The corporate war against terrorism

Introduction It is clear that since the wave of attacks of September 11, 2001, happens not a day without that there is an essentially refers to the Al-Qaida terrorism. We talk about in the Office, at the café, in the universities, institutes of research, in the media - they also playing a very important role in the representation of the terrorism of any one. But is it what is it really? The media, if they do not tests, offer simply in their own way the facts in the world, where a large tendency to misinformation. And if there is analysis, often debates on Al-Qaida remain still quite poor, because they are based on monocausaux views. Determinism is dangerous and should at all costs avoid falling into this kind of simplistic trap. He therefore preferred the pluricausales approaches. What I want to build through this seminar work, it is a pluricausale analysis of the "war against terrorism", oriented on the corporate interests of the protagonists in this conflict asymmetric and non-linear. It was, first, to ask the following question: what are the predominant interests pushing the White House and the Pentagon to enter the "war against terrorism", in a war of conventional type? To answer the first question, it will be to expose the official, "visible", reasons that have relied upon the United States to enter in this war, as for example the fact of democratizing the Middle East and to create a "greater Middle East". In addition to these reasons referred to as "visible", mediated by neoconservative Bush's advisers, it comes to discover the other reasons that led the Bush Administration to declare war to bin Laden. Thus, the corporate interests of the first protagonist of this "war on terror" will be exposed. Second, you will have to analyze the interests corporate of the Al-Qa'idah phenomenon and, to have a conception of this "war" the widest possible (principle of the pluricausalité in the geopolitical research). This will first take analysis of the evolution of the status of Al-Qaeda on the international scene. The hypothesis is that Al-Qaeda took over the role of the State to impose on the international scene. Then, it will be more precisely understand its own corporate interests, which will be observed through its ideology. Finally, it will be necessary to emphasize the mutation suffered by Al-Qaeda (and its new corporate interests), especially since the "Enduring freedom" operation in 2001 to capture the specificities of the leading actors in the "transnational conflict", non-conventionnel. The assumption is that the centre of gravity of Al-Qaeda is dissolved in its affiliated groups and that this gave rise to a new ideology, the "al-qaidisme". Will finally, in the light of these observations, it to be reflection on the effectiveness of counter-terrorism, as the United States. The "war on terrorism" is oriented to the eradication of the terrorist Nebula or is it it fuels, on the contrary? As a corollary, "war against terrorism" would the not also a political veil to hide other interests, clearly oriented towards the corporate areas oil and military? 2. What is the "war against terrorism" conducted by the United States? has. On September 11, 2001, the birth of the "war against terrorism" and the axis of evil On January 20, 2001, moved from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration. A few months of Presidency, George Walker Bush is already hate by world public opinion. He refused the Kyoto agreements, and the accession of his country to the International Criminal Court. It also decided to restart missile shield project. In short, popularity does not fly very high. But come the day that will change the order of the world: on Tuesday, September 11, 2001. Eight years after the first attacks, the World Trade Center in New York, again is the target of Islamic terrorists, like the Pentagon, in Washington. The world stops turning. "We are all Americans", as the title of the newspaper "Le Monde" in the aftermath of the attacks - compassion of short duration. The world entered its "1era war of the 21st century", to borrow the title of a book released late 2001 and edited by the Express. But this war is not global, it is "global." It does not fight on front, "but on all fronts" (the Express 2001: 5). It is the beginning of the "war against terrorism". This Declaration of war led the United States to retaliate. First target where is supposed to hide the sponsor of the murderous attacks of the 11.09.01, Osama bin Laden: the Afghanistan of the Taliban. Al-Qaeda is the target to shoot. But is only the first step in the "war against terrorism". Triggered on October 7, 2001, operation "Enduring freedom" in Afghanistan lasted barely a month. On 13 November, Kabul is released. But other antioccidentaux attacks take place. He is remembered for the bombing of a discotheque in Bali, 187 dead and more than 300 wounded. Opposite to this, the staff of President Bush's influence in the neoconservative policy. It must take advantage of this wave of terrorism to remove Saddam Hussein. Indeed, "what would happen now if Saddam used chemical, bacteriological weapons, or even one day, nuclear, against the United States?" How could Bush justify leaving after having promised Americans that he would do all that never happens the horror of the World Trade Center? "(Figaro 2003: 10). The decision of President Bush is made. And it is in the traditional speech on the State of the Union, to the Congress, is initiated the formula "axis of evil". This 29 January 2002 will reverse the situation of international relations, particularly as regards the relations of the United States with the usual allies. Indeed, will lead the fight against terrorism on a wider scale scares the Westerners (including and especially Western Europe) who see this formula a religious character. One can even say that it is the beginning of the consternation and the "antibushisme" of the global emergence of a new anti-Americanism. However, President Bush remains firm. The purpose of the United States, positioned in a situation of self-defence, is the threat residing in weapons of mass destruction, that proliferate across the world and which may fall between the hands of rogue States (Rogue States), among which are the Korea of the North, the Iran and the Iraq, or in other words, the "axis of evil" ("The Axis of Evil" )). By April, the Bush administration is goal of regime change in Baghdad. The concept of "preventive war" is placed on the table of negotiations. Still a formula which is raising the hair on the head of a number of European leaders and russes…But Bush is marble with critics. He is convinced of this thesis (written in the strategy of national security of the United States) of the new right, neo, personified by ideologists such as William Kristol and Robert Kagan. "Regardless, for them, the risks of destabilization in a region still on the explosion, peace in the Middle East is possible that if one changes background fills a balance between little democratic regimes born of the end of the ottoman Empire" (Figaro 2003: 11). In addition, antioccidentaux Al-Qaeda attacks and the situation in the Arab world are reinforced this ideology there. The Iraq is therefore the next target. "Our route begins in Baghdad", to quote the title of the book written by Kristol and Kaplan. In addition, if the United States arrive to get its hands on Iraqi oil[1], second largest reserve in the world of black gold, this could significantly reduce the influence of Saudi Arabia on the oil market. Let us remember also that 13 of the 19 bombers of September 11, 2001 were of Saudi origin, what raise doubts on the part of the Americans on the transparency of the Wahhabi Kingdom, so-called ally of the United States, but mostly home to radical global Islamism. Antoine Basbous, founder and Director of the Observatory of Paris Arab countries, spoke of "Wahhabi Vatican" regarding Saudi influence on Islamists around the world. (b). Corporate neo interests - democracy and militarism The United States today is the hegemonic power par excellence. But who are the actors in this process? Since George w. Bush came to power in January 2001, they are neo-conservatives surrounding President which are the source of its policy, particularly with regard to foreign policy. For the neo-conservatives, the world must respect America and respect it for what it is (or would be), that is the nation of the rights of man and of democracy, that we must promote in the world, by force of arms if necessary. What to remember of neo-conservatism, in relation to our problem, it is his third age (dating in the 1990s). It differs from the other two[2] by the importance it attaches to military force and "democratic crusade" (history, 2004; 59), democracy must be defended - or even exported - thanks to America, strong and respected. And to put this into practice, no need for America to turn to organizations multilateral (such as the United Nations), considered to be illegitimate morally and democratically and mostly too weak to ensure the world order. There is an almost messianic vision of the role that must endorse the US. The 3th vague neo mission dates back to mid-1990s. At this time, the "néos" - already - wanted intervene in Iraq. September 11 would give them the green light. A new enemy appeared: global terrorism, which does not prevent before hitting. He must find the source of this problem, which is be the Middle East, where there is a "political and economic stagnation" (Ibid ; 59). The node of this stagnation, the nerve centre is embodied, according to the hawks of the Bush administration, by the person of Saddam Hussein, who, Iraq, rampant master absolute, "outbreaks his people, supports terrorists, fourbit weapons" (Ibid ; 59). Many critics of the neoconservative doctrine believe that the Iraq is not the most dangerous country in the "axis of evil" (which is, among others, the Korea of the North, the Iran and the Syria) and so it does deserve an American military intervention. The neo-conservatives, they don't think of this eye. Serve for them, do fall of Saddam Hussein's regime and establish democracy as a example to neighbours by thus pushing to change. This concerns the interests of the Americans from the ideological point of view. But given as the angle of the corporate interests (industry), the "war against terrorism" is a superb opportunity for an administration to enrich themselves personally. Indeed, since 2001, since the beginning of the Presidency of George w. Bush, agreements and mergers accelerated. It is also not certain that the "Hawks" are arrived in power, only obsessed with the Iraq, as demonstrated by analysis of the ideological interests, the latter in terms of sailing for the development of important contracts in the military-industrial field. The objectives of the neo-conservative "Hawks" are moving instead to "grow at all costs the threat posed by ballistic missiles that could be launched from"rogue States"such as North Korea or the Iran, (...)]. "[to] make explode the defence budgets and promote armaments firms to which they are linked" (Laurent, 2004; 113). The question is then whether these officials who take advantage of this lucrative business. Without claim to completeness with respect to the understanding of the military-industrial complex, it will be put forward just a few names of personalities and their links with the industry of weapons, to highlight the existing malsanité in the Bush administration and his fight against the misrepresentation It is interesting to consider the case of the NSA, the National Security Agency, created on November 4, 1952, under the chairmanship of Truman. Without going into details, that would be heavy in this general analysis of corporate interests in the "war against terrorism", it may be noted, as Eric Laurent, the "real crossover between the world of the industry and the Agency." "Fibre optic network, specially designed for the NSA and is used for internal ultra-confidentiels document transmission, has been developed by a small unknown start-up, Q West, which has however a shareholder celebrates, Donald Rumsfeld" (Ibid; )(111) Since the mid-1990s, but especially since September 11, changes in communication technology have led the NSA, as well as its little brother, the NRO (National Reconnaissance Office[3]), to design new devices more efficient mainly (transistors and satellites) and, therefore, this led also to dig in the defence budget anda fortiori, to the shareholders of the companies suppléantes… "In 2003, consolidation and mergers resulted in the existence of big three of the weapons in the United States which consumes all contracts." "Boeing has absorbed Mac Dowell, Lockheed merged with Martin Marietta to become the world number one, and Northrop the third received in 2002 almost 9 billion in contracts, representing more than 5% of the total budget for the acquisition of the Pentagon" (Ibid; )(114) It is even more disturbing to see that the above companies, and one multitude of others, employing former officials responsible for intelligence and security, also employed by the Saudi regime, this "Wahhabi Vatican" in the words of Antoine Basbous, who, in all likelihood, leads the carrot (if it is not also the stick) oil and investment funds, weaknesses of the US security strategy. One of these companies working closely to the Saudi regime is American society Vinell, created in 1931, whose work is to provide military training to foreign Governments, including Saudi Arabia. This company was "redeemed by TRW, including one of the leaders [was] Robert Gates, former Director of the CIA George w. Bush's father and current Secretary of Defense of the United States, since December 18, 2006, the famous Carlyle investment fund that is precisely among its shareholders Bush father and the Bin Laden family" (Ibid; )(115) TRW was purchased, however, in 2002, by Northrop, through the intervention of Paul Wolfowitz, head of the néoconservateurs… file - oil For more than a half century, the main link between Saudi Arabia and the United States is of course oil. There was of course the oil shock of 1973, which revealed some friction between OPEC and the US, but "marriage" between the largest consumer of crude (the United States) and the largest producer of black gold (Saudi Arabia) do not apart so far. On the contrary, relations had tended to intensify, so oil revenues was large, with the increase in the price of a barrel. Since the attacks of September 11, it has been found a constantly increasing curve of the price of a barrel of oil and, until July 2006, reaching almost the $80 per barrel. With such prices, speculation and investment went well. For example, before the prices are too high and that "ground zero" smoked, "dreamed of oil and gas companies to the new project of exploitation of gas, estimated at $ 25 billion, that crown prince Abdullah negotiated with them, through the Office of James Baker, former Secretary of State for Bush's father, and his partner in the fonds d'Investissement Carlyle.". The powerful Office of lawyer Baker Botts in Houston installed, had an Office in Riyadh where he became an almost unavoidable partner for all important contracts negotiated with the Saudis. James Baker as his friend George Bush collected fruitful dividends for the role they had played in the first Gulf war, protecting the Saudi Kingdom. (…) "[At the same time], the former firm of Vice President Cheney, Halliburton, also client of the law firm Baker, signed a contract in the amount of $ 140 million for the development of the Saudi oil fields" (Ibid; )128-129). With regard to the Iraq, it is true that the moral weight of American (creation of a democratic greater Middle East) policy is much more important than what one arrives to imagine in our consciences in Europe. But do not mistake. (Attack the Iraq under the guise of the fight against terrorism and have large reserve of naphtha in the world of its second oil after Saudi Arabia) could change the equation from the quasi-diktat of the pétromonarchie other words, Wahhabi Saudi Arabia. With Iraqi oil, the Americans could lead the "war against terrorism" with less obstacles in their path, as for example by reviewing their oil contracts signed with Saudi Arabia, which is the source of Islamism and its spread worldwide. The geopolitical dependence of the United States with the Wahhabi Kingdom, through the Iraq, therefore might decrease and the map of the influences on the oil market would be reconstituted. It is a geostrategic vision is worth, but some specialists believe argue that the entry into war against the Iraq, in the context of the "war against terrorism", is a calculation much further on the part, this time, of the family of Bush. Always mediated by a willingness to break off little by little the oil from the Middle East and to turn to its own reserves, the assumption of these specialists is that (the entourage of) Bush had planned the increase in the price of a barrel of oil before it began. Indeed, with prices of high oil, oil production in the United States (primarily in Texas, where Bush maintains strong links with so-called "independent" tankers) becomes possible, as extract a barrel of oil of a deposit in Texas is more expensive than the extraction in Saudi Arabia. Hence any contradictory pressure around the US President: lower the cost of oil to boost the US economy or focus on high prices for personal reasons, but also diplomatic[4]? 3. The "war against terrorism" seen by Al-Qaida has. The problem of the failure of States and the non-linear war What is the art of the war when asymmetric warfare is globalized? At this time, there are more than real distinction between peace and war, the civil and the military. Therefore, there is a change in the art of war. While past, veterans had a delimited field of battle and military enemies known and visible, today, Veterans (Al-Qaida) did not hesitate to involve civilians in this new form of war. According to Ben Laden, citizens are as responsible as their Government of the atrocities committed by the latter, because they are the ones who elected him: « Every American who pays taxes to the Government is our target because it helps the American war against the nation musulmane… machineTerrorize the oppressors, criminals, thieves and bandits is necessary for the safeguarding of populations and for the protection of their biens… They have compromised our honor and our dignity and because we dare to push a single cry of protest, we are called terrorists. This is a serious injustice. » This statement of bin Laden date of may, 1998, in an interview by the latter to a journalist from the American string ABC, John Miller [5] . This "democratization of responsibility" brings Ben Laden to carry out a "strategy of liberalization and extension of the area of the conflict" (Ould Mohamedou, 2005 ; 135). The war becomes nonlinear, because it has more defined territorial limits. The field of battle is global. This is "spatio-temporal linearity of commitment used primarily to protect the armed group against its vulnerability in a permanent exhibition to an enemy Government its power and its legality" (Ibid; )(133) One of the goals of Al-Qaeda is to attack the symbolic targets selectively to "humiliate his opponent, to reveal its weaknesses and encourage him to react in retaliation" (Gunaratna, 2002 ; )12-13). The use of violence by Al-Qaeda is corollary to the bankruptcy of States, which have more failed to defend their people and the interests of these. Therefore, in response to the bankruptcy of States that Al-Qaeda took over the role of the State and that, through the use of the monopoly of violence "legitimate." "The use of force is their ultima ratio and its legitimacy is the perception of the right to self-defence" (Ould Mohamedou, 2005; 136). Although it is decentralized and polycentric, "State Al-Qaida" has therefore "contracted private and public alliances, concluded a truce, had an impact on the elections and, above all, gained international stature beyond the threat he poses. "An economic statement also came progressively expand its discursive panoply" (Ibid; )(152) What therefore search Al-Qaida, is the security of its "State". As it said bin Laden on Al-Jazeera on October 30, 2004, "Each State which does not play with our security automatically won his own safety"[6]. There is only to see the Spain. The country was struck by terrorist attacks under the Aznar Government, March 11, 2004. A week later, his Government was replaced by that of Zapatero, who did repatriate Spanish troops deployed in Iraq. Since then, no Al-Qaeda attack was perpetrated against Spanish interests. This, bin Laden has even proposed a truce to all European countries on condition that the latter withdraw their troops from Iraq: "in response to the positive developments that have been expressed in the recent events and by public opinion polls showing that most Europeans want the Tilleul". Subsequently this, I offer them a peace treaty; "the basis for this is our commitment to stop actions against all countries committed themselves to not attack Muslims or interfere in their affairs"[7] (bin Laden, 15 April 2004 in Ould Mohamedou, 2005; 168). Britain refused and was struck on July 7, 2005. But the State is not the only entity to play a role in the djihâd launched by Al-Qaida. Indeed, in his book Knights under the banner of the Prophet, meditations on the[8], Jihad movement "Al-Zawahiri has established six categories which are, for the West,"tools to combat islam": the United Nations, the Muslim regimes which cooperate with Westerners, multinational companies, international communication and data exchange systems, international press agencies and strings TV satellite.", and finally the international humanitarian organizations" (in Gunaratna, 2002; 268). It was for Al-Qaida to fight against these "tools to fight islam". To understand how the war of Al-Qaida is designed, Mohammed-Mahmoud Ould Mohamedou offers this table (Ould Mohamedou, 2005; 139): Ground punitive and defensive response to aggressive policies Logic principle 1: Commoditisation (collective responsibility privatized) Principle 2: Substitution (legitimate reappropriation of the State monopoly of violence) Strategy instrumentalization of the technological imbalance (disparity of forces: opportunity rather than constraint) Tactics -transnational mobilization of combatants -structure cell and derived groups -spectacular use of civilian equipment (aircraft, trains, bus) Al-Qaida is therefore "not a monolithic group or a coalition of groups;" [it] includes a core of basic Afghanistan, terrorist cells around the world, a conglomerate of Islamist political parties and other independent bodies that [it] uses for its offensives. (…) "[In short], it is a vertical structure which provides strategic direction and tactical support to its network of compartmentalized cells and associated organizations" (Gunaratna, 2002) ; 67). The evidence that Al-Qaeda is a vertical structure is that, even after the American intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, its operation could continue (not without some obstacles). What are the regional nuclei which have taken over, the Philippine group Abu Sayyaf in the Algerian GSPC (the Group Salafist preaching and Combat). Terms of this analysis on the reason for Al-Qaida, that replacement of States bankrupt, it is possible now to deepen knowledge of the Nebula by analyzing its ideology. Thus, it will be possible to extract the real motives of the movement of bin Laden, in other words, it is "intelligibiliser" the true interests of Al-Qaida, let alone its corporate interests. (b). The interests corporate Al - Qaeda through its ideology The conceptualization of Al-Qaida returned to Abdullah Azzam, who, in 1988, publishes "Al - Qa'ida al-Sulbah" in Al-Jihad. Here is an excerpt of this founding act: "You jump in the fire of the hardships and the waves of the worst difficulties." Leaders share with all the harsh steps, sweat and blood. Leaders must be as the heat mother of a fowl chicks grow under the wings, during the long period of incubation and education. This Vanguard must refrain from the vile pleasures of the world and support abstinence and frugality are its hallmark. With the same faith, it must firmly believe and rely on the ideology, by feeding the great hope of victory. There must be a strong determination and a willingness to continue walking, so long as it is. Its essential for this walk travel supplies. Provisions are meditation, prayer and patience. Loyalty and dedication. " Need to be aware of conspiracies that surround against islam everywhere in the world"[9]. (in Gunaratna, 2002; 8) This passage shows quite clearly the ideology of Al-Qaeda, where the conservation of forces and the virtues of patience are the prerogatives needed "for the Holy battle against unbelievers." Saint combat, or djihâd, is relative to the current Islamist Salafist, which is claims the Organization of bin Laden. "The purpose of the Salafi [associated with the Wahhabis] is to return to the Quran and the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet, to revitalize the thinking within the framework of Islamic principles (i.e. present realistic solutions to contemporary problems) and to establish a truly Islamic society governed by the laws of Allah" (Ibid; )(36) "In this literature, history is only repeating to infinity of the same story: the arrival of the Prophet and the occurrence of Islam, fighting for the extension of its scope and the conquest of the universe up to that he submit entire to this religion" (Kepel, 2005; 5). In a first phase, is to overthrow the leaders of Muslim countries, considered as "false Muslim" (jahiliyyah) and replace them with a true Islamic State. In a second phase, it comes to fighting the United States and its allies (including especially Israel), because they support the "bad Muslim leaders". By participating in the sense of social and political injustice that exists within Muslim communities, they are thus also considered enemies of islam, let alone the Salafi islam. It is therefore in this Islamic view that Al-Qaeda has evolved. To attract a maximum of members, it gives "eight main reasons to join Jihad: the desire that stop the domination of the unbelievers; the lack of men; the fear of the flames of hell; the desire to perform its duty and respond to the call of Allah; the example of the pious predecessors; the desire to give Islam a strong base; protection of the oppressed; "the search for martyrdom" (Gunaratna, 2002) ; 106). They are therefore not why apocalyptic - as some authors like to characterize them - the Organization to act, but the practical reasons as a religious framework. According to Napoleoni, "religion camouflages skilfully political and economic motives." "But as soon as you lifts the veil, it becomes clear that the fight is not against a perpetrator but against foreign powers and local perpetrators to operate economically and culturally the Muslim masses" (Napoleoni, 2005; 217). Should therefore not only be members of Al-Qaida and humiliated and frustrated, youth who are only looking for the destruction of the Western world. "In his message of October 30, 2004, to the American people, Osama bin Laden declared that President George w. Bush was wrong" to say that we hate freedom"and added:"if it is so, explain us why we do not strike the Sweden for example."" "(Ould Mohamedou, 2005; 158). For Al-Qaida, the political objectives are clear and declared. It's totally rebuild society and not destroy without reason. In General, Al-Qaeda seeks to stop the threat of the United States on the security of Muslims, playing "a role of activism supporting leverage" all crins (Sayegh, 2004; 27). Thus, one can understand the modern djihâd "as a BREW mixing Islamic revolutionary ideology, quest Muslim identity and socio-economic aspirations" (Napoleoni, 2005; 219). What are these special corporate interests that justify violence by Al-Qaeda. However, the analysis of corporate interests in the "war against terrorism" cannot be complete unless noted the mutation suffered by Al-Qaida. Indeed, how to design a contre-stratégie of Al-Qaeda terrorism if its current form is unknown? c. Corporate through the "al-qaidisme" interest Can be seen that there was a resurgence of the "al-qaidistes" since September 11, 2001 attacks. These attacks were perpetrated by cells affiliated with Al-Qaida, but independent from the operational point of view. Therefore, it may be asked how Al-Qaida has evolved since operation "Enduring freedom" in October 2001? Some authors such as Loretta Napoleoni or Gilles Kepel believe that the Al Qaeda Nebula moult gradually in model. It becomes a sort of logo. "It is as if bin Laden provided a standard, a"mark", a concept that local managers return to their account" (the barn, 2006; 153). The referent ideological as the operating modes are available for all the volunteers on the Internet. In an interview with the Arabic daily published in London Al-Quds al-Arabi, a former bodyguard of bin Laden, Abu Jandal, stated in the summer 2005: "all the elements of Al-Qaida activate themselves." Anyone at the opportunity to address the fact. It is his decision. No matter that he has lent allegiance to Osama bin Laden or not. "" "(Ibid ; 153). The hypothesis is that the Islamist cells think globally, but act locally. In other words, this means that the groups can refer to Al-Qaida in ideological terms, but they will justify their local attacks in a political context, regional, or even national. Of the regional context in the Afghanistan war during the 1980s, Al-Qaida has evolved into international "Afghan", bringing together thousands of djihâdistes volunteers in its databases. Then, wanting to continue its war against the oppressors of the Muslims (the United States and its allies), Al-Qaida is is transnationalisée by creating a global network of cells, more or less subject to the orders of bin Laden and the majlis shura (Consultative Council). But since the attack of the US coalition in Afghanistan, there was a shift of the centre of gravity of Al-Qaeda to "the vast majority of people who are not directly involved (in the war)], but whose support - voluntary or forced - is necessary to the insurgents around the world" (Ibid ; 153). The centre of gravity of Al-Qaeda is therefore de facto dissolved operative freedom which is focused on the al-qaidiste model in all its cells, leaving it to each of them. The Switzerland, to give an example, is not immune from Islamist attacks, as the think Jean-Luc Vez, Director of the Federal Office of police, which also sees the "atomization of the groups claiming Jihad" (Masmejan, 2006; 7): "the situation has changed." After the attacks in Madrid, but especially after those of London, the structure of the groups claiming Jihad is changed. The threat is atomized sort. It is now small groups composed of people sometimes well integrated into local society, ready to act according to the circumstances, on the opportunities available to them. This trend is noticeable everywhere in Europe. The movements were previously more hierarchical, and the Switzerland was then not as a direct target, although some diplomatic representations on Swiss soil could become. "This analysis must now be revised" (Ibid ) ; 7). Thus, "to operate in the context of a strengthened vigilance, the strategy of Al-Qaeda after September 11 is based on [the] Parties Islamists who are hiding behind a political veil; It is from there that will recruit and supporters to fight in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Will "pending conditions, Al-Qaida operate through mosques, madrassas, community centres and, as far as possible, charities of America, Northern and Western Europe" (Gunaratna, 2002; 270). In other words, the modus operandi is al-qaidiste (kill and to know), but issues remain in the national framework, in the internal policy of each countries such Islamist cell. "It is clear that the term al Qa'ida is a double figure of rhetoric." First, it is a metonymy of this gathering of Islamic radicals resulting in the same place in the jihad. "But it will be, by derivation, the metaphor database, dispersed on the surface of the globe and kept together by the links and sites online, a"database", a microcosm of the Ummah are found"brothers in islam"of the Philippines in Mauritania" (Kepel, 2004; 146-147). Loretta Napoleoni, it, note that "economically and financially, the transition of Al-Qaeda to al-qaidisme has decreased the costs of Islamic terrorism." Not only national attacks are cheaper to run than the transnational attacks, but they are also more difficult to follow, because they require no international movement of people or funds (...) The script is the same but the scale is much smaller, adapted to modest finance available to groups. However, their socio-economic impact is enormous (www. ) view.php?StoryID = 20060106-092307-3492r). Eric Denécé think also thus: "no doubt, for convenience, we will continue to be attributed to Al-Qaeda all terrorist actions that will occur." Bin Laden will probably remain the inspiration, but it will play no role. This great terror arsonist lit so fire it can withdraw and watch the world ignite. "Succession is now insured" ( This means that even if bin Laden died, his dream and his strategy would not disappear not so with him. The idea beyond the body and it seems that the "generation Al-Qaeda" is (already) being the torch of bin Laden. 4. The problems of the counter-terrorism The light of these observations on the philosophy of war to Al-Qaeda - al - qaidisme - cannot be noted that that it has apparently not been understood by the United States. They believe that by targeting the leaders, they come to put an end to the Al-Qa'idah phenomenon. However, it is nothing. Ben Laden has become a myth. It is as if it was already dematerialized. Therefore, if he had to be killed, the Nebula would certainly lose its charismatic leader, but its ideas he would survive. Culturally, the stratagems of Washington were not seized it, because they remained on a design of the war based on the hard power. "It [to America] an opponent his as belonging to the register of the hard power : a State territory and institutions, and not a terrorist NGO without statutes or head office also devastating it.". "Washington strategists are not culturally able to apprehend an actor who is not, ultimately, a State" (Kepel, 2004; 143). The United States therefore faced a "major problem ofintelligence in the French sense as the term English: not only the means to destroy them appear in fine inadequate, inappropriate, but the interpretation of the phenomenon is missed.". "It remains dependent on a world view indebted for the most part to the strategic categories of thinking of the cold war" (Ibid ; 142). This asymmetry, fueled by this problem ofintelligence relating to the understanding of the enemy is Al-Qaida, therefore is another problem, that of reciprocity in security matters. - Principle of reciprocity What research Ben Laden is equal security. This principle of political reciprocity is the very foundation of the strategy of Al-Qaeda. As long as there is no political reciprocity in the war by the United States, Al-Qaeda will continue to use the terrorist weapon. To illustrate this, here is a statement of bin Laden, dated November 12, 2002, published on audio support on Al-Jazeera: "If you were saddened and appalled by the sight of your dead and those of your alliés… remember our Unfertilised. How long should we be the only ones to suffer massacre, destruction, deportation, being an orphan and the widow, so that peace, security and joy remain your monopoly exclusif… It is an unfair situation. It is high time that we become equal. Thus, as you kill, you will be killed and as you bomb, you will be bombed; wait to see what brings the curse"(in Ould-Mohamedou, 2005; 160). To bin Laden, this "curse" is not free, but comes from a situation of self-defence: "Se defend oneself and punishing her attacker as a result, it objectionable terrorism?". "If this is the case, then we cannot escape. (Osama bin Laden in his message to the American people, October 2004). Bin Laden believes that there is a profound injustice on the security of all people. It is therefore for the debate on the definition on terrorism: terrorism for some method of combat in a situation of self-defence for others. Reciprocity policy and legal is therefore a condition to consider if one does not want to move towards a "perpetual war for perpetual peace" (Huyghe, 2005; 9). Need so that the United States review their copy in strategic matters, because the time factor will become their worst enemy. And, for the economic reasons inherent in their "war on terror". Indeed, as noted just Loretta Napoleoni, the "legacy of the past lessons show that conflicts presented as universal ideas battles generally become wars of attrition." They are not always won by the richest competitor but by one who does not fall into bankruptcy. Although Western capitalism has wide resources available, they are not unlimited. With financial and human costs increasing, the budget for the fight against terrorism will, sooner or later, begin the Western way of life. Public opinion could turn against the Western leaders, as was the case during the Vietnam war. "If this happens, Osama bin Laden will claim a second victory over a superpower" (Napoleoni, 2005; 74). 5. Finding: counter-terrorism strategy change or leave the priority to corporate interests? It was thought that the end of the cold war would lead to a period of prosperity, of peace, of democracy. But the neo-liberal concept of democracy is not really political; It is to be seen in terms of individual freedom, to "escape the economy of any subordination also to state that the policy" (Wievorka, 2002; 38). And this conception of freedom led, paradoxically, at a growing militarization of the world, through the influence of the United States on instances such as NATO, which has transformed and adapted to the dangers of the era post-cold war era. It is to do in fact through "economic glasses", since because of multinational firms which were denationalized, needed to protect the interests of these companies and the States supporting them. And this is what made the United States, to protect their interests, continue their logic of capital accumulation and ensure peace, began to militarize in more and more the world. "History shows that the conduct of the wars is based on the production of weapons which itself depends on the State of the economy, more specifically the industrial and technological development, because as said Engels,"industry is the industry that it is moving towards the production or destruction of objects"(in Serfati, 2003;). (62) Therefore observed over the past 10-20 years rising force of the military-industrial complex, which, linked to the financial capital, influenced more and more policy area. Since the first Gulf war, it came in a new military phase, that specialists call RMA (Revolution in the Military Affairs, the revolution in military affairs). This revolution is due to the development of technologies of information and communication (ICT) which are now used in extremely precise way by the military sphere, because one who controls the information may dominate, so talking about "information dominance" (Ibid ) ; 63). These are the United States which have such power today. September 11 did that accelerate the path taken by capitalism since the 1980s through what Bush called the "war without limits": "more financial capital managed to strengthen and extend its logic, and more the need for the force grows" (Ibid ); 69). A judged by these recent observations and those observed throughout this work, it shows that the United States is a strategic deadlock. May they long continue to impose their model of Imperial control through an unbridled militarism? What is this militarism is an effective strategy? The United States should seriously call into question, if they want to keep their global leadership . First of all, they should ask themselves the question "whether the US bases in the country where they are not desired by the local population increase or decrease the security of the US and longer term of the American people, and if it is used to prevent terrorism or if instead they encourage.". "If this question was asked, which is something extremely delicate to do in Washington DC… atmosphere that could have revolutionary implications for us strategy and security"[10] (in Ould-Mohamedou, 2005; 166). This issue of implanted American military bases abroad is the crystallization of American foreign policy, which puts too much emphasis on the hard power. Their approach to security is too focused on the tactical, on the operational. This high concentration in the tactical field away from the United States of their political purposes, which are supposed to be beneficial for the whole world. They have a priori forgot the clausewitzienne structure, which place the tactics below the strategic, which is itself subject to the policy. Given that political goals are directed towards a secure world and the facts, in the reality on the ground, to prove the contrary, there is therefore a problem somewhere. The nœudal point of this problem lies in the American strategy. To develop a strategy, must first get to know his enemy, B. If (b) uses the weapon of terrorism against A-, which is in a form of "conventional" war, then must understand the nature of this terrorism. A sociological approach is required then itself. "Among the proposed axes: analysis of the factors that drive a group armed to stop or continue the fight, the research of methods of prevention of the recruitment of new djihâdistes and the study of the unconscious motivations of bomb technicians, bombers including" (of La Grange, 2006; 155-156). Through a sociological analysis of terrorism, the United States must realize that the "war on terrorism" should not only be by force of arms, but mainly by the public diplomacy. It is the base of the pyramid - population - which must be heard. On the population that is the top of the pyramid, it should be taken into consideration. "Prevail, to establish a new relationship, against the status quo that gave rise to Al Qaeda." The attitude of the West and the Muslim world is largely responsible for the current situation. The West must work with the Muslim world, with Governments and populations; It is not enough to work with Governments only (...) "Public diplomacy should be an integral part of the fight against terrorism" (Gunaratna, 2002; 278). Then start this work of public diplomacy, the United States should first engage in a process of review of the injustices, they would be the cause. By "reading critical fifty years past, foreign policy and oil policy (…) singularly" "[the United States will observe that their] economic development is based on alliances with oil dictatorships and encourages the latter to promote the more backward beliefs" (Brisard, Dasquié, 2001; 228). In short, there appears to be a glimmer of hope if the US will react correctly to the above points and they effectively reorient their corporate interests. Indeed, by understanding the reasons which fuel international terrorism and by applying a strategy which responds to the expectations of both sides, a peace process could come from a diplomatic reasoning, self-criticism on the part of the United States. "Who sows the wind reaps the storm" is easy, simplifying expression, but it ICES in the current context. It is therefore in the United States that is the task to start this "public diplomacy", since they are the ones that are, among other Western countries, "depression" that create storms. What practical solutions are then offered to them? Imagine three approaches that could bring down against terrorism. The first approach is societal. The idea comes from Rohan Gunaratna, who thinks that "humanity may abandon terrorism as means of expression of protest political institutions are created to enable people who have real grievances and legitimate aspirations to express them and be satisfied without recourse to violence" (Gunaratna, 2002; 287). The second approach, however, is ideological. Since Al-Qaeda uses the Koran as a supporting medium to its actions, should oppose the tendentious interpretation of the Holy Book by Al-Qaida. Long term, Al-Qaeda could wipe of serious strategic setback. Finally, the third approach remains in the military domain. To meet the immediate threat, it would be advisable, at the micro level, to infiltrate Al-Qaeda cells by agents recruited within immigrant communities, because these agents would pass unnoticed and, more importantly, they would be the most to even to understand the motivations of terrorists and thus to anticipate their actions. Later, it would be to pool all the information collected to smother the threat of a block. On the macro level, should resolve the conflicts which are mixed with Muslims, as in Kashmir, Palestine, Afghanistan or Iraq. It is thus also to help Arab and Muslim States to improve the quality of life of their population. Therefore leading a plurifrontale peacemaking policy, on the one hand, and by minimizing failures and by maximizing the success of another, then Al Qaeda could fall into disuse. But we really want to see its main enemy? Even if on the one hand there is (military, civilian) deaths and this should push the U.S. Government to reconsider their strategy, the financial part (oil, armaments industry) seems to take over. But for how long? 6. Annexes Summary table Here is an attempt to classify corporate interest in the "war against terrorism" according to the actors taking part in the conflict and depending on the quality of the interests, as they are positive (profit any) or negative (factor playing against this or that actor). Interests corporate Actors "Positive". "Negative". USA Military prestige, power strike, huge defence budget; profits for the military-industrial complex Profits for the international oil companies and independent American (best production capacity) Democratization of the "greater Middle East" (neo, messianic vision) Anti-Americanism growing (public opinion against Bush's policy) Military cost Cost in human matters (soldiers killed or wounded) Terrorist attacks around the world Al-Qaeda Prestige (international recognition in the media, popular support) Financial enrichment global (through NGOs and other sources of income) Ideology al-qaidiste (lowering the cost of the attacks and security) (senior dignitaries arrested or killed) immediately replaced Allies of the United States Military budget increased Commercial contracts with the United States Prestige (ex: the Poland was administered militarily one of the three regions under Bremer, with the US and the United Kingdom) Adverse public opinion Cost in human matters (soldiers killed or wounded) The history of neo-conservatives Who are neo-conservatives? To find the answer to this question, we must first go through a historical analysis of the domestic policy of the United States. Indeed, in the 1930s, following the stock market crash on Wall Street in 1929, which led to the period commonly named the great depression, the tendency is to government intervention to boost the budget and social programs. However, this progressive desire (in economic matters) can be designed without a measure of stability at the international level. It is for this reason that many liberals of post-war were of the virulent anti-communist and thus supported Truman in the entry in the cold war in 1947. Their doctrine was that America must defend democratic peoples fighting totalitarianism, with the support of the United Nations (as they claimed), and helping other nations to develop economically. Talking about "global destiny" (history; no. 284; 56). On domestic policy, the Liberals proposed in fact strengthen the welfare State or to establish a civic egalitarian basis for blacks. And this is what began in practice from 1947 to 1963, Truman to Kennedy. In the 1960s, however, there was a break. Indeed, abroad, the Vietnam war is a huge failure and, inside, we struggle for civil rights. It is while Lyndon b. Johnson launches social programs in large number and introduces the practice of positive discrimination (affirmative actions), which must promote integration, through the education of minorities, including black. In response to this excess of liberalism, are born two journal The Public Interest, established in 1965 by Irving Kristol and Daniel Bell and Commentary by Norman Podhoretz. These intellectuals come from the left. Some were socialist, even even Trotskyist in the 1930s. Attached to the liberalism of the New Deal (which allowed a very strong intrusion of the Federal State in Economic Affairs, the crisis of 1929), they refuse however liberalism proposed by Johnson, including the occult scope equality principle and the primacy of freedom. It is precisely during those years that was born the term of "neo-conservative" and through the pen of Michael Harrington as "Renegades" (Ibid ; 56). It is 1968 and the Republican Nixon won the Presidency. The Democratic Party switches to the left and it is once appears a new face of neo-conservatives. Indeed, they are more of simple "nostalgic", but Democrats, academics and political activists in Washington advocating a return to a certain "tradition", social progress and liberties inside and especially outside anti-communism. Their desire is to destroy communism and to defend and promote democracy all around the globe. Young people, that we know well today, are appearing: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz… For these neo-conservatives, democracy is the best system and America is its only vector, "which requires that the United States are strong militarily" (idem; 58). This vision of the world is growing when Reagan came to power in 1980. Although it is Republican, he was Advisor, foreign policy, by a neo-conservatives (such as Richard Perle), the Pentagon, he inspire policy in Afghanistan, in Central America or elsewhere. However, with the end of the cold war, their words lose their weight. Under Bush's father, they go almost unnoticed. Under the era Clinton, they reappear timidly, because of the "moral accents" (Ibid ; 58) of the predecessor, George W.. Bush. But it is especially since the arrival of Bush son to power in 2000 that could see re-emerge neo in his last expression doctrine, firmly right on the political spectrum, as the two newcomers, William Kristol (son of Irving Kristol) and Robert Kagan, publishers of the neoconservative journal The Weekly Standard. This 3th age of the neo-conservatism differs from the other two by the importance it attaches to military force and "democratic crusade" (Ibid ; 59), democracy must be defended - or even exported - thanks to America, strong and respected. And to put this into practice, no need for America to turn to organizations multilateral (such as the United Nations), considered to be illegitimate morally and democratically and mostly too weak to ensure the world order. There is an almost messianic vision of the role that must endorse the US. 7. Bibliography Brisard Jean-Charles, Guillaume Dasquié, Ben Laden, forbidden, truth Editions Denoël, Paris, 2001 Having been censored for a certain period (Yeslam bin Laden, half-brother of Osama, living in Geneva, was quoted in the book in terms of financial links with Al-Qaeda and had filed a complaint for libel leading to censorship of the book in bookstores), the book but resurfaced by revealing the financial network of Al-Qaida around the world. Very complete. Chomsky Noam, "International Terrorism: Image and Reality", in George Alexander (eds.), Western State Terrorism, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1991 Virulent author on American foreign policy, Chomsky has attempted in this article a relevant approach in the definition of terrorism. Of the Grange Arnaud, "The zigzag of the fight against terrorism", in the review of the intelligent, No. 1, February-March 2006 This article enters a strategic perspective in the field of counter-terrorism. It think that Westerners should better learn about their enemy to fight it. Rohan Gunaratna, Al-Qaeda, in the heart of the first global terrorist network Editions otherwise, Paris, 2002 Book reference on Al-Qaeda. Rohan Gunaratna, Professor at the Centre for studies on terrorism and political violence at the University St. Andrews, in Scotland, analysis in all its facets phenomenon Al-Qaida, including through the relevance of interviews with members of Al-Qaida. Kepel, Gilles (eds.), Al-Qaeda in the text, PUF, Paris, 2005 Reference book with respect to the ideology of Al-Qaida. Under the direction of Gilles Kepel, PhD students from Sciences-Po Paris were translated and analysed the texts produced by the key figures of Al-Qaeda (Osama bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Abdullah Azzam or even Abu Mussab al-Zarkawi). Gilles Kepel, Fitna, war at the heart of Islam, Gallimard, Paris, 2004 Very current, the theme of this book is focused on the increasingly deep divisions separating the main currents of islam, namely between the Sunnis and Shiites. Huygue Francois-Bernard, "four polémologues be expriment…". ", Jibrile, n ° 5, September 2005 In this article, four polémologues, including Mr. Raymond Sayegh, respond to issues of Jibrile on what is the war and its evolution in the future. Lawrence Eric, the hidden face of September 11th, PLON, Paris, 2004 The great reporter Eric Laurent book a narrative of his travels around the world for information about fuzzy points of September 11. In a very suggestive style, the author highlights the lies and silences on the attacks on American soil, pointing out the corporate interests existing primarily between the United States and Saudi Arabia. Masmejan Denis, "" Islamist attacks are possible in Switzerland also", The times, May 31, 2006 Loretta Napoleoni, that finances international terrorism?, otherwise, Paris, 2005 (2004) Reference book on the economics of international terrorism. Napoleoni Loretta, "terrorists kill the economy", The weekly, September 22, 2005. In this short article, Loretta Napoleoni note the disparity between trivial costs of a terrorist attack and its socio-economic impact, which are destructive to the economy of the country or / and the sector covered by this or that attack. Ould Mohamedou Mohammed-Mahmoud, "Al Qaeda: a nonlinear war", in A Contrario, vol. 3, no. 2, 2005 Excellent translation in French of a section of Ould Mohamedou which addressed on the strategic development of the Organization of bin Laden. Sayegh Raymond, United States, survival by dominance, Academia-Bruylant, Louvain, 2004 Raymond Sayegh wondered about the causes and consequences of the global leadership of the United States. Very good geopolitics around the issues of globalization and American hegemony. Claude Serfati, "war without limit, the 21e century News" in Artous Antoine, Sitel Francis (eds.), globalization and imperialism, Les Cahiers de Communist criticism, Syllepse, Paris, 2003 The author analyzes the policy of the Bush administration through the relationship militarism and capitalism, which are the two aspects of imperialism. Useful criticism. Michel Wieviorka, "Reflections on September 11 and its aftermath" in Chagnollaud Jean-Paul (eds.), The Mediterranean in the event of September 11, Mediterranean Confluences, L'Harmattan, Paris, 2002 Excellent synthesis. Iraq: objective Baghdad In Le Figaro hors, No. 57984, 2003 The Iraq war (2003) explained in different facets. The first war of the 21st century: the shock of September 11, the weight of history, the actors in the conflict, and in the future?, L'Express, Paris, 2001 Gathering of several articles about September 11. "The crusade of the neo-conservatives" in History, No. 284, February 2004 Excellent article for understanding the basis of American neoconservative thought. Eric Denécé compares Al-Qaeda to a holding company with its own subsidiaries. It defines Al-Qaeda, its strategy, its proliferation. It also notes the position of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as hotbeds of radical Islamism. Finally, an analysis of success and the limits of the fight against terrorism has just concluded his article. = 20060106-092307-3492r Loretta Napoleoni is a very relevant analysis on lower costs of terrorism, which leads it to the transfer of Al-Qaida in al-qaidisme. [1] American and British oil companies concluded agreement with Saddam, a contrario of the French, Russians, Chinese and Italian. [2] see annexes: "the history of the neo-conservatives". [3] The NRO, created in 1960, is the most secret us spy agencies. The Agency "manufactures and controls all American spy satellites placed in orbit around the world" (Ibid; )101). [4] Several allies of the United States, oil-producing countries benefit also of the increase of oil to make considerable profits, as for example the Norway, the Canada, the Mexico, the Kuwait and of course Saudi Arabia. Let alone the State tax on the price of gasoline at the pump! [5]complete the site text [6] full text on the site [7]Osama bin Laden, "Proposal for a Peace Treaty", April 15, 2004 on the website: = archives & Area = sd & ID = SP69504 [8] Ayman al-Zawahiri, Knights under the banner of the Prophet, meditations on the Jihad movement (Al-Sharq al-Awsat, in Arabic), London, 2 December 2001. [9] Abdullah Azzam, "Al - Qa'ida al-Sulbah", Al-Jihad, No. 41, April 1988, p. 46 [10] Rashid Khalidi, Resurrecting Empire - Western Footprints and America's Perilous Path in the Middle East, Boston: Beacon, 2004, p. 54. Blog de géostratégie et de géopolitique en rapport avec les problèmes sécuritaires des nations, le développement économique, l'Actualité, l'Histoire du monde, les conflits en l’Europe, Amérique, Asie, Afrique, et leurs enjeux stratégiques.