The end of regime change

According to Stephanie Kaplan, Ph.D candidate at the Department of Political Science at the M.I.T. and public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center, the election of Obama signals the end of regime change as a counter terrorism approach. In its absence two options have arisen in the liberal foreign policy community: modernization and constrainment.

Kaplan described modernization as an approach that would work to combat terrorism at it’s source by mending broken societies on an economic, political, and social level. This would include eradicating poverty and updating the educational system through much of the Middle East through a wide U.S. led program similar to Truman’s Marshall Plan.

Constrainment, not to be confused with the Cold War grand strategy of containment, is based on the belief that jihadists are on a path towards self-defeat and constraining the terrorist movement on an operational and ideational level will hasten this defeat. Kaplan says that this can be done by confronting terrorism both on an international and local level to drive wedges between the jihadist community and by shifting the narrative in favor of the U.S.

“The U.S. and it’s allies and any of the surrogates that we appoint most often can’t credibly counter the jihadist narrative and promote the narrative that we want…but what we can do is create facts on the ground so that credible actors can advocate on our behalf,” said Kaplan

Of the two options, Kaplan stated that constrainment will hold the greatest chance of success. She explained that there is very little evidence that modernization will work, and points to modernization’s failure to transform Indonesian society following the U.S.’s post-tsunami relief effort. In addition, Kaplan said that there is evidence that terrorism is actually spurred by modernization and that attempts to pursue further modernization carries a risk.

“Modernizers take the approach of a sledge hammer whereas constrainers prefer a scalpel. Just as it’s hard to imagine that we can go to war enough that 19 people wont try to harm the United States, it’s hard to imagine that the United States and its allies can reform the Middle East enough so that a few dozen people wont try to harm us again,” Kaplan concluded.