As 2008 dawns, it has become apparent that though this strategy engendered many unforeseen costs, it has proven successful at grinding al Qaeda into nonfunctionality. Put simply, the jihadist war is all but over; the United States not only is winning but also has an alliance with the entire constellation of Sunni powers that made al Qaeda possible in the first place. The United States will attempt to use this alliance to pressure the remnants of al Qaeda and its allies, as well as those in the region who are not in the alliance.
According to Freidman the GWOT is mostly over. Conservative election year rhetoric about the threat of Al'Queda will be just as hard to square against this reality as liberal demands for immediate withdrawl from Iraq are hard to square against developments there. The later, however, can be despun, as obviously some scaling back is imminent, and liberals can cast those withdrawls as the product of domestic political victory even if they're not. The former is very different... Consider the comment Chertoff made last week: When I lift my eyes and look around the world and I look at what happens in Britain and Germany and Spain and Bali and Pakistan, I don't see terrorism going away, I see an al Qaeda that's emboldened...
Frankly, you'd think it would be in their interest for word to get out that they won the war. If anything, this kind of rhetoric emboldens conspiracy theories that Bin Lauden has been kept alive because of his usefulness as a wedge against the Constitution. Remember, these anti-terrorism security measures are useful for pursuing all kinds of policy objectives, including possession of drugs, weapons violations and outstanding warrants.
| 
