5 Minute Guide: War on Terror

What happened?

The War on Terror is the ongoing fight against terrorism by the US and its allies.

The anti-terrorist combat has been likened to a modern day Cold War, given its indefinite duration and multiple targets.

It started with Operation Active Endeavour, Nato's anti-terrorism response to the trafficking of weapons.

Then, it shifted to Afghanistan - just four weeks after the 9/11 attacks - as the US pursued al-Qaida and its leader Osama bin Laden.

Although widely focused on the threat of Islamic terrorists, and Middle Eastern countries, various parts of the world have been affected.

Somalia, Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines and even parts of the Mediterranean Sea have all been host to War on Terror operations.

By far the most high-profile target for the war has been Saddam Hussein, who was accused of secretly harbouring weapons of mass destruction.

The US and its closest ally, the UK, have been heavily criticised for the doctrine of pre-emptive war and regime change in the overthrow of Saddam.

The US and allies have claimed victories, saying that the elections in Afghanistan and Iraq and the capture of alleged 9/11 planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed justified the ongoing war.

Why did it happen?

The aims of the war included capturing groups identified as terrorists by the US, spreading liberal democracy, and putting an end to state-sponsored terrorism.

Former US president Bill Clinton launched Operation Infinite Reach in 1998 after the US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania that year. This was followed by a bombing campaign in Sudan and Afghanistan.

However, the 9/11 attacks ramped up the stakes as the US public wanted to see justice for those who plotted the atrocities. This was the impetus for the invasion of Afghanistan.

The other prominent campaigns were in Iraq and, most recently, Operation Enduring Freedom in the Horn of Africa.

In December 2006, the British Foreign Office advised the government to stop using the term "War on Terror" - the same month that outgoing US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld expressed regret over the use of the phrase, which he said created unattainable expectations.

What happens next?

There is speculation that Iran is next on the list as it has made its nuclear intentions clear.

Iran's president Ahmadinejad has not helped matters by calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth and has accelerated his anti-western rhetoric.

However, as the tenures of Bush and Blair come to an end, the War on Terror may well take a different turn, with new administrations sure to have fresh ideas about whether it's worth the financial commitments.

In the long-term, there are those who fear the campaign has been counterproductive, with critics saying it has created a culture of antagonism with the Muslim world, creating a breeding ground for anti-western ideology.

Key players

George Bush
In a joint address to US Congress and the American public after 9/11, Bush said: "Tonight we are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom. Our grief has turned to anger, and anger to resolution."

He has been resolute in the War on Terror which has been a defining feature of his presidency.

And despite the findings of the Iraq Study Group - which said the situation in the country was grave and deteriorating - Bush still wants to deploy more troops.

It is widely acknowledged that he saw establishing a permanent democratic government in Iraq as his primary legacy, although such a desire seems increasingly unlikely to come to fruition.

Tony Blair
The prime minister says he stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the US in the combat of terrorism.

He too reacted to 9/11 in similarly aggressive terms, saying: "What happened was an attack not just upon the United States but upon the civilised world."

With such assertions, Blair effectively super-glued himself to US foreign policy over the following five years, a tactic which has led to much criticism domestically.

The criticism reached a peak in 2003, when a million people marched in London against plans to bomb Iraq.

The argument for going to war with Saddam - the theory he had weapons of mass destruction - has since been largely discredited.

Share this article

Send this article to a friend »

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Reddit
• Facebook
• StumbleUpon

What are these?