changes must be made:
  • Encourage more risk-taking and competitive analysis. Eliminate pressures on analysts to produce conforming reports.


  • Make personnel changes. Careerists should be replaced with professionals capable of thinking outside the box - in both the CIA and DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency).


  • Bring intelligence professionalism into the State Department.


  • Liberate US intelligence collection. Bureaucratic problems inhibit our ability to gather crucial information and to transmit it quickly to policy-makers or to commanders in the field.


  • Undo recent detrimental "reforms." Recent changes created an additional, dysfunctional layer of bureaucracy - the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) whose personnel decisions and organizational demands have exacerbated problems within the community, not alleviated them.
Contributors: Major General Paul Vallely USA (Ret.), Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney USAF (Ret.) and Dr. Dan Goure and Dr. Michael Rubin

Energy Security

The Problem
As a practical matter, the United States is financing both sides of the global conflict. The spike in oil prices since 2001 costs the United States an extra $200 billion per year - much of it going to regimes that support terrorist groups and ideologies.

A jihadist website hails this development:

"The killing of 10 American soldiers is nothing compared to the impact of the rise in oil prices on America and the disruption that it causes in the international economy."

Where the money goes: Saudi Arabia uses its petrodollars, garnered from this country and elsewhere, to build its Islamist infrastructure - including: building and operating Wahhabi "Islamic centers" and schools; recruiting students, imprisoned convicts and military personnel; and, not least, funding terror organizations.

The same is true, to a lesser extent of other Islamofascist state-sponsors of terror. For example, Iran's oil revenues support its Shiite version of Islamism and underwrite some of the world's most dangerous terrorist organizations, including Hezbollah.

It is reckless for the United States to allow oil to remain a strategic commodity - that is, a product whose disruption can hold our economy hostage and jeopardize our national security - especially when many of the suppliers of that commodity are determined to do us harm.
What Needs to Be Done

We must reduce the strategic importance of oil in the global economy, to be interchange-able with other energy resources. Today, the transportation sector accounts for two-thirds of oil consumption.

The Set America Free Coalition presents a blueprint for transforming the US transportation sector to halve US oil consumption by 2025 by promoting non-petroleum, next-generation fuels - and vehicles designed to use them

1. Create Fuel Choice: When it comes to filling the fuel tank, American consumers have no real choice. And if petroleum supplies are ever disrupted, we have no fallback option.

Vehicles: All new cars should be flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs), designed to run on gasoline or alcohol-based fuels (ethanol and methanol) or a combination.

Fuels:

  • Ethanol (grain alcohol) can be produced domestically from fermented agricultural products, including corn. Feedstocks other than corn can be converted to ethanol, without the need for substantial government subsidy. Current research is developing processes to convert "cellulosic biomass" (from grasses) into ethanol.


  • Processes already exist to produce ethanol from sugar cane - currently used extensively in Brazil. By encouraging low-cost sugar cane producers to increase their output and become major fuel suppliers, we could reduce our reliance on oil from unstable or hostile sources while greatly enhancing the US posture in the Western Hemisphere.


  • Methanol (wood alcohol). Methanol is produced mostly from natural gas. Greatly expanded domestic production can be achieved, however, by producing methanol from other materials. Coal which we have in abundance can also be converted into clean liquid fuels (methanol can be commercially produced for fifty cents a gallon; the proven Fisher Tropsch technology produces diesel and jet fuel from coal).
2. Electrify transportation. "Hybrid" vehicles combine a traditional gasoline-burning internal combustion engine with a battery-powered electric motor, to improve gas mileage. Increasing fuel choice calls for taking hybrids one step further: Plug-in hybrids.
  • Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) look and perform much like regular hybrid cars, but they can be charged to run on electricity by plugging into an ordinary 120-volt outlet - up to 60 miles per charge.


  • PHEVs can reach fuel economy levels of 100 miles per gallon of gasoline consumed.


  • Moreover, a plug-in vehicle designed to use alternative fuels (say, 80% alcohol and 20% gasoline) might achieve fuel economy as high as 500 miles per gallon of gasoline.


  • The administration and Congress should encourage the purchase of plug-in hybrid vehicles, through rebates and tax credits to buyers.

3. Stretch a gallon still further. In the last three decades, the American economy has grown nearly five times faster than energy use - proof that conservation can go hand-in-hand with increases in productivity. Encouraging conservation must be a central ingredient in our War Footing strategy.

Individual initiatives. The most immediate measures to improve the efficiency of America's automobile fleet are in the hands of individual motorists:
  • properly inflating tires


  • tuning the engine


  • maintaining air filters


  • removing excess weight from the trunk


  • driving at a steady pace


  • consolidating trips


  • choosing to take the "broadband highway" to work, using the Internet to telecommute from a home office


  • Better materials. Reducing the weight and drag of a vehicle need not require reducing its size or safety, but it can greatly increase gas mileage. Cars made from advanced composites and next-generation steels can roughly halve fuel consumption without compromising size, safety, performance, or cost effectiveness.


  • Modern diesels. Hybrid diesel engines can combine the benefits of both technologies to reach even higher efficiency gains.


  • New technologies are available to utilize non-fossil sources (including waste materials) for diesel production.


  • An innovative biodiesel fuel can be commercially produced from soybeans and other vegetable oils.
Contributors: Dr. Gal Luft and Anne Korin

Divest Terror

The Problem

The states that support terrorist organizations benefit from other Free World sources of funding besides the sale of oil.

Perhaps the most important of these involves huge sums our enemies garner from unwitting American investors. A number of publicly traded enterprises that partner with terrorist-sponsoring regimes raise funds in US capital markets.

A study released in August 2004 by the Center for Security Policy (http://www.divestterror.org/) examined an illustrative subset of this problem - the holdings of America's top 100 public pension funds. This study revealed that:

On average, America's leading public pension systems - representing firefighters, police officers, military personnel and veterans and other government employees - invest between 15% and 23% of their portfolio in companies that do business with state-sponsors of terror.Most public pension systems and university endowments are unable to quantify their resulting exposure to what the Securities and Exchange Commission calls "Global Security Risk."

Few of these funds have taken any steps to inform their beneficiaries about such exposure, let alone taken steps to reduce it by divesting the stocks of companies that partner with America's enemies or through other means.

The Center for Security Policy's study showed that the American pension funds examined had approximately $188 billion invested in companies that partner with terrorist-sponsoring regimes. Of that amount, roughly $73 billion was actually invested in the countries in question. Since money is fungible, it is reasonable to conclude that at least some of these staggering amounts are being used to underwrite terror, ballistic missile, weapons of mass destruction or other threatening activities.

What Needs to Be Done
Individual Americans can spearhead a divestment initiative, to cut the flow of funds to state-sponsors of terror.

1. Organize to reach state officials
  • State and local public pension funds should be required by law to divest the stock of any company that does business in terrorist-sponsoring nations.


  • Send letters to the governor, state treasurer, leading state senators, and representatives or assemblymen.


  • Sample letters can be downloaded from http://www.divestterror.org/.
2. Create a buzz. Send an e-mail to family, friends, neighbors, congregation leaders and members, and business associates to educate them about this issue.

3. Engage the media. Bring this issue to public awareness through local, community, and state media: newspapers, talk radio, and television.

4. Don't take 'No' for an answer.
  • Set clear markers and timetables for action.


  • Ensure that the media are aware of any commitments that are made - and whether they are met.
Contributor: Christopher Holton

Equip the Homefront

The Problem

The war on the homefront requires America to combat individual terrorists and their organizations that seek to operate within our own borders. Until 9/11, we generally adopted a conventional policing approach to this threat - prosecuting terrorists as criminals, usually after they had attacked.

This approach actually endangers the public:

  • Armed enemies who would be recognized as a deadly threat on the battlefield are by definition under our system of justice presumed innocent in the courtroom.


  • The information that is put into the public record in the course of prosecuting such individuals may be extremely sensitive. Its disclosure could compromise or otherwise harm military and intelligence secrets or operations.

Mission Impossible: Self-inflicted impediments to a secure homeland

Matters were made worse by the "Wall" constructed between intelligence and prosecutorial agencies, prohibiting the sharing of information. For example, a few weeks before the 9/11 attacks, FBI headquarters refused to allow exchanges of information between its criminal and intelligence divisions in the attempt to locate two suspected terrorists. These two known suspects, Khalid al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, were thus afforded the freedom of movement that allowed them to hijack Flight 77 and fly it into the Pentagon.

Political correctness is causing government officials to discourage law enforcement agencies from using standard screening techniques to prioritize the allocation of scarce resources. As a result of inhibitions about "profiling," the job of protecting us is being made more difficult.

Similar sensitivities have impeded the public from being mobilized to help monitor threats to America's communities and infrastructure - a role whose importance was underscored by the attacks on London's transportation system in August 2005.

Most US police departments lack the specialized training they need to play a constructive role in protecting the American homeland against terrorist actors. While those of New York City and Los Angeles have begun to make preventing terrorist attacks a core policing function, most remain ill-equipped or -prepared to do so.

We are also not utilizing the single most effective tool for training our community leaders and other senior officials to contend with crisis scenarios. The on-the-job training in evidence during and after Hurricane Katrina was a powerful reminder that in disasters -whether manmade or natural - the cost of unready leadership can be the otherwise avoidable loss of life and destruction of property.

What Needs To Be Done

The possibility that the home front may once again be, as it was on September 11, 2001, on the front lines of the War for the Free World requires that we take a number of mutually reinforcing steps. These include:

1. Make the Patriot Act permanent. The Patriot Act as a whole infringes only modestly on our civil liberties and only to the extent absolutely necessary. We need to keep in mind that, if these precautions should fail to prevent some further terrorist attack, we are likely to see impassioned demands for greater security measures, at the expense of our freedoms. We need to make sure the Patriot Act remains in place and effective.

2. Allow appropriate use of "profiling." Not every terrorist will fit the profile. But to deny police the ability to take such straightforward identifying information into account - and, in so doing, to waste precious resources by focusing attention on people unlikely to be terrorists - amounts to inviting attack.

3. Maintain prohibitions on "material support" to terror. Any assistance that strengthens a terror organization also makes it more efficient at the brutal business of killing. This is the end result of contributions that enhance its overall resources and its attractiveness to potential recruits. What is more, terrorism cannot be marginalized and eradicated if those who engage in it are legitimized. A legal regime that allows terror organizations to flourish - to masquerade as mere political entities that happen to be armed - is self-defeating. Our enemies will be far more formidable if they are afforded a supporting infrastructure and the latitude to operate inside the United States.

4. Maximize the counter-terror effectiveness of America's police forces.

Develop robust intelligence and analytical capabilities.

Educate officers regarding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist tactics.

Participate in local Joint Terrorism Task Forces.

Foster programs to educate and engage the public.

Facilitate cooperation and sharing of resources across jurisdictional lines (for example, state, local, and, where appropriate, tribal). Involve, where appropriate, the private sector, which has massive experience in establishing cooperative business relationships.

5. Institute a "national Neighborhood Watch." Local law enforcement has vast experience in developing and effectively using Neighborhood Watch programs. To help put our country on the needed War Footing, we must now harness this capacity by networking these groups into a national counterpart effort to fight both crime and terror. This will require attuning citizens to the threat and informing them as to how they can take action.

6. Prepare our leaders - both in and outside of government - with specialized training in emergency response.

Urge community leaders to get simulation-based training. Programs that build decision-making and leadership skills should include "curve balls," simulating the unpredictable demands typical of real crises. Leaders should be encouraged to train together as a team, including representatives of government and businesses who must work together in a crisis.

Create a network to share information with neighbors. A shared roster can identify those with special skills or special needs, and provide emergency contact information.

Encourage community leaders to discuss emergency preparedness and training.

Contributors: Andrew McCarthy, Tim Connors and Mark Chussil

The EMP Threat

The Problem

A massive current of EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) could be unleashed with catastrophic effect on the United States if a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the earth's atmosphere. The energy of this pulse would interact with the Earth's magnetic field, affecting - and possibly destroying - every piece of unshielded electronic gear and power grids in line-of-sight of the detonation, all at the speed of light. What is more, the higher the altitude of the weapon's detonation, the larger the affected area would be. At a height of 300 miles, the entire continental United States would be exposed to EMP attack, along with parts of Canada and Mexico.

As a result, America could be transformed from a 21st Century superpower into a pre-industrial society almost instantaneously.

This sounds unbelievable. But a blue-ribbon commission created by Congress confirmed this danger in a report submitted in August 2004. Thanks to the almost unimaginable power of an EMP wave unleashed by a properly configured nuclear weapon - approximately a million times as strong as the most powerful radio signals on earth - the devastation caused could make the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina look modest by comparison.

Given the magnitude of the danger it is astonishing that EMP is hardly ever mentioned when threats to this country from Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are discussed. This might be considered the ultimate WMD - yet practically the only people aware of its potential for harm are our enemies.

In fact, the congressionally chartered commission discovered that knowledge about EMP is widespread in such places as: China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, North Korea, Pakistan, and Russia. Several of these nations, and perhaps terrorists that they sponsor, could launch a nuclear-capable ballistic missile from a ship - the sort of attack that poses an especially grave threat to the United States.

What Needs To Be Done

EMP attack poses a clear and present danger to our national security, our technological society, and our democratic and cosmopolitan way of life. The EMP Threat Commission has presented a blueprint for protecting both US military forces and the United States homeland from EMP attack.

The Commission's plan includes three focused efforts.

1. Deter EMP attacks. Make it difficult and dangerous to acquire the materials to make nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. This will require:

  • vastly improved intelligence


  • the capacity to perform clandestine operations, throughout the world


  • assured means of retaliation in the event of attack

2. Defeat EMP attacks.

Protect critical military capabilities and civilian infrastructure from EMP effects. We must re-build our neglected scientific and technical base for conducting EMP tests of military and civilian equipment.

Deploy a comprehensive defense against ballistic missile delivery systems.We know that a catastrophic EMP attack can be mounted only by putting a nuclear weapon into space over the United States - using a ballistic missile.

Enhance the capability of existing defenses. We need widely to deploy anti-missile defenses on the Navy's fleet of more than sixty AEGIS air defense ships.

3. Reduce our vulnerability to EMP attacks. We must prepare for the consequences of an EMP attack, in the event that deterrence and protection fail. The EMP Commission plan provides detailed recommendations for protecting the nation's critical infrastructures, in four key areas:
  • Electric power grid


  • Telecommunications


  • Transportation


  • Food and Water
This will require close collaboration between government at all levels and the private sector. We must also ensure that we have, on-hand and properly protected, the equipment and parts needed to repair EMP-damaged systems.

4. Extend the life of the EMP Commission for four years. The Commission's report has so far received little serious attention - from the White House, the Department of Homeland Security, the Congress, or the media. With a renewed mandate and public and official support, the Commission can play a vital role in overseeing the implementation of the required corrective actions.

Related Links

See what the private sector is doing to reduce our vulnerability at: http://www.stop-emp.com/.

View video about the EMP threat: Windows Media

Contributors: Reps. Curt Weldon and Roscoe Bartlett

Secure Our Borders

The Problem

Every year, about one million people are caught attempting to enter the United States illegally - just a fraction of the number who actually succeed. A growing percentage of these illegal immigrants are from countries that sponsor terror.

There are only 10,700 Border Patrol agents, tasked to guard 7,500 miles of land borders - 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The US government system for monitoring legal border crossings currently records only 22% of foreign visitors as they enter the country - and an even smaller fraction of those departing the country.

Applications for Green Cards, citizenship, work permits, and change of status are routinely processed by adjudicators, many of whom have no access to database records that could indicate whether the applicant might be a known serial killer or a terrorist.

But numbers alone tell only part of the story. The "Tri-Border" area of South America - where Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil meet - is a lawless haven for money-laundering, arms and drug trafficking, counterfeiting, document falsification, and piracy - illicit activities that generate billions of dollars annually. This region also hosts a large community of Arab and Muslim expatriates, including nationals of countries known to sponsor terrorism.

The Tri-Border region is a natural terrorist habitat, affording these operators safe haven, sources of financing, access to illegal weapons, easy movement and concealment, and a sympathetic host population. Finally, ease of movement through Mexico gives ready access to our border.

What Needs To Be Done

Opinion polling consistently shows that the majority of Americans oppose illegal immigration and want it stopped - across all demographic and political groups. Still, the necessary political "critical mass" has not yet been achieved.

1. Take "the Pledge." The "Secure America" Pledge is a set of ten principles that every politician in America should be asked to sign.

2. Establish Secure Borders.

Augment the Border Patrol. The fastest approach would be to bring in military personnel to augment the Border Patrol by helping to locate illegal entrants, and then monitor or detain them.
'We Need a Fence.' High-tech security fences would make it vastly more difficult for illegal immigrants to transit our land borders.

Secure the Mexican border first.

There is evidence that would-be Islamist terrorists have targeted known smuggling operations across our southern frontier as a means of gaining entry into the United States.

The so-called "Tri-Border" area of South America - the area where Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil meet - has become a haven for illicit activities that generate billions of dollars annually.
Ease of movement to and through Mexico gives such groups ready access to our southern border.

Do not neglect Canada. According to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), "With the possible exception of the United States, there are more international terrorist organizations active in Canada than anywhere in the world." Canada's permissive asylum and refugee policies serve as the primary magnet for these terrorist groups and their supporters. Consequently, America must make a concerted effort to help the Canadian authorities:


  • identify and neutralize such operations across the border


  • undertake systemic reform of its asylum policies


  • take all practicable steps to monitor and secure our northern frontier

3. Secure the Interior

Establish worksite enforcement. As long as jobs are easily available, some illegal immigration will continue, regardless of what barriers or other measures are put into place to impede such flows.

The 'Basic Pilot.' The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) required the creation of several pilot programs ? including the Basic Pilot, which verifies social security number, name, and date of birth. Congress must make employers' use of the Basic Pilot program mandatory to level the playing field for employers.

Institute an effective, automated entry/exit system. The "United States Visitor Immigration Status Indicator Technology" (US-VISIT) is a step toward addressing the need for computerized entry records. The system fingerprints and photographs arriving aliens and verifies that their biometric data matches the biometric data stored on their visas.

US-VISIT must be used to record the entry into and the departure from the United States of "every alien." That means every non-citizen - not just every visitor or every non-Canadian or non-Mexican visitor - must be screened before he or she is admitted into the country. The departure of every non-citizen should be similarly confirmed.

Augment Immigration and Customs Enforcement. We can readily augment the manpower available for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, by utilizing other appropriate law enforcement personnel and assets. o 650,000 state and local law enforcement officers may come into contact with illegal aliens and other criminal aliens every day in the course of their duties.
All law enforcement officers have the inherent authority to enforce federal immigration laws, just as they enforce other federal laws.

Make federal data available to other law enforcement personnel. Data on illegal and criminal aliens must be made available to authorized personnel via the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database.

4. Increase Visa Vigilance

Perform rigorous security checks before issuing visas. The visa process includes fingerprints, photographs, and extensive background checks on all applicants, designed to reveal whether an applicant has a criminal record or known terrorist connections, or otherwise presents a threat to national security. These data searches are our best line of defense against the next attack on our homeland.

Congress must impress upon both the State Department and USCIS that visa-related background checks are integral to the security of the country.

Adjudicators processing applications for Green Cards, citizenship, work permits, and change of status must have access to data bases required to check the applicant's background. This is, obviously, especially true in cases where the applicants have been identified as potentially dangerous.

Stop the Visa Lottery from being a game of Russian Roulette with terrorists. The "visa lottery" gives away 50,000 visas each year through a random drawing. A number of lottery winners have been involved in terrorism in the United States.

Exclude hateful, violent ideologues. In 1990, Congress rashly dropped ideological grounds as a basis for either excluding visa applicants or deporting aliens once here. In the wake of attacks on its soil, Great Britain has undertaken a series of measures aimed at preventing Islamofascist operatives and front groups from further exploiting its traditions of religious tolerance and its lax immigration policies. The United States must now do likewise, drawing a line between legitimate religious activities and terrorist indoctrination avowing our destruction.

Contributors: Rosemary Jenks, Jim Staudenraus, Amanda Bowman and Colleen Gilbert

Step Eight: Wage Political Warfare

The Problem

Thus far in the War for the Free World, the United States has been unilaterally disarmed in one of the most effective forms of warfare against ideologically driven foes: Political warfare. While we wage it against each other incessantly - Republicans against Democrats, liberals against conservatives, etc. - we have largely failed to use political warfare against our enemies, or even to organize ourselves to do so.

The closest we come to political warfare has tended to be the use of so-called "public diplomacy" - disseminating America's message through various media. Even in this area, we have been hampered by inadequate resources, direction and strategy. For example, we have tended to focus on goals that are vague or irrelevant. Currently, the underlying theme of our public diplomacy is, "Why do they hate us?" - when it ought to be, "What is wrong with them?"
American public diplomacy was seriously impaired, moreover, by the loss of an independent communications office, when during the Clinton Administration the US Information Agency (USIA) was folded into the State Department (See STEP 10: Wield Effective Diplomacy) .

But even effective public diplomacy falls far short of what is needed: a strategically designed, fully implemented campaign of political warfare. The "warfare" side of communications is legitimately a Pentagon function and must not be assigned to our diplomats.

The focus of such a campaign would be to de-legitimize Islamist extremism in the eyes of Muslims. While violent Islamism presents a serious problem for the West, it is a vastly greater problem for the Muslim community.

Winning a political war is, in the end, a question of credibility. When nations stand firm for what they claim to believe in, they are perceived as credible. When they appear unwilling to stand firm - regardless of stirring rhetoric - they become vulnerable to their enemies' more decisive use of political warfare.

What Needs To Be Done

The United States needs to take a number of steps, urgently, to inaugurate a program of political warfare.

1. Stop evading the issue. No government strategy to date for the so-called "War on Terror" has included political warfare as an element of the American arsenal.

2. Devise, staff up and begin executing a political warfare strategy. Countering the Islamofascist ideology must be its principal focus.

3. De-legitimize Islamist extremism in the eyes of Muslims, and especially its potential supporters. We need to show that, while violent Islamism is certainly a problem for us in the West, it is a vastly greater problem for the Muslim community.

Challenge the Islamists on religious grounds. Many Muslim leaders teach the message of civility and tolerance, and their voices need to be amplified.

Expose economic disaster. There is ample evidence that Islamism, and its imposition of Shari'a law, results in crippling limitations to economic development, and thus to the socio-economic well-being of Muslims.

Celebrate educational opportunity. Radical Islam has a strongly negative effect on educational standards. Any serious effort at political warfare must emphasize the huge costs to societies that do not fully utilize the talents of half of their population.

Emphasize progress. Shari'a-ruled countries exhibit a strong bias against science and technology education, to the huge detriment of their economic development. A successful political warfare strategy must highlight this key failure by documenting the numerous religious prohibitions and restrictions on scientific and technological pursuit imposed by Islamist ideology.

Enshrine human rights. The regular and officially-sanctioned abuse of basic human rights in Shari'a-dominated countries is yet another glaring Islamist misdeed that needs to be exposed.
Use legislative vehicles for political warfare. Congress has an important role to play. Under the leadership of the remarkable Senator Henry M. Jackson, the legislative branch wielded political weaponry to decisive effect in delegitimizing totalitarian Soviet Communism. Sanctions legislation and assistance to democratic opposition movements can serve a similar purpose in the War for the Free World.

4. Use our strengths. The good news is that Americans are among the world's experts at political warfare. The bad news is that we mainly use it against each other: after all, the strategies and tactics of any hard-fought election campaign are precisely the stuff of applied political warfare. The talent, creativity, ingenuity and, yes, ruthlessness of top-flight political campaign strategists of both parties should be mustered for the purpose of fighting our enemies and helping our friends - rather than fighting each other.

5. Invest in the instruments of political warfare, including public diplomacy. Public diplomacy, intended to influence perceptions, attitudes and actions abroad, must be viewed as a form of political warfare. An immediate and sweeping ramp-up of our international broadcasting capabilities is needed to provide high-quality programming to include:
  • Voice of America; "free radios"; new services like Radio Sawa and Al Hurra; and support for the extremely effective private sector broadcasts (for example, those beamed into Iran from Los Angeles and more innovative, sometimes covertly sponsored forms).


  • A range of formats (television, satellite, AM/FM and/or shortwave radio and the Internet).


  • Operating twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, where appropriate.


  • Serving every country currently or potentially under assault from Islamism.


  • The cost of such an ambitious undertaking - while appreciably greater than the stingy investment we are making in international communications today - pales by comparison with the costs of military warfare. The investment will be well repaid if helps us protect and expand the Free World against the Islamists and their friends, without resorting to further use of military force.

6. Use the Internet as a tool of political warfare. In particular, the power of creative web sites, webcasting and blogging should be aggressively exploited.

7. Strengthen the CIA clandestine services, and authorize and fund them for long-term strategic political warfare.

8. Grant the Department of Defense the primary responsibility for political warfare. Just as the State Department leads in public diplomacy, the "warfare" side of communications is legitimately a Pentagon function and must not be assigned to our diplomats.

9. Don't forget political warfare in non-Islamist areas. The US must combat adversarial political warfare wherever it arises, even in countries traditionally considered friendly.

10. Reinforce and strengthen our friends. By demonstrating that there are not only consequences for opposing us, but also real and tangible benefits from supporting us, we can maximize the chances of our success.

Winning a political war is, in the end, a question of credibility. When nations stand firm for what they claim to believe in, they are perceived as credible. When they appear unwilling to stand firm - regardless of their rhetoric - they are vulnerable to their enemies' more decisive use of political warfare. With the fate of the Free World hanging in the balance, we cannot be (or be perceived to be) weak and irresolute. Toward this end, we must wage political warfare effectively, convincingly, and decisively.

Contributors: Dr. Michael Waller and Alex Alexiev

Regional Initiatives

The Problem

This global conflict affects every region of the world - in ways that are both obvious and not so obvious. Consequently, Step 9 examines the challenges America faces in six fronts in the War for the Free World:

A. Turmoil in the Mideast and its Periphery

Iran. The oil-rich Islamofascist regime in Tehran is a threat to the United States, its people and vital interests in the region and elsewhere. The character of the ruling mullahocracy is not an accident: It derives from the fact that the political role of Iran's clerics directly contradicts the teachings of Shi'a Islam. This is why the regime's founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, created his version of the fascistic Islamist ideology, which Iran then spread by means of terrorism.

Terrorism is in fact the regime's most successful undertaking:

  • Iran's war against America, begun nearly than three decades ago, is responsible for the deaths of over 1500 Americans - more than any other terrorist organization or sponsor prior to 9/11.


  • Iran is responsible for developing Hezbollah in Lebanon, as the most highly developed terrorist organization in the world.


  • Most ominously, Iran may be on track to acquire nuclear weapons in the near future. In light of the mullahs' stated intention to share nuclear technology with other Islamic countries, the threat posed by a hostile Iran represents a ticking time-bomb.
Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royal family is the primary supporter of the strain of Islamofascism known as Wahhabism. We cannot afford to assume that the United States and Saudi Arabia share a true alliance on issues of terrorism.

Much like the Soviet sponsors of global communism in the last century, the Saudis promote Islamism by providing:

  • funding


  • direction


  • intelligence


  • diplomatic cover
We must not be confused by the Saudi regime's relentless pursuit of its own home-grown Islamists, who are labeled "deviant elements." In fact, these terrorists' only "deviation" is their challenge to the ruling family.

Meanwhile, the government, royal family, clerics, businesses and "charities" of Saudi Arabia continue energetically spreading this intolerant fascistic doctrine. They remain blithely unconcerned about the violence generated by this toxic political ideology - as long as it occurs outside the borders of its own kingdom. Indeed, it would be scarcely as dangerous to America and other freedom-loving nations without Saudi state-sponsorship.

Pakistan. Formerly one of the success stories of the developing world, Pakistan under Islamofascism has been delivered to seemingly unending poverty and despair. The grim economic realities feed into an all-too-familiar death spiral, typical of Islamist societies:


  • Ideological indoctrination replaces education in Koranic madrassas (and in some formerly secular public schools, as well).


  • Students graduate ill-equipped for employment - other than jihad.


  • The economy continues to nose-dive, eliminating job opportunities that might compete with the terrorist recruiters.
Turkey. As in Pakistan, Turkey's traditionally secular educational system is being steadily supplanted by madrassa-style schools, whose only instruction is the Koran as interpreted by the Islamists.

Tens of thousands of these madrassa graduates hold government jobs, replacing experienced, secular staff.

Four thousand madrassa graduates have packed Turkey's secular courts, in effect transforming them into instruments of Shari'a religious law.

In 2006, over a million students are expected to graduate from these ideological schools.

Moreover, the government has managed to take control of the Turkish media by threatening to expropriate their operations. One conglomerate ally of the Islamists owns at least ninety percent of the nation's press outlets.

Israel. Israel is an asset, not a liability, in this War for the Free World, an island of democracy surrounded by varying shades of tyranny. At a time when we are trying not only to defend the Free World but to expand it, America's interests are best served by firmly aligning ourselves with the forces of freedom and democracy throughout the world.

The Islamists' ultimate enemy is the one nation most capable of thwarting their designs - the United States of America. Israel is seen as a creation of the West, a tool used by the United States to control the entire region, and hence referred to as the "Little Satan."

It would be disastrous for the United States to acquiesce in the dismantling of the Israeli outpost of the Free World. Doing so can only embolden the Islamists in their determination to destroy the "Great Satan."

Contributors: Alex Alexiev, Kenneth Timmerman, Dr. Michael Rubin and Caroline Glick

B. Africa: The Islamist Wedge

Sub-Saharan Africa is an extremely tempting target for the Islamist agenda. A Muslim population of about 250 million offers a massive base from which to draw support. Its natural resources are immense. And, because of the almost complete neglect of the region in Western security circles, the Islamists have been able to operate there in relative obscurity.
Porous borders, with easy trade in illicit arms, coupled with weak or corrupt political and financial institutions, create an ideal operating environment for Islamists.

Al Qaeda (along with other terrorist organizations) is believed to be using the notorious "blood diamond" trade - in Angola, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and the Congo - to finance its operations.

By funding radical mosques and madrassas, and indoctrinating African clerics, the Islamists are steadily eliminating the tolerant and moderate traditions of African Islam.

The most commonly employed tactic is to try to establish Shari'a law in a given region (most successfully in Nigeria), creating a separate legal system for Islamic communities. The opposition is portrayed as restricting "Muslim rights," and the Islamists emerge as champions of Islam - eclipsing the more moderate Muslims.

Of special concern are the ominous strategic ties that are developing between the radical African National Congress-led government in South Africa and Islamofascist Iran and Libya. For example, two prominent Islamist organizations in South Africa are funded by and responsive to Iranian intelligence: the radical group Qibla and its violent vigilante offshoot, People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (PAGAD). And Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi is forging a north-south axis from Tripoli to Cape Town aimed at dominating the African Union and the continent.

Contributors: Christopher Brown and David McCormack

C. Asia: On the Brink

The Islamofascist movement has found a potentially formidable supporter and ally in China - an alliance based solely on a shared enmity for the United States.

China's ambition is to displace the United States as the world's preeminent economic power and, if necessary, to defeat us militarily. As it prepares for military conflict, China is pursuing every avenue of strategic political warfare, including by cultivating close relations with:

  • Vladimir Putin's Russia


  • The imams of Iran


  • The Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia


  • The mullahs of Sudan


  • Hugo Chavez in Venezuela


  • The military junta in Burma


  • Kim Jong-Il's North Korea


  • Fidel Castro's Cuba
China's de facto alliance with the Islamists is designed to bleed and demoralize the US in advance of a future Sino-American conflict. Moreover, by offering cash, arms, and political protection to key targeted nations, China secures access to oil, natural gas, coal, and other fuels. Control of these energy resources can someday translate into significant strategic advantage relative to the US. Such deals also serve to prop up and strengthen despotic regimes.

At the same time, the Chinese government is also preparing for war, not only in Asia but globally as well.

China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) fosters instability across Southeast Asia by supporting military aggression, terrorism, and narcotics trafficking.

China is engaging in a massive high-technology and offensively oriented military build-up - particularly of its missile, naval and air forces.

Chinese military capabilities are being relentlessly enhanced by an ever-closer strategic partnership between Moscow and Beijing and by technology theft and espionage in the United States and other Western nations.

In 2005, Beijing and Moscow engaged in joint war games - in which their common enemy looked a lot like the US.

Contributors: Al Santoli and Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu (USA Ret.)

D. Latin America: the Re-emergence of Totalitarianism

Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, is Fidel Castro's most successful and most dangerous pupil. The under these two autocrats, the Venezuelan-Cuban partnership is posing a growing menace to the stability, tranquility and prosperity of the region and to American interests there.
An ex-paratrooper, Chavez was imprisoned for leading an unsuccessful coup against the democratically elected government of Venezuela. Released from prison, he ran successfully for President on a populist platform promoting property confiscation and obsessive anti-Americanism.

Venezuela, with the largest petroleum reserves in the hemisphere, supplies much of our imported oil. Unlike Castro, or even his Soviet sponsors, Chavez has an almost endless supply of cash to finance political parties, revolutionary activities, and terrorists.

The Chavez presidency is systematically installing a new despotism:

  • Venezuela's new constitution (approved by just thirty percent of the electorate) gives Chavez wide and effectively unchecked powers to tax and spend, seize private property, and limit freedom.


  • Chavez unconstitutionally declared a national emergency, suspending and finally sidelining the elected Congress.


  • Every element of Venezuela's political infrastructure has been politicized and cleared of potential dissidents (including: government departments, currency boards and banking structures, police forces, the educational system and independent labor unions).


  • Chavez stacked the courts with loyal judges and purged the military of anyone he thinks might oppose his orders.


  • His administration has imposed gun control, ensuring that only its supporters are armed.
It has also severely restricted freedom of speech, most recently by banning any public or private expression of opposition to the government. It is now a crime in Venezuela to criticize the president.

Only the Catholic Church, a steadfast opponent of the regime, remains outside the government's control - for now.

Under Chavez, Venezuela is funding militantly anti-US political movements across the hemisphere. For example, Chavez's government:

  • Provides funds, protection, and military support to the FARC narcoguerrillas of Colombia.


  • Helped overthrow Bolivia's elected, pro-American president, in 2003 and in 2005.


  • Finances political subversion in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay.


  • Provides Venezuelan identity papers to many hundreds of Islamist extremists, to allow them to enter the United States.


  • Outside of the hemisphere, Chavez has forged relationships with the Islamofascist network.


  • Chavez has signed treaties for "technological cooperation" (read, weapons transfers) with the terrorist regimes of Libya, Iran, and Syria.


  • Iran, Libya, and North Korea have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Venezuela.
Today, the United States finds itself increasingly isolated in the American hemisphere. While the governments of Communist China, Libya, and Iran are hailed as heroes and partners, America is routinely described as an "evil" nation with an imperialistic plan.

Contributors: Michael Waller and Thor Halvorssen

E. Russia's Emerging Autocracy

Vladimir Putin is resurrecting a system in which the Kremlin once again dominates all aspects of Russia's political and economic life.

The deputy chiefs of the Kremlin administration, Igor Sechin and Viktor Ivanov, are former KGB men.

Half of the members of the Security Council are former officers in the police, military, or FSB (the unreformed successor to the KGB).

Nearly 70 per cent of all senior regional officials are former officers.

Putin is recentralizing political control, in violation of the Russian constitution, by replacing previously independent, elected regional governors with handpicked cronies - who will ultimately install their own appointees as local officials (including mayors).

Control of the media proceeds apace. Putin has brought all national television and most important print organs under state control. Reportedly, 130 journalists have been murdered in Russia since 1991, making Russia one of the most dangerous countries in the world for journalists.

Internationally, Russian initiatives echo the hostility towards the United States of the Cold War era. For example, the Kremlin is aggressively deploying and selling advanced maneuvering and hypersonic ballistic-missile warheads - marketed explicitly as weapons designed to overcome America's nascent anti-missile defenses.

Putin personally presided over Bezopastnost-2004, reportedly the largest simulated nuclear attacks on the United States since 1982 when Leonid Brezhnev ruled the Kremlin, and is pressing ahead with the construction and fueling of a reactor at Bushehr that will likely help advance the Iranian arms program.

Russia is also abetting China's ambitions to challenge and, if necessary, to defeat America militarily.

Contributor: David Satter

F. Europe Comes Undone

Europe today is facing a political "perfect storm" - a combination of critical socio-economic and demographic challenges, a dramatic military decline, and an emerging Islamist presence.

The ambitious European project is today in shambles. As early as the mid-1990s, Europe was already falling behind the US in economic growth; the social market model has proved counter-productive to economic growth. Government expenditures reach as high as 50% of national income. Business is over-regulated. Labor unions inflate pay-scales, rendering companies and industries uncompetitive and contributing to huge unemployment. Excessive social-welfare benefits, sustained by exorbitant tax rates, reduce incentives for employment.

And the proposed EU constitution signals that Europe will probably see still more socialism - and less market.

Over the past ten years, Europe has experienced an annual deficit of over two million births below replacement levels; population is projected to decline by as much as 150 million by 2050, a decrease of one-third of today's population. Long before that, low fertility will result in an elder-skewed demographic that will undermine the pay-as-you-go welfare system and cripple European economic competitiveness.

Failed immigration and integration policies may present an even bigger political challenge, in light of the extensive radicalization of Europe's burgeoning Muslim population, currently between 15 and 20 million.

Islamofascism is fast becoming the dominant face of Islam in the EU. This profoundly anti-Western ideology, supported either directly or indirectly by Saudi sources, rejects such fundamental Western values as democracy, secularism, and human rights. If the trend continues, Western Europe will be seriously challenged to preserve its character as a modern, democratic, and secular polity.

Unless it can address these challenges effectively, the European Union is poised to become, in the coming decades, a strife-ridden, second-rate power, either unwilling or unable to help defend the Free World.

Contributor: Alex Alexiev


What Needs To Be Done

A. Defend and Foster Freedom in the Middle East and Its Periphery

Iran

Millions of Iranians are desperately crying out for secular government. We should heed their call and adopt a comprehensive strategy designed to help them bring down an Islamist regime that poses a mortal threat to them, and to us. The following are among the essential components of such a strategy:

  • Make freedom in Iran America's declared policy.


  • Do as Reagan did. We must seek to delegitimize the Tehran regime in every possible venue.


  • Pursue two tracks. The new policy would have both economic and political elements.


  • Develop intensive public diplomacy and strategic communications.


  • Confront Iran's nuclear threat.
Saudi Arabia

The Saudis must be made to understand that we can no longer tolerate their active support for our enemies. They must take concrete steps to curb the further spread of Islamofascism and, specifically, they must end their material role in underwriting and otherwise enabling it. If the Saudis fail to take such steps and persist in unacceptable behavior, the United States must be prepared to impose the following sanctions:

  • Reduce the status of bilateral diplomatic relations.


  • Place Saudi Arabia on the State Department list of state sponsors of terrorism.


  • Freeze Saudi assets in the United States.


  • Work with Shiites in the oil-rich eastern region who seek to break away from Saudi Arabia.


  • As a last resort, seize Saudi oil fields and other critical energy infrastructure.
The message should be clear. These are steps we do not wish to undertake. We are fully aware that the repercussions of any such sanctions could be traumatic for both nations - and the world beyond.

Pakistan

America's long-term security, as it relates to a nuclear-armed, Islamofascist-dominated Pakistan, cannot be based solely on a relationship with that country's current President. Several steps need to be taken while the opportunity exists to work with Gen. Musharraf:

  • Cut off Saudi funding for Islamist operations in Pakistan, as an essential first step.


  • Support a serious effort by Gen. Musharraf to rebuild - outside of the government's control - Pakistan's former civil and democratic society.


  • Press for a government-wide effort to purge itself of Islamists.
In Pakistan as elsewhere, a proper US political warfare strategy must be designed and implemented to counter the domestic appeal of the Islamist message (STEP 8: Wage Political Warfare).

Turkey

As elsewhere in the Mideast and its periphery, the United States must help those moderate Muslims and others in Turkey who are bravely resisting the Islamists and their policies of political repression, religious intolerance and economic impoverishment.

Turkey would also benefit, in the long run, from a cut-off of the "green money" and other subversive funding from Saudi Islamists.

Turks would be better able to resist the Islamofascist onslaught if the United States begins to wage effective political warfare on behalf of freedom, in Turkey and in the region.

The West, however, has one other, extraordinary opportunity to have an impact on Turkey's future course: Millions of Turks want to become part of the European Union, recognizing that membership will open up enormous economic and other opportunities. The Europeans should make it clear that Erdogan's Islamist takeover makes Turkey's EU bid a non-starter. Such a message could prove decisive in pulling Turkey back from the abyss and restoring to the Free World a valued ally.

Israel

As a relatively young, but highly advanced state, Israel is an example of what is possible in the region for a free and democratic nation. Unless and until Iraq provides an Arab example, Israel remains the only nation in the Middle East that demonstrates what people can do if afforded political and economic freedom.

Thanks to Israel's geographic location and experience, it is in a unique position to provide both a physical platform for American operations and - one of the most important resources for this war - human intelligence.

Israel is an island of democracy surrounded by varying shades of tyranny. At a time when we are trying not only to defend the Free World but to expand it, America's interests are best served by firmly aligning ourselves with the forces of freedom and democracy throughout the world, including in Israel.

B. Counter the Islamofascists and their Friends in Africa

The US policy posture in Africa today is reminiscent of the British policy of the mid-19th Century that came to be known as "Masterful Inactivity" - a hands-off attitude that, in the end, facilitated Russia's conquest of almost all of Central Asia. For us to persist in such a posture today would be bad news not only for our own interests in the continent, but also for the peoples and nations of Africa. We must, instead, take the following sorts of measures:

Support the Trans-Sahara Counter-Terrorism Initiative (TSCTI). Islamist Libya, however, should not be allowed to participate.

Develop public diplomacy as part of a tailored political warfare strategy against the Islamofascists and their allies in Africa.

Redirect official development assistance funds to underwrite TSCTI and public diplomacy.
State-to-state diplomacy also provides an avenue to combat the Islamist phenomenon. Efforts must focus on choking radical Islam of its authority and popularity by, among other things, applying pressure to states outside of Africa - most especially, Saudi Arabia - that export Islamism to the region.

Engage the battle. More than anything else, the United States and its people must recognize that we have long been targets in ideological wars for the hearts and minds of Africans. This will require placing our efforts in Africa on a true War Footing.

C. Thwart China's Ambitions for Hegemony in Asia and Beyond

In order to mitigate the danger posed by Communist China and, with luck, to help the Chinese people free themselves from the odious regime in Beijing, the following initiatives must be adopted:

1. Encourage Change in China

We must use political warfare techniques to mitigate the danger posed by the government of China. Fortunately, there may be an opportunity in China today for a successful political transformation strategy.

Support Taiwan. The best model for the sort of change that would make a real difference for the Chinese people, and for the rest of us, is the Chinese democracy on Taiwan.

We should try to identify, encourage and strengthen pro-freedom and democratic groups within China. That may mean, as it did during the Cold War, publicly recognizing those who have had the courage to resist the regime and who have been punished for it - dissidents, political activists, journalists, scientists, etc. We must find ways of engaging in subtle but effective "strategic communications" with dissidents and their potential supporters.

Along with Japan and South Korea. we should begin developing a strategy for the end of the Kim Jong-il regime in North Korea, which could come about suddenly and far sooner than many "experts" predict.

2. Deter China

In conjunction with its political warfare strategy, the United States is going to have to work hard - particularly with the other demands on its military forces at the moment - to establish a more formidable forward presence for the Free World in East Asia. Components of such a posture should include the following:

  • Station more military assets (ships, fighter aircraft, bombers, logistical units, etc.) in or rotate them through Guam, Japan, Singapore and other friendly nations.


  • Put China on notice that the inevitable result of its continuing aggressive behavior and military build-up will be to drive other states in the region to acquire their own nuclear deterrent capability.


  • Encourage Taiwan to provide more fully for its own defense, notably by increasing its spending as a percentage of GNP and initiating immediately the long-overdue modernization of its armed forces (including the purchase of weapon systems offered by President Bush in 2001).


  • Increase bilateral military-to-military ties with Taiwan.


  • Foster three-way defense relationships and exercises with two of the Free World's most important outposts in the region - Japan and Taiwan.


  • Develop and exercise contingency plans for implementing President Bush's commitment to defend Taiwan, including deploying sea-based missile defenses.


  • Encourage other democratic regional powers (notably, South Korea and India), to join us in our commitment to prevent a successful attack on Taiwan.
3. Cultivate India

We must build on the efforts made to date by the Bush administration in developing our mutual interest in countering the growth of Chinese power in Asia. At the same time, care needs to be exercised about compromising US security interests.

4. Utilize America's Economic Leverage

Components of such a strategy might include the following:

  • Americans should approach their state pension systems and other fund managers to insist that their hard-earned retirement and other investment dollars not be used to purchase the stock of large Chinese state-owned enterprises.


  • US investors should divest immediately their equity holdings of any publicly-traded Chinese companies doing business in genocide-ridden Sudan and terrorist-sponsoring Iran.


  • Businesses in the US should be encouraged to diversify their international investments and overseas commercial partnerships with Indian and South East Asian entrepreneurs, rather than deal largely - still less, exclusively - with China.


  • China's activities in Central and South America, the Middle East, and Africa must be more closely monitored and US policies crafted to publicize and challenge them.


  • The US Congress must become more actively involved in shaping US-China policy, particularly in the areas of trade, acquisitions in our country, the defense of Taiwan, meaningful sanctions for proliferation abuses, and championing human liberties and the free flow of information.
The United States hardly needs a new enemy at this point. It is a mistake, however, to think that we can neutralize an emerging adversary by choosing to overlook it. We will not avoid a military conflict with Communist China simply by hoping that it will not occur - or, worse yet, by thinking that we can appease the PRC.

D. Counteract the Reemergence of Totalitarianism in Latin America

American leadership must expose Hugo Chavez and his agenda as a threat to the Free World. We must assist those inside Venezuela and Cuba who are on the frontlines in opposing the Chavez -Castro axis, and we must assist the resistance elements in countries threatened by Chavismo before it is too late, by implementing the following steps.

1. Design and implement a political warfare strategy to empower the Venezuelan people and to undermine the Chavez government. Elements of the needed political warfare strategy include the following:

  • Sustain and protect the democratic and human rights movement in Venezuela that provides a viable alternative to the dictator.


  • Make a far more concerted effort to help dissidents who have had the courage to stand up to Chsvez and Castro.


  • Expose Chavez's efforts to silence his opposition, by calling attention to such abuses as the false arrest of the movement's leaders.
2. Strengthen the Organization of American States (OAS).

Invoke the Organization of American States' Democratic Charter, violated by the Chavez regime on dozens of occasions, to demonstrate support for the cause of anti-Chavez Venezuelans, and to pressure other freedom-loving nations to address the illegitimacy of Chavez's rule.

3. Engage in public diplomacy in the region. We need to reconstitute the necessary communication tools for building relationships with the publics in countries where the US still has friends - and where it might someday need them.

4. Help stop Islamist infiltration. Islamist terrorists are now finding safe haven, logistical support (including, false Venezuelan identity papers) and other assistance from the Chavez regime. We need to work with others in the region - especially non-Muslim Arabs and non-Islamist Muslims - to ferret out and neutralize this threat.

5. Give the native peoples of Latin America an alternative to Chavismo. The only real answer to the poverty exploited by ideologues like Hugo Chavez is the creation of wealth. The Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) provides a model for transforming the lives and conditions of millions of Andean peoples in the Western hemisphere.

6. Individual Americans can help by becoming part of the solution. Individual Americans can play a direct role in winning the War for the Free World against Hugo Chavez and his allies, through the following steps.

Make sure your elected officials do their job.

Don't fund terrorism. The Venezuelan regime owns Citgo Petroleum Corporation. Every time an American fills his tank with Citgo gasoline, he hands cash to Chavez.

Reach out to dissidents via the Internet. Independent blog sites, such as http://www.vcrisis.com/, are crucial to finding out what is happening and how best to help.

Support resistance to the regime. To find out more about how you can help, contact the US-based Atlas Foundation for Economic Research, which is devoted to assisting think-tanks throughout the world. (http://www.atlasusa.org/) for a full directory of the freedom-based movement in Latin America. Other useful sites include:

Pressure the media.

The media has, by and large, given Chavismo a free pass. Hugo Chavez's scandalous record is public and must be widely and relentlessly exposed.

Latin America must be considered one of the most important fronts in the War for the Free World. What happens there can affect us directly and materially - whether by disrupting our markets or oil supplies, through socially disruptive, illegal migration flows, or through negative strategic developments. We cannot hope to win this war unless we help secure our neighbors against the combined ideological assaults of a homegrown Chavismo and imported Islamofascism.

E. Challenge Russia's Emerging Autocracy

Moscow and Washington today have greater grounds for common cause than at any time since World War II. Specifically, both have much to fear from Iranian and other forms of Isalmofascism, as well as from the burgeoning ambitions of Communist China.

As long as Putin fails to recognize these realities, however, President Bush - who once famously declared that he has "looked into Putin's soul" and found him "trustworthy" - would be well advised to reconsider that judgment. Putin can be trusted only to do one thing: to pursue relentlessly his quest for power. US policy must be designed accordingly.

Specifically, we should do the following:

1. Support the rule of law. The United States needs to insist that selective prosecution for political purposes is a violation of the rule of law.

2. The US needs to make clear its opposition to Putin's undermining of Russia's democratic institutions.

3. Russia's strategic drift - most especially, its arms developments and sales - must be recognized as unfriendly to the United States. That will require us to reassess the bilateral relationship and to consider necessary steps to counter these Russian sales and their military implications.

4. The United States should exert pressure for a political settlement of the Chechen war. Allowing the conflict to continue will further drive Chechen and other Muslims into the arms of Islamofascists, providing Putin with additional pretexts for restricting democratic liberties in Russia.

F. Salvage Europe

Europe's inexorable decline is a troubling development for the United States. There is not much America can do to address the deeply systemic nature of the continent's problems, but we should stand ready to offer our assistance whenever possible.

1. The United States must contemplate a future in which Europe is no longer the reliable ally, philosophical soul-mate and fellow-pillar of Western civilization that it has been for the past two centuries. In the worst case, some regions or countries of an Islamicized Europe could conceivably become an adversary, in the longer term.

2. It is likely that the European Union will splinter economically and politically in the coming decades, abandoning even the pretension of being a monolithic power. The United States should continue to offer friendship and assistance to those Europeans that share our vision of freedom, individual responsibility, and opportunity.

3. A closer, specialized relationship with the United Kingdom and the Eastern Europe countries (for example) would include political, economic, and military ties, as well as policy coordination. Out of this initiative, a new alliance could someday emerge - and expand beyond the borders of Europe.

Wield Effective Diplomacy

The Problem:

Thus far in the War for the Free World, America's efforts to utilize diplomatic weapons have been seriously hampered, if not largely counterproductive.

A. A Free-Range State Department

State Department policies are, in truth, often oriented less to the interests of the United States than to the concerns of other countries (which are treated as "clients" of the State Department).
Repeatedly, the State Department has acted in ways that undermine announced policies of the incumbent administration, in such areas as:
  • Promotion of freedom and democracy in the Middle East


  • The Israeli-Palestinian conflict


  • The International Criminal Court (ICC)


  • The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty


  • The Kyoto Protocol


  • Counter-proliferation strategies regarding North Korea and Iran

This divided diplomacy harms the cause of the Free World, diminishes the prospects for a timely victory, and puts the lives of Americans at greater risk.

Many State Department professionals believe that they alone are equipped and authorized to make foreign policy judgments. Some of our diplomats even argue that State needs to operate independently of the elected administration, to pursue its own foreign policies - without regard to decisions of the President and the Congress.

Even in the middle of a war, the development of national security policies benefits from give-and-take between officials and agencies with different portfolios, responsibilities, and perspectives. In the event they disagree with the resulting decision, our government representatives are certainly still entitled to express their opposition - but from outside the government, after resigning from office.

Contributors: Fred Gedrich and Gen. Paul Vallely USA


B. A Hostile United Nations

The need for reform of some of the United Nations systems and offices is widely recognized, particularly in the wake of the release of damning details of the corrupt and malfeasant Oil-for-Food program. However, even the most sweeping of the changes currently being discussed fails to address the fundamental problems of the UN.

As a deliberative body, the United Nations is merely the sum of its parts. That is, UN decisions reflect the interests and priorities of most its member nations. It is important to understand the character of the UN majority, and the way negotiations consequently typically go at the UN.
Only 88 of the UN's 191 member nations can be considered fully-fledged democracies. The non-democratic majority effectively controls the funds, programs and overall agenda of the United Nations, supported by the well-organized "non-aligned" movement. (Note that the 115 nations in the non-aligned group together account for less than one percent of the UN's total budget, compared with 22% for the United States.) UN initiatives are almost invariably injurious to the economic and geo-political interests of the United States, its largest contributor.

The lowest common denominator - namely, the prevailing side in most UN votes - is hardly motivated by the ambition to make the world "safe for democracy" (to borrow Woodrow Wilson's apt phrase). The dictatorships that drive the UN agenda are interested only in preserving and extending their power.

So, far from serving the best interests of mankind, UN initiatives may in fact be harmful to the common good. Indeed, the UN is of enormous value to the anti-democratic cabal as an instrument of political warfare against their Free World opponents.

Contributors: Claudia Rosett and Cliff Kincaid


C. Recruit Academia

As the need for those with expertise in the languages and cultures of the Middle East and other strategic regions reaches an historic high, universities - and particularly their US taxpayer-supported regional studies centers - are failing spectacularly to meet that need. For example:
The FBI has such a serious shortfall in the number of available Arabic translators that it has 120,000 hours of pre-September 11th "chatter" still undeciphered.

The dearth of Americans trained in relevant regional languages is so acute that law enforcement and intelligence communities have been forced to "outsource" the work to foreign nationals, including some of uncertain reliability.

In particular, there is concern regarding the accuracy of the translation by foreign nationals of critical wiretaps of organizations with suspected ties to Islamist terrorists.

Especially damaging is the radical politicization of universities, characterized by the routine abuse of the role of "educator," as well as by the quiet but consistent suppression of professorial dissent. The traditional American belief in the universal values of freedom and democracy is widely rejected on today's campus.

In fact, many of the professors who benefit most from the federal government's Title VI funding make no secret of their hostility toward this country's government and its policies and, in some cases, their sympathy for our foes. Unfortunately, such professors routinely use the classroom to preach politics.

As a result, taxpayers are underwriting an academic industry that actively discourages American students from properly understanding the war effort.

In fact, the core premise of so-called post-colonial theory is that it is immoral for a scholar to put his knowledge of foreign languages and cultures at the service of American power.

Due to this pattern of radical indoctrination, taxpayer-funded Middle East and other regional studies programs consistently produce students unable or unwilling to provide the skills the nation needs at this critical moment.

Contributors: Dr. Michael Rubin and Sarah Stern


What Needs To Be Done

A. Enlist the State Department

1. The President must go beyond the leadership changes he has made to date in Foggy Bottom. He and Dr. Rice need to install, in the State Department and its foreign embassies, a cadre of high-ranking officials who are committed to supporting the President's agenda.

2. Institute a "Goldwater-Nichols" reform for State. Excessive power is concentrated in the State Department's regional bureaus, which have traditionally exercised undue influence over policy and personnel decision-making within the Department. The Defense Department once faced a similar problem. Prior to the implementation two decades ago of legislation known as Goldwater-Nichols, professional success in the military meant serving entirely in one's own branch of the armed forces. A similar approach to the assignment of FSOs could help lessen the parochialism - and clientitis - associated with the predominance of the regional bureaus.

3. No more "business as usual." Such personnel initiatives will, of course, require changes in the way business is done today, and will therefore be resisted by Foreign Service officers and the American Foreign Service Association (which serves as the sole bargaining agent for 23,000 active and retired officers). Yet the need for change is clear.

B. Marginalize the United Nations

The United Nations as presently constituted is now - and will remain - an instrument of political warfare, wielded by enemies of the Free World. The UN is not merely resistant to the sort of systemic change that might bring it into closer alignment with its founding principles of protecting and promoting freedom. Such changes are, as a practical matter, impossible. Consequently, the United States, joined by other freedom-defending nations, should adopt an alternative approach:

1. We must stop legitimating the UN and deferring to its assertion of higher moral authority. Particularly in time of war, the Free World cannot afford to allow an organization dominated by the Un-Free to be the arbiter of our security, let alone the determinant of what we do to safeguard it.

There are activities the UN performs (notably, in the humanitarian relief area) whose continued US funding might be justified. American contributions to the UN should be earmarked for these limited purposes, however.

We need to stop turning a blind eye to Secretary General Kofi Annan's undisguised anti-Americanism and his unhelpfulness in the War for the Free World.

Under no circumstances should the US government or its citizens agree to or be obligated to pay international taxes of any kind.

2. Create a new organization: the "Free Nations." US leadership, prestige, and resources should, instead, be directed towards establishing a new entity for the defense of the Free World. Such an organization would have real moral standing, would represent the best aspirations of mankind, would give force and effect to the sentiments imbedded in the UN Charter and UN Declaration on Human Rights, and would provide a ready basis for forming coalitions for the defense of the Free World.

3. Stop thinking of the world's oceans, international commerce, outer space, and the internet as so-called "global commons" to be turned over to UN organizations. The idea of a socialist bureaucracy administering an invaluable and delicately structured resource - such as the internet - is an obvious non-starter. No less unwelcome are similar initiatives in other areas vital to American national security, economic interests, and sovereignty.

C. Recruit Academia

For American diplomacy, military, and intelligence services to function effectively during this War for the Free World, steps must to be taken to change the attitudes - and perhaps the personnel - associated with the politicized university system. The following are the sorts of steps a War Footing will require be adopted to ensure that country develops the knowledge and skills required to understand, confront, and defeat America's enemies:

1. Revise the Tenure System.

2. Revise the Hiring Process. In order to prevent academia from becoming a wasteland of "group think," government-funded universities must break the monopoly of the hiring process.

3. Cultivate Foreign Language Experts. A priority must be placed on the rigorous study and mastery of relevant foreign languages.

4. Foster Students' Field Research. Federally funded curricula should ensure that regional studies address the world as it is, not just politicized imaginings about foreign peoples, cultures, and religions.

5. Refuse Foreign Funding. Too many universities hesitate to offer programs sponsored by U.S. government agencies, but happily accept money from foreign states whose interests are inimical to US standards of democracy, liberalism, and human rights. The absence of foreign funding for regional centers and other foreign studies programs should become the hallmark of unbiased, neutral scholarship.

6. Ground Students in the American tradition. Our regional studies programs must ground American students in an accurate appreciation of America. It is unacceptable to spend federal tax dollars to support curricula that amount to little more than indoctrination in a skewed and vehemently anti-American view of this country and the world.

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

About Frank Gaffney and Contributors

About Frank Gaffney & Contributors

Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is the founder and President of the Center for Security Policy, established in Washington, D.C., in 1988.Mr.Gaffney acted as the assistant secretary of defense for international security policy under President Reagan. In that capacity, he served as chairman of the High Level Group of NATO. He also served as a professional staff member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee under its then-chairman, John Tower, and as an aide to Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson. Mr. Gaffney is a weekly contributor to the Washington Times and numerous online publications. Mr. Gaffney holds a B.S. in foreign service from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and an M.A. in international studies from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.

Alex Alexiev is vice president for research at the Center for Security Policy. During his nearly twenty years as a senior analyst with the National Security Division of the Rand Corporation, he directed numerous research projects for the U.S. Department of Defense and other agencies. He is the author of several books and myriad monographs and articles on national security issues. His current research focuses on issues related to Islamic extremism and terrorism. Mr. Alexiev received his undergraduate degree in English from Sofia State University, Bulgaria, and his M.A. in political science from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA).

Congressman Roscoe Bartlett represents the Sixth Congressional District of Maryland and is serving his seventh term. Prior to his election, Bartlett pursued careers as a professor, research scientist, inventor, small-business owner, and farmer. In Congress, Bartlett is senior member of the Science Committee and is chairman of the Projection Forces Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee. A recipient of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Jeffries Award, Congressman Bartlett earned a degree in theology and biology from Columbia Union College and a Ph.D. in physiology from the University of Maryland, College Park.

Amanda Bowman is the New York director of the Center for Security Policy and president of the Coalition for a Secure Driver's License. In addition to heading her own consulting firm, Ms. Bowman's positions have included conference programmer at The Economist; vice president of marketing and public relations, Christie's; vice president, Hill & Knowlton; senior vice president for public affairs, United Way of New York City; senior vice president, Ogilvy Public Relations; and managing director of Fine Light Public Relations. Ms. Bowman is a graduate of the University of Cambridge.

Christopher Brown has been a Transitions to Democracy Program Member at the Hudson Institute since 2003.His duties include preparing research, providing testimony, and conducting briefings for officials at the U.S. Departments of Defense and State, the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Council, the White House, and members of Congress and their staff. His articles have appeared in major publications, and he assisted the late Dr. Constantine Menges on the recently published book China: The Gathering Threat. Mr. Brown is a graduate of Utah State University with a dual major in political science and philosophy. He is fluent in both Afrikaans and Xhosa and is currently studying Arabic.

Mark Chussil is a founder and senior director of Crisis Simulations International (CSI), where he designed CSI's DXMAT crisis simulator. Mr. Chussil is also founder and CEO of Advanced Competitive Strategies, Inc., and designer of ACS's award-winning Value War business simulator. He has published extensively, and has thirty years of experience in consulting, simulation, teaching, and business war-gaming on six continents. Mr. Chussil earned his M.B.A. in general management from Harvard and his B.A. in political science from Yale.

Timothy Connors is director of the Manhattan Institute's Center for Policing Terrorism (CPT),helping police departments combat terrorism using a global network of counterterrorism experts to generate practical products, advice, and services. Mr. Connors is a decorated veteran who recently completed a combat tour in Konar Province, Afghanistan, where he led a Civil Affairs Team in support of 20th Special Forces Group. He is a graduate of West Point and was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant of Infantry. He received an M.B.A. and J.D. at the University of Notre Dame.

Lt.Col. Gordon Cucullu, USA (Ret.), a former Green Beret, is an editorialist and author. Born into a military family, he lived and served for more than thirteen years in East Asia, including eight years in Korea. For his Special Forces service in Vietnam, he was awarded a Bronze Star, Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, and the Presidential Unit Commendation. After separation from the Army, he worked on Korean and East Asian affairs at the Pentagon and Department of State and later as an executive for General Electric in Korea. His first major non-fiction work, Separated at Birth: How North Korea became the Evil Twin, is based in large part on his extensive experience in Korea and East Asia as a governmental insider and businessman.

Fred Gedrich is executive vice president for MobilVox Inc., a software development and wireless technology contractor developing anti-improvised explosive device technology. He formerly served as a U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of State official. His State Department assignments included Beijing, Beirut, Haiti, several African countries, and several republics of the former Soviet Union. His articles have been widely published. He received his bachelor's degree from Wilkes College in 1973 and his master's degree from Central Michigan University in 1983.

Colleen Gilbert is a research associate at the Center for Security Policy responsible for issues pertaining to immigration and homeland security. Ms. Gilbert is also executive director of the Coalition for a Secure Driver's License, overseeing the coalition's legislative agenda at both the federal and state levels. She is also responsible for representing the coalition in various media forums, and her writings have appeared in publications such as the Wall Street Journal, Newsday, and Human Events. Miss Gilbert holds a B.F.A. from New York University and an M.A. from George Washington University.

Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. Ms. Glick, who lives in Jerusalem, Israel, also serves as the deputy managing editor and chief columnist for The Jerusalem Post. She is the senior editorialist and commentator for Makor Rishon, a Hebrew newspaper in Israel, a senior researcher at the Israel Defense Force's Operational Theory Research Institute, and an adjunct lecturer in tactical warfare at the Israeli Defense Force's Command and Staff College. Ms. Glick received her bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University and her master's degree in public policy from Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

Dr. Daniel Goure is vice president of the Lexington Institute. Dr. Goure was a U.S. Defense Department official during the George H.W. Bush Administration. Dr. Goure teaches at both Georgetown University and the National Defense University and is an NBC military analyst. He received a B.A from Pomona College and an M.A. and Ph.D. in international relations from Johns Hopkins University.

Thor Halvorssen is president of the New York-based Human Rights Foundation and is the First Amendment Scholar at the Commonwealth Foundation. He currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Armando Valladares Foundation, the Advisory Council of the Atlantic Legal Foundation, and the Society of Fellows of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni. Mr. Halvorssen is a contributing author of Bringing Justice to the People: The Story of the Freedom-Based Public Law Movement (Heritage Books). Mr. Halvorssen received undergraduate and graduate degrees in political science and history from the University of Pennsylvania.

Victor Davis Hanson is the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.He was a full-time farmer before joining California State University, Fresno, in 1984 to initiate a classics program. His academic achievements have included the National Endowment for the Humanities fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences (Stanford), the Eric Breindel Award for opinion journalism, and the Shifrin Chair of Military History at the U.S.Naval Academy.Dr.Hansen is the author of over 170 articles, book reviews, and editorials and is a biweekly contributor to National Review Online.He was educated at the University of California, Santa Cruz, the American School of Classical Studies, and received his Ph.D. in classics from Stanford University.

Bruce Herschensohn has been an author and television and radio political commentator for two decades. He currently teaches at Pepperdine University, is an Associate Fellow at the Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom, and serves on the Board of Directors of the Center for Individual Freedom. After service in the U.S. Air Force, Mr. Herschensohn started his own motion picture company and was appointed director of motion pictures and television for the United States Information Agency. He served as the deputy special assistant to President Nixon, as a member of Ronald Reagan's transition team, and as a fellow at the John F. Kennedy Institute of Politics at Harvard and at the Claremont Institute.

Christopher Holton is vice president for administration, marketing & development at the Center for Security Policy. Mr. Holton came to the center after serving as president and marketing director of Blanchard & Co. and editor-in-chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit from 1990 to 2003.As chief of the Blanchard Economic Research Unit in 2000, he conceived and commissioned the Center for Security Policy special report, Clinton’s Legacy: The Dangerous Decade. Holton is a member of the Board of Advisers ofWorldTribune.com.

Rosemary Jenks is director of government relations for Numbers USA, a nonprofit, nonpartisan, grassroots organization. She has worked on immigration issues since 1990, first with the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based immigration think-tank, and then as a consultant. Her articles have appeared widely and she is the co-author of Shaping Illinois: The Effects of Immigration 1970–2020 and Doctors and Nurses: A Demographic Profile. Ms. Jenks earned a J.D. with honors from Harvard Law School and a B.A. in political science from Colorado College, and she is a member of the Virginia State Bar.

Cliff Kincaid is president of America's Survival, Inc. (ASI) and the editor of the Accuracy in Media (AIM) Report. A veteran journalist and media and policy analyst, he has been an advocate on behalf of the families of victims of terrorism. ASI was the first national organization to warn of global taxes and the proposed International Criminal Court, holding news conferences at the National Press Club and on Capitol Hill. Mr. Kincaid is the author of eight books and has published frequently in major media outlets. He received his degree in journalism and communications from the University of Toledo.

Anne Korin is co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS) and editor of Energy Security. She is also co-chair of the Set America Free Coalition. Ms. Korin focuses on energy supply vulnerabilities, OPEC, maritime terrorism, energy security, energy strategies, and technological innovation. She has written articles for various foreign-affairs journals. Her education includes an engineering degree in computer science from Johns Hopkins University and study toward a doctorate at Stanford University.

Dr. Gal Luft is executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS) and co-chair of the Set America Free Coalition. He specializes in strategy, geopolitics, terrorism, and energy security. He has published numerous studies and articles on security and energy issues and consults with various think tanks and news organizations worldwide. Dr.Luft holds degrees in international relations, international economics, Middle East studies, and strategic studies and a doctorate in strategic studies from the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS,) Johns Hopkins University.

Andrew McCarthy is a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and a contributor at National Review Online. For 18 years, he was an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York and in 1995 led the terrorism prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He became the chief assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District's satellite office and supervised the office's Command Post near Ground Zero in New York City after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Mr. McCarthy also served as a special assistant to then-deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz.

David McCormack is senior research associate at the Center for Security Policy where he directs the African Security Project. His articles have appeared in publications such as the Washington Times, the Jerusalem Post, and the Wall Street Journal Europe, and he is the author of the CSP Occasional Paper "An African Vortex: Islamism in Sub-Saharan Africa." Mr. McCormack holds a B.A. in history and international affairs from the George Washington University.

Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, USAF (Ret.), served thirty-five years in the U.S. Air Force as a fighter pilot and commander at every unit level. He had four combat tours in Vietnam as well as commanding a major air strike against terrorists in the mid-1980s. His last assignment in the Air Force was assistant vice chief of staff as well as director of the Vice President's Defense Performance Review (Reinventing Government) for all of the U.S. Department of Defense. Upon retirement as a lieutenant general, he served as a vice president for command, control, and intelligence for UNISYS and Loral Corporations until becoming president and CEO of Business Executives for National Security for four years. In 2000, he created his own consulting company, focusing on government reform and terrorism. General McInerney is a Fox News military analyst and co-authored the book End Game: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror.

Vice Adm. Robert R. Monroe, USN (Ret.), served thirty-eight years in the U.S. Navy. During his career, he had combat tours in World War II and the Korean and Vietnam Wars. He was a systems analyst for the U.S. secretary of defense, and, as vice admiral, headed the Defense Nuclear Agency and then directed Navy Research and Development. Upon retirement, Admiral Monroe joined Bechtel, and, over the next twenty-one years served successively as business line manager, vice president, senior vice president, and partner. He is now a private consultant, also serving on several U.S. government advisory boards. Admiral Monroe graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and holds a master's degree in international relations from Stanford University.

Claudia Rosett is journalist-in-residence at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, writing on tyranny and human rights, especially as these relate to the War for the Free World. Over the past twenty-four years, Ms. Rosett has reported from Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and the former Soviet Union. She is an adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute and a former member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal. Ms. Rosett received an Overseas Press Club Citation for Excellence for her on-site coverage of China's 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising. In 2005, she won the Eric Breindel Award for her coverage of the United Nations.

Dr. Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and editor of the Middle East Quarterly.Rubin received a Ph.D. in history in 1999.His dissertation on the formation of modern Iran won Yale's top prize. He has spent twenty months in Iraq and more than seven in Iran. His most recent book (with Patrick Clawson) is Eternal Iran: Continuity and Chaos.

Al Santoli is president and founder of the nonprofit Asia America Initiative and the editor of the weekly e-publications China in Focus and Asia in Focus. He is the former senior vice-president of the American Foreign Policy Council and director of the Asia-Pacific Initiative and has worked as a foreign policy and national security advisor in the U.S. House of Representatives. Mr. Santoli has been a contributing editor at PARADE magazine, and his writings have appeared in a variety of publications He is the author of numerous books and monographs, including Everything We Had: An Oral History of the Vietnam War.

David Satter is an associate of the Hoover Institution, the Hudson Institute, and Johns Hopkins University and the author of two books on Russia: Age of Delirium: The Decline and Fall of the Soviet Union and Darkness at Dawn: The Rise of the Russian Criminal State. He writes frequently for the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal on the former Soviet Union and is currently working on a new book about the Russian attitude toward the communist past. Mr. Satter received a B.A. from the University of Chicago and a B.Litt. degree in political philosophy from Oxford University.

James M. Staudenraus has been involved with border security and immigration issues for more than ten years. He has developed a wide range of trusted contacts within state and federal law enforcement and has witnessed first-hand how these agencies continue to remain hindered in their counterterrorism efforts by a lack of a common database, ongoing turf wars, and mixed signals from elected officials at all levels of government. A graduate of Syracuse University, terrorism hit home for Mr. Staudenraus in December 1988, when thirty-five of his university schoolmates were killed aboard Pan Am Flight 103.

Sarah N. Sternis the director of the Washington Office of the American Jewish Congress. She has long been an advocate for robust U.S. and Israeli foreign policies in the War for the Free World. Ms. Stern is also the author of a recently released novel, Cherished Illusions. She was educated at Boston University and received her master's degree from Columbia University. Prior to her work in public policy, Ms. Stern worked with Montgomery County, Maryland, public schools as a child psychologist.

Kenneth R. Timmerman is executive director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, which he founded in 1995, and a journalist with more than two decades of experience tracking and exposing terrorist networks. His 1998 expose of Osama bin Laden appeared in Reader’s Digest just weeks before the embassy bombings in Africa. In recent years, Mr. Timmerman has revealed how U.S. policies have helped create new threats from Russia, China, and Iran. Mr. Timmerman is the author of numerous books and articles. His latest book is Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran.

Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely, USA (Ret.), served in the U.S. Army for thirty-two years. He served in many overseas theaters including Europe, Pacific Rim countries, and two combat tours in Vietnam. General Vallely is a military analyst for Fox News Channel and chairman of the Military Committee of the Center for Security Policy. He co-authored the book Endgame-Blueprint for Victory for Winning the War on Terror. He and his wife, Marian, are the co-trustees of the Scott Vallely Soldiers Memorial Fund. General Vallely graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Infantry School, Ranger and Airborne Schools, Jumpmaster School, the Command and General Staff School, the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, and the Army War College.

Dr. J. Michael Waller holds the Walter and Leonore Annenberg Chair in International Communication at the Institute of World Politics and directs its graduate programs on public diplomacy and political warfare. He is also Vice President for Information Operations of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. A former staff member of the U.S. Senate, consultant to the U.S. Department of State, and journalist and author, Dr. Waller is an expert on terrorism, intelligence, the former Soviet Union, and the Americas. He has been a contributor to Insight magazine, Reader’s Digest, the Washington Times, and the Wall Street Journal. Dr. Waller holds a B.A. from George Washington University and an M.A. and Ph.D. from Boston University.

Congressman Curt Weldon represents the Seventh Congressional District of Pennsylvania and is serving his tenth term. Congressman Weldon is a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and the Homeland Security Committee. He is recognized as one of the Congress' leading authorities on military weapons and other systems and techonologies. Long before September 11, Congressman Weldon was an advocate of bolstering U.S. defenses, assisting first responders, and improving intelligence gathering. Congressman Weldon received his B.A. in Russian from West Chester University.

R. James Woolsey is vice president for global strategic security at Booz Allen Hamilton. Ambassador Woolsey was director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 1993 to 1995, was appointed by President Reagan as delegate-at-large to the U.S.-Soviet Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START) and Nuclear and Space Arms Talks (NST), and was an advisor on the U.S. Delegation to the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT I). He received his B.A. from Stanford University, an M.A. from Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar, and an LL.B from Yale Law School.

Members of the Center for Security Policy Staff who rendered invaluable help:

Michael T. Reilly is vice president for operations at the Center for Security Policy. In that capacity, Mr. Reilly is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the center as well as the management of the center's employees. Additionally, and working in close coordination with the president of the center, he also manages the center's outside relationships and strategic development. Mr. Reilly is a former military legislative assistant to Congressman Jerry Lewis and a Marine Corps veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He is a graduate of the Catholic University of America with a degree in civil engineering.

Olivia Albrecht, John Tower National Security Fellow at the Center for Security Policy, is the project manager for the center's Islamist Project and lead researcher for an array of homeland security and international relations topics. She has worked at the Pentagon in Non-Proliferation Policy and at the Heritage Foundation. Ms. Albrecht is a graduate of Princeton University with a degree in philosophy.

Patrick Devenny is the Henry M. Jackson National Security Fellow at the Center for Security Policy. Mr. Devenny researches various national security topics and has been published in American Spectator Online, Middle East Quarterly, the Washington Times, and FrontPageMagazine.com. He is a graduate of Rutgers University with a degree in history and is currently pursuing a master's degree in U.S. foreign policy at American University's School of International Service.

Lisa Firestone is the executive assistant to the president of the Center for Security Policy She has worked in the fields of asset management, campaign administration, and public policy. Ms. Firestone received a B.A. in English, economics, and French from Duke University and is a graduate of the New York Institute of Finance.

Ryan Peterson is a research associate and project manager for the Center for Security Policy's Energy Security Initiative. His research focuses on issues of global security, U.S. energy policies, and law and sovereignty issues. His work on these topics has been published by FrontPageMagazine.com. Mr. Peterson holds a B.A. in international relations from Wheaton College.