Difficult as it will be, even if an international alliance manages to eradicate Osama bin Laden, we will still have to deal with a more complicated generation of other terrorists.

"You have a swamp, and bin Laden is just one of the mosquitoes," says Amin Tarzi, a Middle East specialist with the Monterey Institute. "We have to drain the swamp."

But how do you defend against those willing to die for an ill-defined cause?

It may be nearly impossible but must be attempted. America must work to change these radicals' minds about their causes and disrupt their efforts.

Changing minds.

Extremist Muslim groups exist all over the world. In Pakistan and Afghanistan in particular, schools are brainwashing children to believe America is the incarnation of evil. It will be hard to alter their opinions.

Strangely enough, perhaps the best thing the West can do, in particular America, is to work on diplomatic and commercial relationships; we must emphasize areas for agreement and joint efforts. Some things cannot change – many Arabs malign America for supporting Israel, the "enemy state," or aiding compromised rulers, like the last shah of Iran. Conservative Arab states may not appreciate our defense of democracy and personal freedoms. However, American support for causes like public health could not be condemned.

If areas for constructive engagement can be found, anti-American sentiment may decline over the long term, and moderate Muslims can gain more sway.

Disrupting efforts.

To disrupt terrorist efforts, the U.S. has to know about them. The federal government spends about $30 billion each year on intelligence gathering. Yet the major intelligence lapses over the years have been astounding – incorrect assessments of the true conditions in countries like Vietnam or Iran; infiltration by moles into the intelligence services; lack of expertise about radical groups. Although more value does need to be placed on low-tech human intelligence gathering, other tools of eavesdropping need to be used while balancing the civil liberties of Americans. Proposals to grant intelligence agencies more latitude need to be revisited and debated.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service, still one of the most inefficient arms of federal government, must reorganize in light of terrorist threats. Better follow-up is needed on foreigners who enter this country as students and never leave. A more sophisticated border policy is needed.

In addition to disrupting terrorists' actions, the U.S. must disrupt their organizations. After Tuesday's attacks, responsible nations have a new interest in condemning states that harbor terrorists. Nations must join together to block funding for terrorist organizations and to bring key leaders to justice.

Charles Hill, a diplomacy expert at Yale University, warns that terrorism comes in waves, "In the '70s and early '80s we were totally vulnerable. We had no security procedures, and nationally we had no counterterrorism program with foreign governments. We fought back and we suppressed it greatly. ...We have to be prepared in case there is a second or third act to this."

Fighting back – on many fronts – is our only option. The great tragedy of the terrorist attacks cannot be diminished, but they have provided us with a clarion call that may serve to modify if not nullify future attacks from this new breed of even more dangerous terrorists.

- This editorial was originally published in The Dallas Morning News 09/17/01.