Freeman’s Analytical Incompetence

Freeman objected to the U.S. designation of Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations because he was afraid that this would “invite them to extend their operations in the United States or against Americans abroad.” Kramer points out that in the years following Freeman’s statement, “[t]here’s little more the United States could have done, short of bombing Beirut and Gaza City itself, to demonstrate to Hezbollah and Hamas that they’re on America’s wrong side.” Yet, Kramer argues, almost seven years later there has been no wave of Hezbollah and Hamas-sponsored terror “in and against the United States.” Thus, Kramer concludes, Freeman’s “preemptive cringe” was a misplaced fear. Kramer is right — from one point of view. Certainly, neither Hezbollah nor Hamas has launched attacks inside the U.S. proper in the past seven years. And Hezbollah is certainly capable of doing so because it maintains an active network on American soil. On the other hand, Hezbollah (as well as its master, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) has been active in sponsoring anti-American and anti-Iraqi terrorism inside post-Saddam Iraq. So, it is not the case that Hezbollah has refrained from anti-American terrorism entirely. In addition, Hezbollah, the IRGC, and other branches of the Iranian government continually work with Sunni terrorist groups against American assets around the globe, including inside Afghanistan. But, Kramer is right that the continuing U.S. designation of both groups has not led to any demonstrable increase in anti-American terrorism from either organization. Hezbollah, in particular, has sporadically targeted American assets around the globe since its inception in the early 1980’s and the U.S. designation has not made one iota of difference one way or the other on Hezbollah’s focus. In fact, Hezbollah’s earliest attacks were against American assets in Lebanon (the 1983 attacks on the American embassy and the U.S. Marine barracks). So, anti-American terrorism has been one of Hezbollah’s chief undertakings for decades — long before Freeman apparently thought that taking them off the list of designated terrorist organizations would appease them. Freeman’s more noteworthy analytical error, in my view, is his description of the recent past. Read again the lines underlined above. How could Freeman claim — in 2002 — that Hezbollah has “not done anything against the United States or Americans, even though the United States supports their enemy, Israel” in “recent decades”? In June of 1996, just six years prior to Freeman’s comments (that is, not even one decade in the past at the time), Hezbollah was directly responsible for the Khobar Towers bombing. There is no doubt over Hezbollah’s and Iran’s role in the attack. The Clinton administration, the Bush administration, the 9/11 Commission, the DOJ, and everyone else that I am aware of are in agreement: Iran was responsible for the attack. Al Qaeda may have also played a role, per the 9/11 Commission’s final report and other evidence. But this does not diminish the fact that Iran and Hezbollah were principally responsible. The 2001 indictment of the Khobar Towers conspirators makes Hezbollah’s and Iran’s role clear. And, as former Clinton administration officials have repeatedly said, this was clear long before 2001 as well. 19 U.S. servicemen were killed at Khobar Towers. More than 370 others, including some Americans as well as civilians and workers of various other nationalities, were wounded. Yet, Chas Freeman was apparently unaware that the attack was executed by Hezbollah. He was evidently ignorant of this fact even though it took place inside the Saudi Kingdom, home to his controversial patron, the Saudi royal family. The attack on Khobar Towers was not some minor blimp on the national security screen. It was a direct assault on the American forces that were stationed in the Gulf to maintain the Clinton administration’s dual containment of Saddam’s Iraq and the mullahs’ Iran. Our intelligence professionals, especially those charged with stopping the terrorist threat, were certainly aware of all this in 2002. Chas Freeman apparently was not.