| Submit your comments on this article |
| Terror Networks & Islam |
| NYT on the possibility of a resurgent al-Qaeda |
| 2005-07-25 |
| This is pretty good, but also pretty stupid ... As Britain and Egypt struggle to absorb the effects of terrorist attacks on their soil and determine who was responsible, both countries are asking the same two questions: Were the attacks linked, and was Al Qaeda involved? On the face of it, there are a number of similarities: two well-coordinated attacks, carried out in scattered locations nearly simultaneously by suicide bombers. In both cases, this line of thinking goes, the bombers struck targets that represented support for Western or American policies they saw as anti-Muslim. Indeed, London could have been chosen at least in part because of Britain's unflinching support of the American-led war in Iraq and the military campaign against the Iraqi insurgency. Or Afghanistan. Or the destruction of the Ottoman Empire or a host of other Ummah-wide grievances ... Sharm el Sheik is Egypt's leading tourist resort as well as a symbol of the halting American-led process to make peace between Israelis and Palestinians. But several senior intelligence and counterterrorism officials based in Europe and the Middle East said that they would be surprised if the two attacks were operationally or directly linked. They also stressed that it is much too early in the inquiries in both countries to determine conclusively whether a resurgent Al Qaeda, possibly with a newly installed group of operational commanders, had organized or financed either of the two groups of men who attacked the London public transportation system on July 7 and July 21 or the bombings of an upscale hotel, a local market and a parking lot in Egypt. That's not what they told WaPo the other day, but that's okay. My guess is that we're seeing two dueling lines of analysis here that are both trying to get their views floated to the press. "Egypt is not at all the same political universe as London," said a senior diplomat based in Cairo who has decades of experience in the Middle East. "It's much too early to draw a link between the two. It's also a little bit artificial to say they were supported or inspired by Al Qaeda at this point." Saying a number of scenarios are possible, he added, "There are a lot of people here in Cairo insisting it is not Al Qaeda, that it's a local operation, locally inspired." Hosni has a pretty good reason to say it's not al-Qaeda to protect his tourist trade and even if it's not, what does that make it, Gamaa or EIJ? Both of them are signatories to Binny's declaration of war. The head of one European intelligence service who has long monitored Al Qaeda said, "It sounds very strange that there could be a link between London and Sharm." As for finding a connection to Al Qaeda, he said, "It's too soon; we are still trying to determine the origin of March 11," referring to the terrorist train attacks in Madrid last year that killed 191 people. That sounds a lot like Spanish intel, they've been trying to downplay the al-Qaeda connection to 3/11 for awhile now (in contrast to Garzon and the Spanish police/judiciary). That said, there is the conviction among intelligence agencies in Europe and the Middle East that terrorism inspired by Al Qaeda's ideology, carried out in the name of a violent interpretation of Islam, has entered a new, dangerous and global phase. Those officials point to a surge in terrorist attacks in both Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the recent attacks in London and Sharm el Sheik that could be part of a new mandate to set off devastating, multiple bomb attacks to punish Western governments for their foreign policies. A document that some intelligence services see as a kind of road map for the new, more aggressive strategy is a 1,600-page treatise written last December by Mustafa Setmarian Nasar, a Syrian-born militant who operated in London for many years and who authorities believe is the mastermind of the Madrid bombings, the head of a European intelligence service said. Titled "The International Islamic Resistance Call," it outlines future strategies for the global jihad movement, dividing the enemy into sectors: "Jews, Americans, British, Russian and any and all the NATO countries as well as any country taking the position of oppressing Islam and Muslims." Only by carrying out terrorist attacks and decentralized urban warfare will the jihadi network win, the treatise said. There has been a tendency, particularly since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, to immediately blame Al Qaeda after a terrorist attack of unknown origin, even if there is little proof an outside group was involved. It is less terrifying if the terrorists are an amorphous outside enemy rather than one that is based internally. Why can't al-Qaeda be "based internally?" The whole idea is that it's a global network made up of a bunch of local organizations. But Al Qaeda is almost certainly on the minds of British and Egyptian officials as their investigators sift through the evidence of the bombings on their soil. From the beginning, there was a strong suspicion that the initial London attack that killed 56 people might have been an operation inspired by Al Qaeda. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on the afternoon of July 7 that the attacks in the London Underground and on a double-decker bus carried the hallmarks of Al Qaeda. Less than a month before the London attacks, Britain's top intelligence and law enforcement officials said in a confidential assessment that the threat from Al Qaeda's "leadership-directed plots has not gone away." Investigators have actively pursued one theory that the suicide bombers in the July 7 attacks might have met a mastermind in Pakistan, possibly connected to one of two Qaeda-inspired groups, the Jaish-e-Muhammad, meaning Army of Muhammad, and Lashkar e-Toyba, meaning Army of the Pure. Lashkar e-Toyba is believed to have established a recruitment and fund-raising foothold in Europe in the past few years, senior intelligence and counterterrorism officials said. "I have worried about Lashkar possibly trying to do something like the London bombings," one senior intelligence official based in Europe said, adding that he had seen no evidence of a direct link between the group and the London attacks. Another possible Qaeda link under investigation in London is a hunt for a potential suspect, 30-year-old Haroon Rashid Aswat, who authorities accuse of attending two Al Qaeda training camps and trying to establish a camp in Bly, Ore., in 1999. Because Mr. Aswat is believed to have arrived in Britain two weeks before the July 7 attacks, and have left either the morning of the attacks or the day before, investigators want to know if he had any contact with any of the four suicide bombers. However, several American officials have said that it is still not confirmed that the Mr. Aswat who arrived in Britain prior to the attacks was the same Mr. Aswat who attempted to establish the training camps in Oregon. In the Sharm el Sheik bombings, some officials have already pointed to Al Qaeda. But Al Qaeda's true form these days is a question mark. A majority of the officials interviewed call it a badly hobbled, barely functioning organization. Its top commanders have been captured or killed, and its two top leaders - Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri - have been in hiding for nearly four years. I tend to disagree with that assessment for the reasons I listed in here One senior counterterrorism official said, "Al Qaeda is finished. But there is Al Qaedaism. This is a powerful ideology that drives local groups to do what they think Osama bin Laden wants." |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #3 Hehehe, good point. I hadn't considered that ... |
| Posted by: Dan Darling 2005-07-25 11:15 |
| #2 dan, I think sometimes it is useful to step back and look at things in a cold and aloof manner as to what point is attempting to be made, rather than if the point is actually true or logical or possible. This reads like poorly written propaganada to me. Clearly the writer is attempting to get the reader to view things in a manner other how it may seem to appear, leading down a garden path of, "though it may seem" Here is the writers ultimate point: But Al Qaeda's true form these days is a question mark. A majority of the officials interviewed call it a badly hobbled, barely functioning organization. Its top commanders have been captured or killed, and its two top leaders - Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri - have been in hiding for nearly four years. One senior counterterrorism official said, "Al Qaeda is finished. But there is Al Qaedaism. This is a powerful ideology that drives local groups to do what they think Osama bin Laden wants." Now, step back for a moment and say you are a jihadi. You may just be asking yourself that same question. Where is Bin Laden? Where is Zawahiri. Is Zarqawi dead? All of our top leaders seem to be AWOL or in jail. Where are they? What exactly is the goal we are fighting for? I don't have time to ponder this but I can't help wondering if this isn't written for you or me...but rather for the jihadi who might be asking himself that very question, "is AQ finished". |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-07-25 11:11 |
| #1 A resurgent al Qaeda would be an al Qaeda that can carry out 9/11-style operations on a production-line type basis, with each attack killing thousands on a day-to-day basis. That was the real fear after 9/11 - could they keep up that operational tempo on American soil? The answer was no. The only place where it can approximate those numbers is in Iraq, but that is mixed in with an ongoing civil war between Sunnis and Shias, and an environment in which perhaps 20% of the population supports al Qaeda. I don't think you have anywhere near those numbers in any Western country, including Turkey. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-07-25 10:29 |