UNCLASSIFIED

(U) US and other international forces are most at risk in Bosnia, where Islamic extremists from outside the region played an important role in the ethnic conflicts of the 1990s. There is considerable sympathy for international Islamic causes among the Muslim community in Bosnia. Some of the mujahedin who fought in the Bosnian wars of the early 1990s stayed there. These factors combine with others present throughout the Balkans-weak border controls, large amounts of weapons, and pervasive corruption and organized crime-to sustain an ongoing threat to US forces there.

CONCLUSION

(U) Mr. Chairman, I want to end my presentation by reaffirming what the President has said on many occasions regarding the threats we face from terrorists and other adversaries. We cannot-and will not-relax our guard against these enemies. If we did so, the terrorists would have won. And that will not happen. The terrorists, rather, should stand warned that we will not falter in our efforts, and in our commitment, until the threat they pose to us has been eliminated.

(U) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I welcome any questions you and your colleagues have for me.

23

BEFORE THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
HEARING ON CURRENT AND PROJECTED THREATS TO THE
NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 6, 2002

Chairman Graham, Vice Chairman Shelby, Members of the Committee: I appreciate the opportunity to present INR'S view of the current and prospective threats to the United States, its citizens, and its interests. INR sees nc challenge to the existence or independence of the United States, strong relations with the major powers, and solid alliances. But significant threats remain, both today and over the next decade.

When INR, CIA, and DIA testified on this subject last year, all emphasized the threat of terrorism. We all pointed to asymmetric attacks, including by non-state actors using terrorism to counter our vastly superior military capabilities. I read last year's testimony for the first time when preparing for this hearing and was struck, as one who had no involvement in its preparation, by both its prescience and continued relevance. Indeed, I am resubmitting the testimony prepared by INR last year because I believe its comprehensive treatment of the threats we face is still useful. Rather than repeat the tour d'horizon approach used last year, much of which would duplicate the judgments articulated in the testimony submitted by other agencies, I wish to focus on underlying problems and common features linking the general and specific threats facing our country.

"

Terrorism, clearly the greatest current threat to
Americans, transcends borders. It incubates inside failing
states and feeds on frustrations arising from political
repression, lack of economic progress, social inequality,
and conviction that others--national leaders, foreign
governments, rival ethnic or religious groups, the "West,
or the sole superpower--are to blame. We need to remember
that while terrorists tend to be fanatical devotees of
something, terrorism itself is a collection of tactics, not
an ideology. It is a blunt instrument intended to change
conditions its practitioners Find unacceptable. Despite the

2002

undeniable impact of Operation Enduring Freedom thus far,
many factors that nurture and inspire terrorism persist.

years.

State sponsorship. The nature and significance of
state sponsorship of terrorism has changed over the past few
State-directed terrorism has not gone away, but it
is now less threatening to Americans than are the actions of
non-state actors such as al Qaida. Non-state terrorists
increasingly seek not sponsorship as much as a weak state in
which to operate. Would-be antagonists have doubtless noted
lop-sided US victories in the Gulf war, Kosovo, and in the
Afghan campaign. Because no nation can prevail in a direct
confrontation with the US military, some may be tempted to
strike the United States using terrorism as a low-cost,
deniable tactic, and some states may try to use terrorist
surrogates in lieu of actual combatants to raise the costs
to one's opponent in long-running struggles. But the new
trend seems to be toward well-financed non-state actors
taking the lead.

Underdevelopment often

Economic underdevelopment.
breeds the foot soldiers for terrorism. People with little
to lose are easily swayed to a cause, particularly if that
cause carries with it some excitement and promise of rewards
for one's self and family. Many who join groups that
practice terrorism face a life of joblessness and poverty.
Often living under oppressive governments with little
prospect of a better life, young people-especially those
whose exposure to education has made them even more
frustrated and embittered-are prone to seek a way out,
perhaps by attempting to migrate, perhaps by joining a
movement that promises change through violence, perhaps by
immersing themselves in religion. When unemployment hovers
around 40% and nearly 45% of the population is under the age
of 15 (as in the West Bank and Gaza Strip), people find it
difficult to wait for a brighter future. Many of those
drawn to Usama bin Laden are in similar circumstances.

Unresolved political issues. Political issues-such as the status of Kashmir, control of Jerusalem, or a homeland for Sri Lanka's Tamils-serve as focal points for the anger of various populations. In each of these instances decades nave passed with no political resolution. Similarly, and increasingly, greater awareness of the outside world and the shortcomings of regimes that refuse to change and repress dissent fuels both frustration and willingness to use violence, including terror, to attack an unacceptable status

quo.

2003

-3

Convergence of terrorism, narcotics, and crime. One of the most notable features of contemporary terrorism is its growing self-sufficiency. Examples abound, but the most notable are al-Qaida, FARC, and Hizballah. All three have independent means for raising and distributing money, including legitimate as well as criminal means ranging from drug trafficking to misappropriating funds intended for use by NGOs. Such groups also have multiple ways to recruit, train, and arm fighters, and to spread their propaganda. This independence frees groups from the constraints of state sponsors and makes them ever more dangerous.

Western scapegoat. The West, particularly the United States, is widely perceived as the guarantor of the status quo. As champions of progress, we find that painfully ironic. But many groups believe they can more easily attack their own country through attacking Americans or our economic interests. If their attacks can end western support for their country, they believe it will make the overthrow of their target regime far easier.

Downside of globalization. States that enter fully into the global economy and have the cultural and economic capacity to find a niche and compete successfully benefit enormously from globalization, as does the United States. Indeed, much of the world incorrectly but understandably sees globalization as Americanization. But the process also

has a downside, especially in countries that must make difficult economic, cultural, and political changes before the benefits of globalization outweigh the costs. The process challenges traditional class systems and entrenched economic interests, raising expectations and demands on governments for services and reforms.

Globalization makes it easier to move goods, services, ideas, and people, but it also facilitates the migration of knowledge, technology, money, diseases and much more that can be problematic as well as beneficial. Computerized communications and cell phones have made it possible for radical groups to communicate more easily and securely. Terrorists and traffickers in persons and contraband become more difficult to contain, and those with the education and skills to make weapons of mass destruction can move about more easily. Money and investment move more easily, sometimes fleeing perceived future problems and producing a cycle of losses, unrest, further flight, and less investment. The ease of movement and investment has also encouraged the "off-the-books" economy, making law enforcement and revenue collection more difficult.

Fragile and failing states. Many states have problems resulting from weak national institutions and often weaker economies. Traditional class, tribal, or regional divisions frequently abet corruption, crime, and chaos, which in turn breed disillusionment and further undermine the foundations of government and civil society. Failure to meet the needs of often burgeoning populations of young jobseekers, or to provide clean water or adequate health care, adds powder to an already full keg that any number of incidents car. ignite.

Fragile and failing countries often provide terrorists
refuge and recruits while producing economic migrants and
refugees who add to the problems of neighboring states.
Many of the states most at risk are in Africa, Central Asia,
and the Middle East, but no region lacks them. Competent
governments and significant international support together
can alleviate the full spectrum of problems, including
checking terrorism and proliferation. Failing governments
cannot help us or escape their own predicaments without
help. Indeed, they become "our problem in a way we did not
earlier encounter.

Threats to democracy and the "Washington consensus.”
The rush to embrace democracy, capitalism, and more open
markets during the 1990s entailed numerous changes we
regarded as positive, but the demise of a clear alternative
in the form of communism does not ensure that these positive
changes will endure. Many new democracies remain fragile.
Democracy does not guarantee effective or honest government
or ensure higher living standards. In parts of East Asia
and Latin America, despite steps toward more democracy and
market economies, increasing inequities and a growing
perception of inequality fed by rapid urbanization and
global communications contribute to resentment of "greedy
western capitalists." Citizens who have endured the pair of
short-term "reform" for the prospect of "gain" in the future
grow impatient; incomplete or corrupted reform efforts have
left many new democracies vulnerable and many new market
economies in a parlous state.

Globalization compounds the problem. Electronic media
reveal how much better others are doing and spotlight the
fallings of local leaders. Many electoral democracies have
simply elected the same old corrupt elites to positions they
had previously acquired by other means. Corruption,
nepotism, and personal enrichment continue.
Income gaps

wider, the pie does not expand quickly enough, and better

2004