Follow us on social

Gwot-meda

End of an era? Retiring the GWOT medal for all

Experts say narrowing the recipients for this award signals a symbolic as well as practical shift away from counterterrorism and towards China.

Analysis | Global Crises

Despite the recent drone attack on Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in Afghanistan, the U.S. military seems to be looking to put a formal capstone on the broader Global War on Terror.

Starting on Sept. 11 — for the first time since its inception in 2003 — the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal will only be awarded to service members directly serving in counterterrorism efforts. Experts argue this could signify a new era in the GWOT.

"The shift in limiting who is eligible for the Global War on Terrorism Medal suggests that military policy makers may finally be moving away from classifying almost all types of war as 'the fight against terrorism,'” Noah Coburn, political anthropologist and Middle East specialist, told RS in an email.

Under the new regulations set by the DoD, a service member must have “directly served in a designated military [counter-terrorism] operation” for a minimum of 30 days to be eligible for the award.

Up until now, the award was considered by many to be pretty much automatic. Nearly every active-duty, Reserve, and National Guard service member who served since 2003 has received the award, according to Military.com. And in 2004 the Army authorized all troops who served after Sept. 11 2001 to get the award. 

“Certainly, there is a symbolic component here,” Jenni Walkup, a researcher at Brown University’s Costs of War Project, told RS. “Choosing to award the Global War on Terrorism Medal to a smaller portion of U.S. Military personnel suggests a shift in focus away from counterterrorism.”

Erik Dahl, Associate Professor of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School agrees that this change in eligibility reflects a larger reprioritization within the military. 

“This change is well timed,” Dahl said in response to questions from RS. “The main focus of our military has moved away from counterterrorism, and toward concerns about Russia and China.”

The CIA’s No. 2 concurs. According to the Associated Press on Monday, CIA deputy director David Cohen told fellow counterterrorism officials in a closed-door intelligence meeting last week that while fighting extremist groups remains a priority, his agency’s resources will be increasingly funneled elsewhere — mainly to China.

So how will the U.S. approach the GWOT moving forward? Does this indicate the end of a war which has cost the U.S. eight trillion dollars and led to 900,000 deaths?

Perhaps. “At the same time, the targeted killing of Ayman Al-Zawahiri, in downtown Kabul, is a worrying step back towards policies of assassination over relying on diplomacy, courts and the rule of law,” Coburn added.

Global War on Terrorism Service Medal (U.S. Air Force)
Analysis | Global Crises
Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. speaking wit… | Flickr

Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten

Media


Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”

keep readingShow less
Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

Peter Thiel attends the annual Allen and Co. Sun Valley Media Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, U.S., July 6, 2022. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

QiOSK

The trouble with doing business with Israel — or any foreign government — is you can't really say anything when they do terrible things with technology that you may or may not have sold to them, or hope to sell to them, or hope to sell in your own country.

Such was the case with Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir Technologies, in this recently surfaced video, talking to the Cambridge Union back in May. See him stumble and stutter and buy time when asked what he thought about the use of Artificial Intelligence by the Israeli military in a targeting program called "Lavender" — which we now know has been responsible for the deaths of an untold number of innocent Palestinians since Oct 7. (See investigation here).

keep readingShow less
Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Committee chairman Jack Reed (D-RI), left, looks on as co-chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) shakes hands with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on President Biden's proposed budget request for the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., April 9, 2024. REUTERS/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades

Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Military Industrial Complex

Now that both political parties have seemingly settled upon their respective candidates for the 2024 presidential election, we have an opportune moment to ask a rather fundamental question about our nation’s defense spending: how much is enough?

Back in May, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, penned an op-ed in the New York Times insisting the answer was not enough at all. Wicker claimed that the nation wasn’t prepared for war — or peace, for that matter — that our ships and fighter-jet fleets were “dangerously small” and our military infrastructure “outdated.” So weak our defense establishment and so dangerous the world right now, Wicker pressed, the nation ought to “spend an additional $55 billion on the military in the 2025 fiscal year.”

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.