拉登之後 "反恐戰爭"捲土重來

The “global war on terror” was shot down in a hale of ridicule. Sceptics scoffed that President George W Bush’s GWOT was not global and it was not a war — since terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. On taking office as US president in 2009, Barack Obama quietly dropped the term.
The GWOT may have been a clumsy phrase and an inexact idea but, sadly, linguistic quibbles have not removed the underlying issue. However you want to label it, the world has a problem with jihadi violence — and it is getting worse.
There are two specific ways in which the threat from militant Islamism has worsened over the past five years. First, jihadi groups are operating in more parts of the world. Second, the frequency of attacks and number of deaths is increasing.
The massacre of 148 people, mainly children, at a school in Peshawar on December 16 was the worst atrocity in Pakistan since 2007. It was followed, this month, by the murder of up to 2,000 people by Boko Haram in Nigeria, and the killing of 17 in two separate attacks in Paris.
Three brutal attacks on three separate continents give the impression that the frequency of Islamist terror attacks is rising. That impression is confirmed by the data.
A recent study by the Rand Corporation identified 49 Salafist-Jihadi groups operating around the world in 2013, compared with 28 in 2007. These groups staged 950 recorded attacks in 2013, up from 100 six years earlier. And that Rand report was published before a big surge in violence in Nigeria. A recent US state department report estimated that 18,000 people were killed by terrorism in 2013 — but also noted that the number of Americans killed was very low and going down.
That decline in the numbers killed by terrorism in the west ensured the problem received only sporadic attention in the US and Europe. But, in the rest of the world, the number of lawless areas in which jihadi militias can freely operate and train has increased.
A decade ago, the main area of concern for western counter-terrorism efforts was Afghanistan and the border areas of Pakistan — with Somalia another significant worry. But now the self-styled Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis) controls a large swath of Syria and Iraq, including Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city.
In Africa, Boko Haram — possibly inspired by the success of Isis — has also seized territory and now controls a part of northern Nigeria the size of Belgium, as well as threatening neighbouring states such as Cameroon and Nigeria. Much of Libya has slipped into violent anarchy and jihadism is also endemic in Yemen.
The obvious questions are why the problem is escalating and what needs to be done. In the solipsistic world of US politics, it is natural for politicians to assume the problem somehow begins in Washington. Democrats cite President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq. The Republicans claim President Obama withdrew from Iraq prematurely.
Actually, recent history teaches ambiguous lessons about the impact of western military intervention. The failure of the US to intervene earlier in Syria is sometimes blamed for the rise of Isis. On the other hand, western military intervention in Libya helped to reduce the country to anarchy — creating space for jihadi groups to thrive. In reality, this is a problem that is not primarily about US foreign policy and the iniquities of the west. In recent years, every single permanent member of the UN Security Council has been hit. The US was struck on September 11 2001. The UK experienced the 7/7 bombings that killed London commuters in 2005. Russia has waged a long and brutal struggle with Chechen jihadis. China has experienced a bombing in Tiananmen Square and killings around the country. Now France has been struck. India, too, is on the frontline.
Tempting as it is for western powers to make common cause with all countries that have been hit by Islamist terror, it is also politically difficult since that potentially involves accepting the Russian narrative on Chechnya, the Israeli narrative on Gaza and the Chinese view of Qinjiang.
The factors behind the recent upsurge in violence include the increased fragility of several states in the aftermath of the revolutions in the Arab world — as well as the amplifying effect of social media, which allows jihadi messages to spread fast and to reach ever-larger audiences.
As Islamist militias have gained ground, so the conflict with them has come increasingly to resemble a conventional war. There are now several parts of the world where regular armies are battling jihadi groups for control of territory. American and European air-forces are bombing Isis. The Nigerian army, aided by troops from Chad and Niger, is fighting Boko Haram — albeit not very effectively. The French army deployed in Mali to beat back a jihadi threat. The Pakistanis, goaded by the attacks on Peshawar, have renewed military action against the Taliban.

“全球反恐戰爭”曾在一陣奚落中被擊落在地。懷疑論者譏笑稱，喬治•W•布什(George W Bush)的全球反恐戰爭並非全球性的，甚至連一場戰爭都不是，因爲恐怖主義是一種戰術，而非敵人。2009年巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)就任美國總統後，悄悄地放棄了這種提法。
全球反恐戰爭或許只是一個蹩腳的提法和一個模糊的構想，但不幸的是，語言上的吹毛求疵並沒有消除潛在的問題。不管你給它貼什麼樣的標籤，世界正面臨着聖戰暴力的問題，而且正在日趨惡化。
在過去5年裏，激進伊斯蘭主義帶來的威脅在兩個具體方面已經惡化。首先，聖戰組織的活動範圍已擴大到世界更多地區。其次，襲擊的頻率和死亡人數都在增加。
12月16日，巴基斯坦白沙瓦市的一所學校148人（大部分是兒童）遭到屠殺，這是自2007年以來巴基斯坦發生的最殘暴的恐怖事件。隨後是在本月，多達2000人在尼日利亞被恐怖組織博科聖地(Boko Haram)殺害，另有17人在巴黎發生的兩次獨立的襲擊中遇難。
發生在三個不同大洲的三次殘暴的襲擊給人們留下的印象是，伊斯蘭主義恐怖襲擊的頻率正在上升。這樣的印象得到了數據證實。
蘭德公司(Rand Corporation)近期的一項研究發現，2013年有49個伊斯蘭教沙拉菲派(Salafist)聖戰組織在世界各地活動，而2007年時只有28個。這些組織發動的記錄在案的襲擊從6年前的100起增加到2013年的950起。蘭德的報告發布之後，尼日利亞的暴力事件又呈現大幅激增。美國國務院近期的一份報告估計，2013年有1.8萬人死於恐怖主義襲擊，但同時指出，被殺害美國人的數量非常低，而且下降。
西方國家被恐怖主義殺害的人數下降，使得這一問題在美國和歐洲只受到零星關注。但在世界其他地方，聖戰武裝分子能夠自由行動和訓練的無法律地帶的數量已經增多。
10年前，西方反恐努力關注的主要地區是阿富汗以及巴基斯坦邊境地區（索馬里是另一大擔憂對象）。但如今，自封的“伊拉克與黎凡特伊斯蘭國”(Isis)控制了敘利亞和伊拉克的大片地區，包括伊拉克第二大城市摩蘇爾。
在非洲，博科聖地——或許是受到Isis成功的啓發——也佔領了土地，目前控制着尼日利亞北部、面積相當於比利時大小的部分地區，同時對喀麥隆等鄰國造成了威脅。利比亞大部分地區已陷入混亂的無政府狀態，聖戰主義在也門的氣焰也很囂張。
顯而易見的是，爲什麼這一問題正在惡化，而我們又需要做什麼。在唯我論的美國政治世界裏，政客們很自然地認爲問題某種程度上產生於華盛頓。民主黨批評布什總統入侵伊拉克的決定。而共和黨稱奧巴馬總統過於草率地從伊拉克撤軍。
實際上，西方軍事幹預的影響在近期歷史上帶來的教訓是雙面的。Isis的崛起有時被歸咎於美國沒有更早對敘利亞進行干預。另一方面，西方對利比亞的軍事幹預卻使該國陷入無政府狀態，爲聖戰組織的興起創造了空間。事實上，從根本上說，這並非美國對外政策以及西方的種種罪惡造成的問題。最近幾年，聯合國安理會(UN Security Council)每一個常任理事國都遭遇過恐怖襲擊。2001年9月11日，美國遭受襲擊。2005年，英國經歷了倫敦“7.7”爆炸案，造成通勤人員死亡。俄羅斯對車臣的聖戰分子發動了長期而殘酷的鬥爭。中國的天安門廣場遭受過一次爆炸襲擊，全國各地時有暴恐事件發生。如今，法國也遭到了襲擊。印度同樣也處於恐怖襲擊的前線。
與所有遭受伊斯蘭主義恐怖襲擊的國家聯合起來，這對西方國家來說看上去很誘人，但在政治上也有困難，因爲這樣就會暗含接受俄羅斯對車臣、以色列對加沙以及中國對新疆的種種說辭或態度。
近期暴力事件激增的原因包括，一些國家在阿拉伯世界革命之後變得更加脆弱，以及社交媒體的放大效應，使聖戰信息能夠快速傳播並覆蓋更大範圍的受衆。
隨着伊斯蘭主義武裝分子的發展壯大，與他們的衝突已經越來越像一場常規戰爭。目前，在世界的幾個地區，正規軍正在爲爭奪領土控制權與聖戰組織交戰。美國與歐洲的空軍在對Isis進行空襲。在乍得和尼日爾軍隊的幫助下，尼日利亞軍方正在打擊博科聖地——儘管不是非常有效。法軍在馬裏展開部署以擊退聖戰組織的進攻。白沙瓦的襲擊事件促使巴基斯坦人重新開始對塔利班(Taliban)進行軍事打擊。
長遠來看，解決聖戰暴力問題更是一場理念之爭而非軍隊間的鬥爭。但與此同時，打擊伊斯蘭主義暴恐運動的軍事行動正在非洲、亞洲和中東展開。最終結果可能還是要進行一場“反恐戰爭”。