Military Effectiveness in the Face of Terrorism
    By General Marcel Valentin
    Le Figaro

    Monday 23 January 2006

    It is comforting that, in spite of budgetary difficulties, our country has been able to maintain a competitive Air Force and Navy. It is also reassuring that these two forces assure nuclear deterrence. It is, finally, a good thing that they can participate in operations conducted by French forces, engagements in which the men and women of the land Army constitute 80% of French troops.

    I am, of course, thrilled ... but surprised that a January 2 article in Le Figaro promotes the French Navy as a major resource in the struggle against terrorism and transforms the cruise missile into the anti-terrorist weapon of choice! If bombing is effective against classic weapons, it is inadequate, even unproductive, in the anti-terrorist struggle. That French ships play a supporting role to the main action by limiting terrorists' maritime movement is irrefutable. That cruise missile strikes have a decisive impact on terrorist networks is something no serious person would dare to assert. Let's remember the terrorist attacks of August 7, 1998, against the American embassies in Nairobi and Dar es-Salaam: 13 days later, American ships launched cruise missiles against a pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum and against six of bin Laden's terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. These bombings neither decapitated the targeted network, nor prevented September 11.

    Other modes of operation must be developed. First of all, it is appropriate to destroy [terrorist] networks by patient police, secret service, and justice system action and to act against the central weakness of all clandestine networks, their logistics: safe harbors, training camps, arms caches, finance. But, above all, forces on the ground must approach the population progressively, with less visible and media-friendly action than the punctual missile strike - more in-depth. In those regions that give birth to terrorism, regions where it prospers, it's a question of cutting support from the population, of cleaning up situations so that they no longer constitute a favorable breeding ground for the development of [terrorist] networks.

    The nature of crises has changed in the last fifteen years. Beyond the military action, only political action on the ground is able to resolve them. The weapons that were conceived yesterday for conflicts between states have not lost all relevance: they have their place in the arsenal of a country of France's rank; they are not, however, the principal resource in the struggle against terrorists. In fact, today one may destroy important targets, but be able neither to re-establish security nor to win the peace. There's no "military" victory anymore that can be measured by the scale of destruction; victories now have to be evaluated by the peace they establish and by the rejection of terrorism by populations that once supported it. Today, a nation's ability to settle crises may no longer be measured solely in terms of the power or precision of its weaponry.

    The sole physical elimination of new threats is no longer enough, and the gap is growing between classic military power and the gains that can be expected from it. The last decade has shown the limits of destructive capability for restoring stability, order, and security. The struggle for the eradication of terrorism takes place on a psychological level. Influence and persuasion are more effective than destruction. The key to success rests on populations' trust in the friendly force and the values it represents. Only trust allows the establishment of a climate favorable to a return to normality. As for the success of the action, it demands a permanent and faultless coordination between diplomatic, military, economic, and humanitarian actors.

    Only forces committed for the long term at the heart of local populations can fulfill the main mission. Only forces active on the ground can search and destroy - in difficult and isolated, mountainous or urban regions - terrorist cells. Through their ability to simultaneously involve themselves in complex situations, deter, control, react, and master the use of force, only land forces are able to eradicate terrorist tumors and create the conditions necessary for a return to a state of law and peace of mind.

    Few countries have been bombed as much as Afghanistan and Iraq have been during the last fifteen years. Yet, in these two countries, terrorists have never increased as much, terrorism has never been more dangerous than now, when Western powers have never used cruise missiles more ... Let us also recall that the crises that have characterized the state of "belligerent peace" that reigns over the post-1945 world have always erupted on the ground and always been definitively resolved on the ground. Everyone is free to draw the necessary conclusions now, as French military services prepare their new law on military programming, a law which must lead to major choices for the defense of our own country and of Europe in 2007.

    --------

    Marcel Valentin is the former Governor of Paris and Former Commander of the Multinational Security Force in Kosovo.