David Kilcullen - Author and Counter-insurgency Expert HARDtalk

was fired last year because of his age, a claim denied by the board. It

HARDtalk. Welcome to HARDtalk. What does the Nairobi shopping mall siege

tell us about future terror attacks? does the Nairobi shopping mall siege

tell us about future terror attacks? Who will carry them out and where?

one of the worlds most influential My guest today is David Kilcullen,

one of the worlds most influential counterinsurgency experts. He has

advised the former US Secretary counterinsurgency experts. He has

American general during the surge in the Iraq War. He has worked in many

Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq. Is the world in danger of underplaying

HARDtalk. Thank you.What does the Nairobi attack tell us about the

nature of future threat? I would Nairobi as an example of an urban

siege. Since the beginning of the war on terror about a dozen years

ago, there has been an evolution in the way terrorists operate. In this

doing something that we first saw bombings and during the Mumbai

attacks. They have gone to a complex piece of urban terrain and tried to

hold that terrain for a long period of time and defend the area, fight

to hold it. What does that tell of time and defend the area, fight

attacks like Mumbai. Mumbai's a beginning to copy high—profile

coming by boat, in a slum area, coastal city. That was November

coming by boat, in a slum area, Western dominated targets. Nairobi

developed downtown parts. What does that tell us, other than the fact

that cities are dangerous? And cities have always been dangerous.

Yes but there are more people than ever in history living in cities.

Another three billion people will be living in the urban population

across the planet, almost all in developing world cities, that are

already straining because of lack of infrastructure. One of the important

things about the Nairobi attack infrastructure. One of the important

the conflict happened where people live and terrorist adapt to the

conditions. As the world gets more urban, overstretched, poverty and

the kinds of things that lead to slum growth will become the cover,

where terrorists begin to operate. But what you have said is more than

that. You say the challenges we But what you have said is more than

have are a growing population, urbanisation, particularly around

coastal cities, and productivity What do you mean? When you live

coastal cities, and productivity city like Mumbai, where there is

enormous poverty, there are a lot of criminal organisations, corruption

and a lack of infrastructure, most people don't have the kinds of

resources they need. The fact there is occasionally a terrorist attack

to be unlucky to be caught in that is nasty and unpleasant but you

to be unlucky to be caught in that attack. The concerns of billions of

people in the cities in the next attack. The concerns of billions of

generation will be around other issues, more mundane, but more

Kenyan National Crime Research serious. One example would be the

Centre about one month ago issued a Centre about one month ago issued a

report that there are 46 criminal gangs operating in Kenya. 60% of the

population of Nairobi lives in big slums. There are gangs that are

dramatically more violent than Al—Shabab. What's the conclusion?

counterterrorism experts. You have been in just about every conflict in

the world. You say, everybody, take been in just about every conflict in

the world. You say, everybody, take your eye off the ball when it comes

to terror attacks and focus on local issues? We have focused on a very

particular type of threat. How we deal with rural guerrillas in places

like Afghanistan. Mountainous, landlocked. We will still deal with

the same kinds of threat in the future but the environments will be

dramatically different. Urban, crowded, coastal. As we shake off

the hangover of a decade of conflict and we re—engage with the future, we

are really going to have to look thought we knew before 9/11. I will

ask you about the jihadist threat in a minute, but picking up on what you

said, that the jihadist threat will be dwarfed by the criminal activity.

But are you not guilty then of what for instance the Republican chairman

of the house of Foreign Affairs Committee said after this attack, I

think at this point we don't have any evidence that Al—Shabab, which

is of course blamed for the attack in Nairobi, is capable of carrying

out attacks on the United States. Isn't this being complacent? There

are 40 Americans who are members of Al—Shabab. They could conceivably

carry out such an attack. One of the new things about the environment now

is the incredibly high rate of connectivity. Urbanisation was not a

significant penetration into the new thing in the 20th century.

connected across the planet. Stuff that happens in Somalia resonates in

Minnesota of course has the largest that happens in Somalia resonates in

Minnesota of course has the largest a way that it never did before. But

complacent about the nature of the jihadist threat. I remind you of

what President Obama said in May, when he made that speech to the

National Defence University. He when he made that speech to the

that Al Qaeda are in retreat, but they have been defeated pretty much.

It's that kind of complacency I wonder if you are guilty of? I'm not

sure what data President Obama is looking at but the data I am looking

retreating. It suggests they have changed their way of operating.

retreating. It suggests they have me put this in perspective. You

talked about Mumbai. 300 people wounded, about 160 killed. One metre

of sealevel rise in Bangladesh puts 22 million people under water.

That's what I mean by this kind 22 million people under water.

threat dwarfs the terrorist threat. Millions of people on the move,

threat dwarfs the terrorist threat. of the country too salty to farm,

people starving to death and we of the country too salty to farm,

talking about lack of basic urban dramatic, it's important. I have

been doing it for a long time. In extremism. I have two or three

terrorist groups lined up to kill me so I won't underestimate the threat.

But President Obama said in May so I won't underestimate the threat.

Al Qaeda is less capable. Their remaining operatives spend more

Al Qaeda is less capable. Their thinking about their own safety

Al Qaeda is less capable. Their plotting against us. Isn't that

jihadist threat is stronger and wrong? A lot of people say the

jihadist threat is stronger and resurgent. Insults have been hurled

about what is happening at the level President Hollande. There is an

about what is happening at the level Pakistan. The head of Al Qaeda?Yes.

What President Obama is pointing to is that particular group, which

What President Obama is pointing to weaker now than it was at some

points in the past. However, we still see a very strong regional

extremist militant threat. I see Al—Shabab in the context of what has

happened in Somalia, where African troops have done a very good job in

expelling Al—Shabab from places troops have done a very good job in

Mogadishu and Kismayo. This is heading back to Uganda and Kenya...

The Ugandans are the leading force within the peace keeping mission

that has been fighting. I still within the peace keeping mission

the Al—Shabab organisation as having a regional agenda. A lot of these

groups, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsular for example, and to some

extent the jihadist groups in Syria, are allying themselves with the

brand of Al Qaeda to gain credibly. So did Al—Shabab in 2012. You say

with a great deal of confidence So did Al—Shabab in 2012. You say

it's only a regional threat but So did Al—Shabab in 2012. You say

can't say that with confidence. So did Al—Shabab in 2012. You say

Qaeda started off by only attacking the end of Arabian Peninsular and

then went further. Its ideology the end of Arabian Peninsular and

along was global, in a way Al—Shabab has not been. And still is not.

That's not what the president of Somalia has said. He says it is

That's not what the president of ideology, not a citizenship, not an

ethnic group. He says it has, as we know, had links with jihadists in

many nations across Africa. Is he international links? Three days

many nations across Africa. Is he he said it was a threat to the whole

establishment globally. Al Qaeda has he said it was a threat to the whole

establishment globally. Al Qaeda has always been focused on that. But it

groups say that. But me give you an is an affiliate organisation. It has

groups say that. But me give you an example. A group in Syria recently

allied itself with Al Qaeda. The reason that statement was made is

almost certainly not because they want to descend into the gates of

hell and do giant insurgency. It's because his alternative is to be

under the thumb of Al Qaeda. In Iraq. Al Qaeda Central is a weakened

organisation on the other side of the Arabian Peninsular. It's better

to have a theoretical fealty to the Arabian Peninsular. It's better

brand name than be under the thumb of the guy who runs Al Qaeda in

Iraq. So, you have to see this as a diversified group of different

organisations. We do. A lot of falling into a trap. Right after

9/11, they treated the thing as falling into a trap. Right after

single undifferentiated mass. But in today's Al Qaeda is more dangerous

organisation because it is widely dispersed and there is a younger

generation coming up with new ideas, all the way from west Africa to

south Asia. It is a broader battle field. Is he wrong? I think is

what's going on with Al Qaeda, he is right. I think he is pretty right.

what's going on with Al Qaeda, he is articulating a policy about moving

the Arab world and moving away from articulating a policy about moving

the Arab world and moving away from conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan.

So, it has to be seen as part of the conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan.

political discourse and that's why I political discourse and that's why I

statement is partly political. I think it's actually racist. To say

backgrounds. What I react against is because you are Muslim, you must

backgrounds. What I react against is the political statements that came

everybody as an undifferentiated threat. We have to take at face

value what they say. We have reports that people are wondering what

Somalis in Kenya are up to. There are 40 members in the UK. You said

to the President that he was making a political statement that al—Shabab

could be an international risk. It could be an international risk. It

if you look at the statements that al—Shabab leaders have made, it

if you look at the statements that overthrowing the entire world order

like Al—Qaeda, it is one of these groups that fundamentally have a

local agenda. It is manipulated groups that fundamentally have a

groups like Al—Qaeda. Part of the danger of allowing them to fall

groups like Al—Qaeda. Part of the authoritarian regimes because they

have found terrorists in their backyard. We have got two wars and

casualties. That is not the best way to treat this kind of threat. You

mentioned that one of the groups to treat this kind of threat. You

mentioned that one of the groups fighting in Syria, you downplayed

be, is a motivating factor for a lot the fact that religion or religious

be, is a motivating factor for a lot of these groups. Do you recognise

the importance? Absolutely. The of these groups. Do you recognise

determines how things play out when talks about the way that enhanced

determines how things play out when they start. But one of the things I

did was that I visited many cities and a number of different parts

did was that I visited many cities the world and saw the same thing is

playing out in Christian and Muslim and Hindu and Buddhist societies. I

do not see one particular religion is necessarily more prone to this

kind of activity. What I see is is necessarily more prone to this

religion, along with a lot of other things, is a factor. But would you

accept that there are people in things, is a factor. But would you

Tunisia, who has warned of the rise of the Islamist terrorism. He said

Al—Qaeda is trying to recoup its mainstream groups. He clearly has a

am not talking about the modernist Islamists. I am talking about the

jihadists. President Putin has made side—effects of the uprising against

tragedies of Syria has been that the the oppressive regimes in North

West has allowed what was basically a broad—based civil led largely

secular Movement for Democratic a broad—based civil led largely

where the original Syrian and civil Change in Syria be overwhelmed by

where the original Syrian and civil democrat leaders have been sidelined

and you have a series of relatively extreme military groups. That is a

avoided that? We should have done a challenge. How could they have

avoided that? We should have done a lot more diplomatically. I would not

advocate a military intervention. A military intervention in this kind

of environment is always the wrong answer. But we did sit on our hands

for at least the first year. It answer. But we did sit on our hands

the regime six months to get from just beating people up with sticks

and shooting protesters to the point where it is facing a civil war.

and shooting protesters to the point relatively unified. You had things

like the President's wife looking to where the family could flee to.

like the President's wife looking to have people in the Alawite community

rejecting the leadership. What we have now is that President Assad's

powerbase has unified. People feel that the alternative is destruction.

intervention earlier would have helped? It would not make the regime

any weaker. How is your theory of insurgency, would that help people?

It is really important to see Syria as part of a series of conflicts

that began to emerge in 2010. Urban populations that were very connected

with each other and in many places close to the coastline were able to

exploit that kind of activity and the density of communications. They

were able to overthrow regimes that revolution quickly because there was

not a lot of connectivity between people. This time around, half a

dozen cities rose up simultaneously people. This time around, half a

other. It was harder for the regime because people were talking to

to get ahead. So you have got to try and secure the cities. Is that the

fighting is that it is almost all in and secure the cities. Is that the

fighting is that it is almost all in the cities, but the rebels have

controlled the outskirts, with the regime controlling the middles.

controlled the outskirts, with the is a typical pattern. It seems that

the key idea in your model, you is a typical pattern. It seems that

you have been writing things in is a typical pattern. It seems that

book, that we have got to get our heads inside cities and out of the

overlooking the fact that there heads inside cities and out of the

a lot of terrorists and criminal activities that do operate in rural

areas? Not at all. There. Be a substantial amount of violence,

crime and conflict in rural areas. But two thirds of people will be

either in a major city or a smaller city. Conflict happens where people

are. If you are focused on preparing environment, in the British army or

police, you want to be thinking environment, in the British army or

about rural areas and more about urban environments. President Obama

said they take refuge in tribal regions and walled compounds. They

train in empty deserts and rugged mountains. But you're arguing for

place. We now have really good people to take their focus off

place. We now have really good capabilities for engaging in that

environment. I am not suggesting we capabilities for engaging in that

environment. I am not suggesting we take our eye off the ball. But as

these conflicts come to an end, take our eye off the ball. But as

we think about what is coming next, we look at where people actually

guerrillas used to hide in jungles. Now we have radar that can penetrate

mountains. Not because they like mountains, that is where the cover

and radar, the cover is in the mountains, that is where the cover

and radar, the cover is in the cities. We have seen this in the

case of Afghanistan. The conflict has become increasingly urban.

Dramatically larger amounts of the conflict are happening in cities.

Conflict generally is urbanising. conflict. Everything is getting

Conflict generally is urbanising. urban. Finally, when you look at the

world today, where do you think urban. Finally, when you look at the

most dangerous place is on Earth? Very much so it is the rapidly

growing edges of cities, which become this doughnut shaped ring of

territories where people moved to. Most larger cities on coastlines.

East and west coast of Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, certain

parts of the Caribbean and Latin America. I am not suggesting that is

where terrorists will hide. That is unsophisticated. There are a lot of

other threats out there that will be much more threatening to the future

extremists. It will be about urban of the well—being of humans than

extremists. It will be about urban overstretching failing to cope with