Buried beneath all the cybertastic stuff in this year's DNI threat assessment are a few surprising lines about Hizballah:
We judge that, unlike al-Qa’ida, Hizballah, which has not directly attacked US interests overseas over the past 13 years, is not now actively plotting to strike the Homeland. However, we cannot rule out that the group would attack if it perceives that the US is threatening its core interests.
Why is this so striking? Let's start with the fact that the last few threat assessments have grouped Hizballah together with Al Qaeda as a major terrorist threat to the United States:
In addition to al-Qaida, its networks and affiliates, I mention the terrorist threat from Hizballah, which is backed by Iran and Syria. As a result of last summer's hostilities, Hizballah's self confidence and hostility toward the US as a supporter of Israel could cause the group to increase its contingency planning against US interests.
Terrorist groups—including al-Qa’ida, HAMAS, and Hizballah—have expressed the desire to use cyber means to target the United States.
Lebanese Hizballah continues to be a formidable terrorist adversary with an ability to attack the US Homeland and US interests abroad.
By taking pains to emphasize that Hizballah is not a direct threat to the United States, Blair makes a dramatic tonal shift. This raises some big questions. What caused the intelligence community to so radically alter its perspective? Does Blair's assessment suggest further revisiting of U.S. policy toward a group that has steadily evolved from a militia to a major political actor in Lebanon? What might that look like? We shall see.
No comments:
Post a Comment