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
Musk Hegseth
Top image credit: Elon Musk and U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth shake hands at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 21, 2025 in this screengrab obtained from a video. REUTERS/Idrees Ali

DOGE wants to cut the Pentagon — by 0.07%

Military Industrial Complex

Last week, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth directed the termination of over $580 million in Pentagon contracts, grants, and programs. They amount to less than 0.07% of the Pentagon budget.

The elimination of this spending aligns with the administration’s effort to reshuffle the budget, not to promote a wholesale reduction in military spending.

keep readingShow less
Ukraine Civilians
Top Photo: Zhytomyr, Zhytomyr Oblast, Ukraine - March 8 2022: On March 8, 2022, a Russian Su-34 bomber dropped two 250 kg bombs on a civilian house in Zhitomir, Ukraine (Shutterstock/Volodymyr Vorobiov)
Bombardments making Ukraine, Gaza toxic for generations

Bombardments making Ukraine, Gaza toxic for generations

QiOSK

A new report finds dangerously high levels of uranium and lead contamination in Fallujah, Iraq, and other places that experience massive military bombardments in wartime, resulting in birth defects and long-term health risks among the people who live there

The report — from the Costs of War project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs — presages the dangers of prolonged conflict in places like Ukraine and Gaza, both of which have experienced sustained bombing campaigns for 3 years and 18 months, respectively. Indeed, precautions can be taken to reduce dangerous exposure to those who return to their homes after conflict ends, but the authors also point out that “the most effective way to limit heavy metal toxicity from war is by not bombing cities” at all.

keep readingShow less
Azerbaijan is already friendly with Israel. Why the push to 'normalize'?
Top photo credit: Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev (Gints Ivuskans/shutterstock) and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu (photocosmos1/Shutterstock)

Azerbaijan is already friendly with Israel. Why the push to 'normalize'?

Middle East

With President Donald Trump sending mixed messages on Iran — on the one hand, reinstating his “maximum pressure” campaign and threatening military action; on the other, signaling an eagerness to negotiate — anti-diplomacy voices are working overtime to find new ways to lock the U.S. and Iran into perpetual enmity.

The last weeks have seen a mounting campaign, in both the U.S. and Israel, to integrate Azerbaijan, Iran’s northern neighbor, into the Abraham Accords — the 2020 set of “normalization deals” between Israel and a number of Arab states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. The leading Israeli think tank Begin-Sadat Center argued that Baku would be a perfect addition to the club. A number of influential rabbis, led by the founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, Marvin Hier, and the main rabbi of the UAE, Eli Abadi (who happens to be a close associate to Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, who was himself instrumental in forging the original Abraham Accords), also sent a letter to Trump promoting Baku’s inclusion. The Wall Street Journal and Forbes amplified these messages on their op-ed pages.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

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.