Overseas Contingency Operation–that’s the Obama administration’s new name for the conflict formerly known as the Global War on Terror (GWOT). Perhaps GWOT wasn’t the best descriptor for the global conflict against Islamic Extremism, but it seemed to capture the key elements (such as the scope of the conflict and adversary). If anything, it lacked specificity in that it did not identify the adversary as clearly as it could have. From FOXNews.com:
The Obama administration has ordered an end to use of the phrase “Global War on Terror,” a label adopted by the Bush administration shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
In a memo sent this week from the Defense Department’s office of security to Pentagon staffers, members were told, “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’”
I can only speculate as to why exactly the Obama administration thought that this was a good idea. It probably has something to do with their desire to improve “the U.S. image abroad.” What this is, however, is political correctness. The U.S. needs to speak candidly and realistically about threats to our national security. Obfuscation and ambiguity is dangerous. The Secretary of Homeland Security has also stopped using the word terrorism, instead using “man-caused” disaster. As Conservative Punk notes, that probably won’t last too long.
James Carafano of The Heritage Foundation makes a good point:
By deliberately trying not to use the T word they run a serious political risk. If something does happen, they’ll be accused of taking their eye off the ball and no amount of explanation after the fact will suffice.
Overseas Contingency Operation? So much for calling a spade a spade.