Daniel Pipes
Mobile Edition
Regular Site

Epilogue: World War IV?
from Militant Islam Reaches America

Is the "war on terror" really World War IV?

That's what the American strategist Eliot Cohen argues[1] and the term is apt.[2] It captures two points: that the cold war was in fact World War III and that the war on terror is as global, as varied, and as important as prior world wars.

Militant Islam distinguishes itself from any other contemporary political movement in the magnitude of its ambitions, seeking not just to influence the adherents of one religion or control one region. Rather, it aspires to unlimited and universal power. Only Islamists have the temerity to challenge the liberal world order in a cosmic battle over the future course of the human experience. This translates into a worldwide battlefield.

Of course, a war in which so much is at stake cannot be about mere terrorism, and Cohen notes that "The enemy in this war is not terrorism' but militant Islam." As in world wars II and III, the ultimate enemy is a cohort of powerful ideas that can cause some of the most competent members of society to dedicate themselves to a vision and go so far as willingly sacrifice their lives to speed its attainment. The U.S. government, though usually reluctant to make this point, does allude to it on occasion, as when President George W. Bush states that the enemy is "a fringe form of Islamic extremism"[3] and a "new totalitarian threat."[4]

Terrorism, in other words, is just one dimension of a war that has many fronts and takes many forms. Violence is an important symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. Other methods might include acts of violence by loners, smuggling, rioting, lawful street demonstrations, raising money, teaching, proselytizing, intimidating, and even running for elected office. These methods complement each other, constituting the sophistication and reach of militant Islam. The battleground includes Muslim-majority countries as well as countries like Argentina where Islam is a minor presence.

Militant Islam's varied and persistent offensive is often missed in the focus on Al-Qaeda and other well-developed networks. A look at the daily rhythm of the war makes this clear. Here are some top-of-the-news stories from a random two-week period in late 2002; note that Al-Qaeda-style terrorism makes up just a portion of the general assault:

This range of activities implies that an effective defense cannot be limited to disrupting networks of violence. The forces must include anti-Islamist Muslims as well as non-Muslims, intellectuals as well as special forces, teachers as well as police officers, filmmakers as well as forensic accountants.

World War IV, in short, involves many fronts and requires a strategy that looks far beyond counterterrorism. The sooner we understand this, the faster we can win.

[1] Eliot A. Cohen, "World War IV," The Wall Street Journal, 20 November 2001.
[2] Though a historian might prefer World War V, on the basis that the Napoleonic Wars, whose battlefields ranged from the Caribbean to Egypt to India, was the first world war.
[3] "Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People," 20 September 2001.
[4] "Remarks by the President to a Special Session of the German Bundestag: President Bush Thanks Germany for Support Against Terror," 23 May 2002.
[5] Independent, 22 November 2002.
[6] ThisDay, 16 November 2002.
[7] Associated Press, 26 November 2002.


Back to top of page