Seven-year war on terrorism should get back on track

THE ISSUE A bipartisan group has given a mediocre grade to the federal government for its handling of the war against terrorism.

Briefly setting aside partisan politics, Barack Obama and John McCain were to appear at Ground Zero today "to honor the memory of each and every American who died" in the 2001 attacks on their seventh anniversary. One of them will face the challenge of bringing the distractive Iraq war to an end and fully resuming the war against terrorism.

The bipartisan Partnership for a Secure America has issued a report card giving the federal government a mere "C" grade in preventing a catastrophic nuclear, biological or chemical attack on America and fighting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction abroad. Meanwhile, Osama bin Laden has found a safe haven in tribal Pakistan and al-Qaida has expanded its reach to North Africa and the Middle East, including Iraq.

The group, headed by Democrat Lee H. Hamilton, former congressman and chairman of the 9/11 Commission, and Republican Warren Rudman, former senator and co-chairman of the 2001 blue ribbon commission on terrorism, called on the next president to appoint a cabinet-level coordinator of counterproliferation, something President Bush should have done seven years ago.

"The threat of a new, major terrorist attack on the United States is still very real," the group concluded in a report released yesterday. "A nuclear, chemical or biological weapon in the hands of terrorists remains the single greatest threat to our nation. While progress has been made in securing these weapons and materials, we are still dangerously vulnerable."

However, most Americans are not very worried, according to a new Gallup poll. Only 39 percent are very or somewhat worried that they or their families will become victims of terrorism, compared to 47 percent last July and 59 percent a month after the 9/11 attacks. Only 12 percent consider terrorism as the most important factor in their vote for president, while a majority consider the economy to be most important.

Americans understand now that the Bush administration acted too quickly with cherry-picked intelligence in deciding to invade Iraq in 2003 when it should have stayed concentrated on Afghanistan. However, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Congress this week that slow progress in reaching Iraqi political goals will force a go-slow approach in Afghanistan. "We should expect to be involved in Iraq for years to come," he said. Troop levels in Afghanistan are planned to increase only slightly in the coming months.

Fortunately, pressed by committee members about whether the next president's hands will be tied, Gates said the next commander in chief will be "constrained only by his view of our national security interests." Obama understands the importance of U.S. troop withdrawal from a stable Iraq in order to meet U.S. security needs.