Not only does President Barack Obama receive briefs but he also ensures that his top officials also attend the weekly terrorist briefs, dubbed “Terror Tuesdays” by his staff.
President Barack Obama’s weekly global terrorist threat briefings occur in the White House Situation Room, and, although rarely discussed in public, include several dozen high-level officials, from National Security Adviser Gen. Jim Jones to FBI Director Robert Mueller and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
In a town where knowledge is power, these briefings, which began with the George W. Bush administration reaction to the 9/11 attacks, were broadened to include a greater number of Obama’s top Cabinet-level intelligence and security officials to ensure his top officials hear the same information and are on “the same page.”
For the president and his staff, these meetings are an opportunity not only to get updates on threats and the latest prevention tactics, but also to discuss wider anti-terrorism strategies.
These terrorist briefs are in addition to the daily briefs US presidents have routinely received from the CIA each morning, which focused broadly on threats and incidents, both national and international.
Those on the inside say that the president was already very concerned about the radicalization of mainstream Muslims, even before the news this week that Faisal Shahzad, the naturalized US citizen born in Pakistan with no previous history of extremist tendencies was connected to the Times Square bombing.
One of Obama’s major concerns, according to insider’s familiar with these briefs, is about what causes someone to suddenly turn from their normal life and become a terrorist. Insiders say it is a genuine worry for him, especially because it is a complicated problem that is not an issue that any agency deals with specifically within any one office.
Since taking office, Obama has made clear that he is sensitive to the importance of differentiating between Islam and radical Islam.
The previous Bush doctrine outlined the situation as: “The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century and finds the great powers all on the same side — opposing the terrorists.” While the official language in Obama’s new Strategy document has not yet been made public — announcements from White House officials indicate it will be released within the next month — it is reported that the phrase “Islamic radicalism” will be removed.
Taken as a whole, the phrase “militant Islamic radicalism” qualifies the statement in a way that most observers would deduce that this “ideological conflict” does not, in fact, apply to all people believing in Islam. There is also a move to remove the term “ideological conflict.”
At issue is that the White House, and those who work in the region, understand that politicians and journalists cannot always be counted on to explain to the public that not all Muslims are terrorists. It is a difficult balance most would not envy. Trying to understand the specific details of counterterrorism operations, getting countries to share potential cross border international threats while remaining in tune to the fact that the White House does not want to alienate Muslims because of terminology or remarks that set off fury in the region, as with President Bush’s unfortunate pronouncement that he would wage a ‘crusade’ against terrorism that sent waves of concern and even anger in the Muslim world. Although President Bush and his aides claimed that it was a slip of the tongue and Bush really meant to say was a “broad cause” against terrorism, suspicion of his intentions in the Middle East stuck throughout his presidency.
