Is the "war on terror" being won?

Thomas Hammarberg, Human Rights Commissioner, Council of Europe

I take issue with whole idea of a "war on terrorism". The fight against terrorism should not be seen as a "war". This is because some governments feel that different rules apply in warfare that can justify human rights abuses.

Terrorism should be regarded as a serious crime and combated as such. In fighting crime, human rights and the rule of law are not put aside - these principles must be central to the fight against terrorism too. If we look at the general response to terrorism by governments, we see far too many examples of human rights violations.

I am thinking of violations of the right to privacy, for example, through stops and searches; violations of freedom of expression and association, by restrictive legislation with overly vague definitions of terrorism; and torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. Too little attention is given to addressing the underlying causes of terrorism.

Samer Shehata, professor of politics, Georgetown University

There is no such thing as "the war on terror" (WOT). Nearly six years after President Bush first used this misleading phrase, it should be clear that "terrorism" is neither a thing nor a movement, but a method. As such, it makes no sense to wage war against terror. We can fight Al Qaida but a war against a method is nonsensical.

The so-called "WOT" has had serious consequences, however. It is a discourse relentlessly exploited by the Bush administration to justify misguided policies and reprehensible practices. The "WOT" rhetoric facilitated the Iraq war (based on lies) with horrific consequences. The same language is employed to justify the Guantanamo prison where detainees are held without regard to the Geneva Convention. This discourse is also used to justify the curtailment of civil liberties and personal freedoms across the globe -- all in the name of "the war on terror."

Ambassador Ortwin Hennig, Vice-President, EastWest Institute

Not militarily. The war on terror does not have a clear cut end: the labelling of activities as terroristic has always been a subjective and political matter: the same acts have been viewed by some as just and moral, by others as unjust and immoral, depending on the observers values and political convictions; and military responses to terrorists create more new terrorists than they destroy.

Instead, we need to de-militarize the fight. The transatlantic community must join forces with Russia, China, and India and bundle our collective political, economic and strategic assets to establish a positive dialogue and partnership with the Islamic world. The nucleus of terror abides in international politics. A solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict is key to preventing the terrorist threat, as this has become symbolic of the divide among the west and the Arab and Muslim worlds.