The Challenge of Assessment
-Shabtai Shavit
Should fighting terrorism be based on reaction or on pre-emption? Since there is an ongoing war, since the threat is permanent, since the intention of the enemy in this case is to annihilate you, the right doctrine is one of pre-emption and not of reaction.
The writer was former head of the Mossad.
(Institute for Contemporary Affairs/Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs)
-Shabtai Shavit
Should fighting terrorism be based on reaction or on pre-emption? Since there is an ongoing war, since the threat is permanent, since the intention of the enemy in this case is to annihilate you, the right doctrine is one of pre-emption and not of reaction.
The writer was former head of the Mossad.
(Institute for Contemporary Affairs/Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs)
3 comments:
Preemption is a big word. Attacking a supposed base of operations does seemr easonable since terrorists have made this an ongoing and thus constantly active engagement. It is not an excuse to invade a country because they might be contributing to terrorism.
Shavit is referring here to Israel, though the wider application you suggested is interesting.
BTW, you have an inaccuracy in your comment. Saddam's Iraq was most certainly contributing to terrorism, though not necessarily in the way international intelligence sources assessed.
Saddam was 'popular' among Arabs for pumping thousand of dollars into families of Palestinian suicide bombers...the more deadly, the more money.
True, about Saddam, I was being, sadly like our President, America-Centric. I referred to terrorism directed at America, which he did not take part in, and indeed was afraid of Al-Qaeda himself. For Israel he was certainly a different and dangerous story.
Post a Comment