WASHINGTON, Oct. 15 (UPI) -- As we head into an election year, the war in Iraq and slowed economy have crowded out an issue that dominated much of George W. Bush's first term in office and must be kept at the forefront: counter-terrorism policy and the fight against the radical Islamic elements worldwide bent on the destruction of the United States.
Recent events have shown that despite the U.S. public's short attention span and collective unilinear mindset successfully moving this important policy issue in the political -- and therefore policy -- background, the so-called war against terrorism is still very much with us and showing signs of fraying.
Don't believe the hype from the Bush administration that we are winning the war. While there have been many successes, just look to possible infiltration at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for proof that the threat continues unabated.
The administration's failure to adequately address the potential for Islamists to infiltrate the camp or the danger of radical elements' ongoing recruitment of U.S. prisoners show the White House has missed two very important elements of effective counter-terrorism policy: understanding basic political history and thinking outside the proverbial policy box.
A Muslim U.S. Army chaplain working at the Guantanamo military prison, Capt. James Yee, was charged last Friday with mishandling classified material and potentially faces additional charges as part of an investigation into suspect activities at the facility.
The charges follow those made against Air Force Senior Airman Ahmad I. al-Halabi, a translator at the base. Al-Halabi has been charged with espionage and aiding an enemy of the United States for allegedly attempting to pass classified information to Syria, a country which has long had ties to radical Islamic groups.
Ahmed F. Mehalba, an Arabic translator working at the prison with a private firm through a Defense Department contract, has been charged with lying to federal agents after they discovered a compact disc he was carrying contained secret information about the prison facilities.
All three men have claimed their innocence and these charges do not prove that al-Qaida or other terrorist elements have infiltrated the U.S. military. However, at very least they raise the prospect that the facility where Islamic militants are being held as enemy combatants is not out of such elements' reach.
Former Guantanamo interpreter Bill Tierney has said that during his time at the camp interpreters largely had free rein throughout the prison compound. Charles Abell, principal deputy undersecretary of Defense for personnel and readiness, told the Senate subcommittee Tuesday that interpreters were not as well-vetted as they could have been because of the government's haste to meet the sudden high demand.
The effort to recruit prisoners into radical Islam has also become more evident following the banning of the head Muslim chaplain in the New York prison system from both state and federal facilities. The chaplain was accused of using his position to promote radical Muslim ideas, including the "martyrdom" of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers.
It should come as no surprise that U.S. prisons are training grounds for radical Islam. In fact, this has been known for some time and there is a long history of radical groups seeking converts among the incarcerated.
The Aryan Nation, a white supremacist group, has long had a strong recruitment effort in federal and state prisons.
So-called shoe-bomber Richard Reid is said to have converted to Islam in a British prison, and suspected al-Qaida operative Jose Padilla was reportedly first exposed to radical Islam while incarcerated in an U.S. prison.
At Tuesday's Senate hearing, Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said that the country must address radical Islamists' efforts to gain influence through the armed forces and prisons.
"Our government needs to take this growing threat seriously and take immediate steps to curtail it," he said.
Although the proof of a growing threat of Islamist recruitment in prisons and the military is not evident, Kyl has a good point overall.
Prisons are prime place for recruiting the disenchanted within society, as they have been throughout history.
Adolf Hitler used time in prison to write his legendary treatise "Mein Kampf." Joseph Stalin recruited other prisoners to his revolutionary cause while in a Russian czarist-controlled cell.
"The recruitment and organization of ideological extremists in prison systems and armed forces is a century-old problem, as is the difficulty that civil societies have had in understanding and confronting the matter," Michael Waller, professor of international communications at the Institute of World Politics, told the committee in testimony Tuesday.
Even men such as Nelson Mandela, who held what now largely are considered inspired revolutionary ideas, were considered radicals by their oppressors and had their ideas and causes ferment behind bars.
Those who dismiss the political motivation behind Islamic terrorists should be assured the leaders who drive the movement worldwide know their history and recognize how the discontent -- which has largely driven the rise of radical Islam worldwide -- are important to any revolutionary movement.
However, while Islamist elements may be infiltrating the U.S. armed forces, federal and state prisons and even civilian agencies, it is not a cause for a McCarthy-era style purge of the government.
The history of such efforts tells us that they lead to little more than a scapegoating of the innocent and provide little in the way of outing actual spies.
But the finding of chaplains with potential ties to terrorism must be kept center in the mind of voters over the next 13 months as Bush administration officials claim that the United States is winning the war on terrorism.
An asymmetrical threat from an enemy that we are still straining to figure out must be met with equally radical, but rational, thinking.
If the Defense Department cannot properly vet a few interpreters and preachers and civilian leaders cannot think of addressing such concerns before they become a major concern, then non-traditional thinking is not what U.S. citizens are getting.
Instead, we are getting slipshod policy leadership.
Some good has been done to fight the threat and the danger is not all it has been made out to be for all Americans.
Of course all threats cannot be stopped, but don't think for one second that everything that can be done has been done, nor will ever be done.
At the same time don't think that steps like randomly searching a statistically insignificant number of people at airports or a minute percentage of the cargo passing through U.S. ports is the answer.
There is no one right answer, but taxpayers should at least be able to say with confidence that those in charge of protecting their interests are thinking about real potential solutions, not just new ways to vet a potential threat after it rears its ugly head.
You cannot say that with confidence today, no matter what politicians might say.
