海角大神

President Obama鈥檚 executive orders closing the 骋耻补苍迟谩苍补尘辞 detention facility and outlawing torture were interpreted in some circles as closing the door on the Bush administration鈥檚 global war on terror.

But Mr. Obama 鈥� who used the word 鈥渨ar鈥� in his inaugural address to describe the fight with Islamic extremists who would do America harm 鈥� is not so much ending the war on terror as he is redefining it and narrowing its focus.

The president is signaling a desire to home in on the Al Qaeda organization and its leadership, as well as on those Taliban leaders who have created a haven in Afghanistan and Pakistan from which to plot against US interests, say counterterrorism experts.

At the same time, Obama aims to cleave Muslim populations from extremist forces by emphasizing his and America鈥檚 common interests with the Muslim people, and by acting fast on issues that matter to them.

Within his first week in office, Obama named a special envoy on Israeli-Palestinian peace, spoke passionately about the suffering of civilians in Gaza, and gave his first television interview as president to the Al-Arabiya satellite network 鈥� pointing out that he, too, has Muslims in his family.

But just a day after Obama also named a special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan Jan 22, the US launched two missile attacks from CIA-operated unmanned drone aircraft at targets in Pakistan鈥檚 tribal areas where Al Qaeda鈥檚 top leaders are thought to enjoy refuge.

The strikes reportedly killed at least 20 people, including foreign fighters and a high-level militant.

Obama 鈥渋s already making it clear he is focusing on a war on Al Qaeda instead of a broad war on terrorism,鈥� says Bruce Riedel, a senior fellow in terrorism and South Asia studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington and a former CIA analyst and adviser to three US administrations.

鈥淗e鈥檚 going after the organization that attacked the US on 9/11, and before and since, rather than pursuing a vague and murky war on terrorism everywhere.鈥�

As part of that narrowing of focus, Obama is signaling that the strategy for Afghanistan 鈥� which he considers the 鈥渃entral front鈥� in the war on terror 鈥� will be scaled back from the Bush administration鈥檚 aim of building a democracy to a more realistic goal of denying sanctuary to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

鈥淚f we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of Central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose,鈥� Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in congressional testimony this week.

A significant semantic shift

As Obama adjusts the battle with Islamic extremists to his vision, expect to see two other modifications from the Bush approach, counterterrorism experts say. One will be a conscious semantic shift to deny Al Qaeda and other groups fodder to paint America as waging war on Islam. The second change will be a dethroning of military power as the preeminent response to terrorism, in favor of employing the full panoply of tools from law enforcement and the justice system to international intelligence networks and diplomacy.

鈥淭he term 鈥榞lobal war on terror鈥� came to represent an overambitious enterprise encompassing too many objectives, and it ended up sounding hubristic and defining the US for some foreign audiences in a way that did not advance our purposes,鈥� says Brian Michael Jenkins, a counterterrorism expert at the RAND Corp. in Arlington, Va. 鈥淭he term GWOT will be hard to kill, but there鈥檚 a reason we haven鈥檛 heard President Obama or anyone else in the new administration use it.鈥�
As one retired senior military officer says, the term 鈥渨ar on terror鈥� 鈥渃onnotes 鈥榦ld think鈥� and one of the most powerful messages that the new president can send is that we are approaching international issues with a fresh approach and a new level of sophistication.鈥�

Now, Mr. Jenkins says, we are more likely to hear references to 鈥渂attling鈥� or 鈥渃ombating鈥� terrorism 鈥� words that take the ideological edge out of the fight, putting it more on par with combating crime.

In his first visit to the Pentagon Wednesday, Obama and the Joint Chiefs of Staff talked broadly about Iraq and Afghanistan but also about a global strategy for combating extremist ideology, says a senior defense official.

After the meeting, Obama told reporters of his message to the Joint Chiefs that he intends to spread the burden of securing US interests to other agencies.

鈥淲e have for a long time put enormous pressure on our military to carry out a whole set of missions, sometimes not with the sort of strategic support and the use of all aspects of American power,鈥� Obama said.

Looking beyond the military

A common thread of Obama鈥檚 actions so far is 鈥渁 shift away from terms and tools that are overly militaristic,鈥� says Matthew Levitt, director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy鈥檚 director of counterterrorism and intelligence studies. The trend now, says the former FBI analyst, will be toward an 鈥渁ll-elements-of-national-power approach to combating terrorism鈥� including law enforcement, intelligence, financial tools, and diplomacy.

Underscoring the growing role that illicit drugs are playing in financing terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, Mr. Levitt says agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration will play a larger role in the new counterterrorist strategy.

But, he adds, that does not mean the new administration will be 鈥渟oft鈥� on terrorism. The military will be used when appropriate, he says, citing Obama鈥檚 call for more troops in Afghanistan and last week鈥檚 missile strikes in Pakistan.

Still, Obama is also signaling that he expects an America that lives by and promotes its values to be its own best ally in fighting extremism. Al Qaeda鈥檚 top leadership already seems rattled by a popular new American president whose middle name is 鈥淗ussein,鈥� counterterrorism experts say. And by going on an Arab network and addressing the Muslim world in his inaugural address, Obama has shown he understands the importance of the president鈥檚 role.

Al Qaeda leaders such as Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri were comfortable with the Bush administration鈥檚 more confrontational rhetoric, says RAND鈥檚 Jenkins. Resisting that language, he says, may be one of the best ways over the long run of defeating them.

鈥淏in Laden and Al-Zawahiri are desperate to engage Obama in their narrative,鈥� Jenkins says, 鈥渁nd so far he鈥檚 showing us he鈥檚 not going to do that.鈥�