GIVING AID to your most fanatical enemies is nobody's idea of good strategy, but that is exactly how a growing chorus of counterterrorism experts sees the war in Iraq. The U.S. occupation, they argue, has handed Al Qaeda and other Islamic radicals not only a massive training ground but an invaluable tool for propaganda and recruitment. Like the American assistance naively provided to the mujahedin in Afghanistan during the 1980s, our efforts in Iraq, according to this dire view, will have a vicious and predictable "blowback": more and deadlier jihadism for years to come, and not just in the Middle East.
There's no disputing some parts of this argument. Hundreds if not thousands of foreign fighters from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Sunni countries have already heeded the call to confront the "infidels and crusaders" in Iraq. Led by the Jordanian Abu Musab Zarqawi and responsible for the grisliest acts of the insurgency, these would-be martyrs have plainly acquired technical and organizational skills, to say nothing of contacts, that will help them in other arenas of their apocalyptic struggle.
This is all conventional wisdom. The author now proceeds to lose himself in propaganda.
But some such expansion of Osama bin Laden's bloody franchise was bound to happen anyway, even without the American campaign in Iraq. The key event in bolstering the ranks of Al Qaeda and its affiliates was not Operation Iraqi Freedom but 9/11 itself, whose humbling of the "far enemy" was widely cheered in the Arab street. The great selling point of Bin Laden's movement was its stunning success, and any American response was sure to rally new troops to his side.
This is so much BS. Lets pretend that 9/11 was the only recruiting tool. Forget about the invasion of Iraq. Forget about the US "occupation" of Saudi Arabia. The whole issue that Al Qaeda recruits with is "infidels" in Islam's holy lands misbehaving, oppressing the people.
The author goes on about how Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has taken a hit militarily for its propaganda and terror successes. Terrorists don't care about casualties.
Military setbacks are the least of the radicals' worries, however. Despite their continuing appeal to a segment of Arab opinion — think of young men shouting "Allahu Akbar!" as they watch endless iterations of beheadings on the Internet — Zarqawi and his followers have lost considerable ground in the struggle for Arab "hearts and minds." Their indiscriminate brutality in striking at Shiites and at Sunni "collaborators" has turned much of Iraq, including elements of the insurgency, against them, and their early November bombings of Western hotels in Amman, Jordan, sparked outrage across the Arab world. Even Ayman Zawahiri, Bin Laden's top lieutenant, felt compelled to rebuke Zarqawi, instructing him (in a recently intercepted letter) to cease actions that "the masses do not understand or approve."
The still-deeper threat to the legitimacy of the jihadists, as they themselves recognize, is the ongoing democratic project in Iraq. In January, as Iraqis went to the polls for the first of their three elections this year, Zarqawi released a message declaring "a bitter war against democracy and all those who seek to enact it." He has made good on his pledge, even to the point of lashing out at the growing number of Sunnis who, despite hating the U.S. occupation, have reconciled themselves to the new Iraq. Just two weeks ago, Zarqawi's forces assassinated the grand imam of Fallouja. The 70-year-old cleric's crime? Urging fellow Sunnis to vote. A strong Sunni turnout is expected on Thursday, and the radicals will be left to sulk in the shadows.
Whether the United States will succeed in helping to establish a more liberal, pluralistic Iraq remains to be seen. But if nothing else, the conflict there has served a useful, clarifying purpose — revealing the jihadists as nihilistic spoilers opposed to the aspirations of most of the Muslim world. In a fight likely to last for decades, that may be the most consequential "blowback" of all.
Interesting points. One can only hope the author is right. From a western point of view, Zarqawi is hurting his image by his behavior, killing innocents and spoiling democratic reform. What sells in Islam may not be well known to western minds, as this whole disaster in Iraq has shown repeatedly.
However, the claim that this setback is something more, "the most consequential 'blow back' of all" is simply wishful thinking. The ebb and flow of the war for the minds and hearts of Islam is far from over. I would seriously doubt that Zarqawi's excesses have offset Bush's stupid remarks about "crusade" and the killing of thousands of Palestinians and Iraqis.
America and Israel appears to be on a mission to oppress of Islam according to most recent polls in the middle east. America has always been looked upon suspiciously for it's support of Israel, but now it's joined the fray and is acting like Israelis too. Zarqawi has done little more than harass the process in Iraq so far. He'd have to do much more to come near to what America has done to itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment