Last week a CIA drone fired two hellfire missiles at a farmhouse in a remote region of South Waziristan, Pakistan.  The target was Baitullah Mehsud, the notorious leader of the Pakistani Taliban who, according to the UN, is thought to be responsible for over 80 percent of the suicide bombings that have taken place within Afghanistan.  He is also likely responsible for the assassination of the Pakistani political leader Benazir Bhutto.  According to many accounts, Mehsud, a diabetic who was receiving treatment on the roof of the house, was killed by the attack.  Mehsud’s apparent demise is welcome good news.  However, we must also be realistic in our assessment of its potential impact.  Too often we have yearned for the quick solution – the elimination of a terrorist or a tyrant – to solve a much larger systemic problem.

Historians frequently debate the role of individuals in shaping past events.  Some argue that if were not for the actions of certain leaders at critical times, the path of history would have been dramatically different.  Others downplay the role of individuals and point to broader societal forces that shape leaders’ decisions.  Of course, the reality is that in some situations individuals play a critical role and in others the circumstances of the time dominate.  Unfortunately, when looking at the issue of terrorism, we have too frequently overemphasized the role of individual leaders – Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, etc.  This is not to say that these individuals did not play a critical role.  However, an overemphasis on a handful of “bad guys” leads us sometimes to overlook the more fundamental changes in the environment that must take place.

Iraq provides one example of this phenomenon.  As the insurgency in Iraq began to expand in the summer of 2003, there was a concerted effort to capture or kill Saddam Hussein and other high level members of his regime.  In December 2003, Hussein was captured and many Americans breathed a sigh of relief.  At last the leader of a hated regime posed no further threat to the future of the country.  But, the insurgency was just catching fire.  In March 2004, Iraqi insurgents in Fallujah ambushed a Blackwater convoy.  Abu Musab al-Zarqawi rose to prominence as a leader of the insurgency.  This was just the beginning.

So what about looking more broadly at terrorism over the years?  A 2008 study that examined the link between the killing or capturing of a terrorist leader and the level of terrorist activity found no statistically significant relationship between these two variables.  It examined all international terrorist activity recorded between 1968 present in the Terrorism Knowledge base.  The lack of a clear relationship was similar to findings of other researchers who found no direct relationship between Israel’s targeted assassinations and Palestinian attacks against Israel.   This research is not the final word.  However, it raises questions as to the usefulness of a reliance primarily on the elimination of terrorist leadership.

In the case of Baitullah Mehsud in Pakistan, we are much better off without him in the picture just as Iraq was a better place without Saddam Hussein in power.  However, as long as sentiment that foments hatred against the West continues to thrive, there will be another terrorist waiting to pick up the mantle from him.  And, as long as the Taliban can continue bankrolling the existing system, the tools will be available for them to continue the fight.  In fact, there have been rumors recently of a shootout between those seeking to take his place.  The longer this disarray in the Taliban continues the better.  At some point, however, a new leader will emerge and recruits will come knocking.

The solution is to not put all our eggs in the basket of quick fix assassinations.  Rather, we must focus on the type of institution building and civilian support in Afghanistan and Pakistan that has been the hallmark of the US strategy released earlier this spring.  Of course, security is a key component to enabling that institution building to take place.  A temporary reprieve from Mehsud’s terrorist attacks would be a welcome change.  However, this should not be used as an excuse for complacency.

In addition to building institutions, one of the systemic challenges that we must get right is the drug trade that finances the Taliban.  The Senate Foreign Relations Committee just released a report that examined this particular issue.  Fortunately, it seems that the US is now taking the long term view that prioritizes alternative crops over poppy eradication.  There are no quick fixes to this dilemma.  It will continue to be a critical long term challenge in a desperately poor country that has become reliant on the drug trade.  Unfortunately the elimination of one ruthless leader will not stem the tremendous flow of money that continues to prop up the Taliban insurgency.

The demise of Baitullah Mehsud is certainly good news.  But I’ll wait for the real celebration when I see functioning institutions and Afghan farmers planting wheat.

No related posts.