Al-Qaeda's got a brand new bag
By Pepe Escobar 
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JG24Ak01.html
WASHINGTON - Al-Qaeda is back - with a vengeance of sorts. Listen to Mustafa
Abu al-Yazeed - a senior al-Qaeda commander in Afghanistan, in a very rare
interview with Pakistan's Geo TV, shot in Khost, in eastern Afghanistan. 

"At this stage this is our understanding - that there is no difference
between the American people and the American government itself. If we see
this through sharia [Islamic] law, American people and the government itself
are infidels and are fighting against Islam. We have to rely on suicide
attacks which are absolutely correct according to Islamic law. We have
adopted this way of war because there is a huge difference between our
material resources and our enemy's, and this is the only option to attack
our enemy." 

The interview is not only about defensive jihad. Yazeed delves into classic
al-Qaeda strategy - inciting a cross-border Taliban jihad against the US and
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces and blasting a state, in
this case the government of Pakistan. According to him, "Sadly, it is the
government of Pakistan which has most damaged our cause. President [Pervez]
Musharraf violated the trust of Muslims and contributed to the destruction
of the Islamic government of Afghanistan ... Musharraf and his government
have made big mistakes, there is no such example in other Islamic states." 

Yazeed also said al-Qaeda was responsible for the suicide car bombing on the
Danish Embassy in Islamabad in early June, when six people were killed. 

So why is al-Qaeda feeling so emboldened to have one of its top commanders
on camera - and on a foreign TV network to boot, not as-Sahab, al-Qaeda's
media arm? 

I want my emirate
Jihadis now assess that the new Afghan jihad - against the "infidel" US and
NATO troops combined - is more important at the moment than Iraq. So in this
sense, Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama has got it
right - Afghanistan, and not Iraq, is "the central front in the war on
terror". 

But it's much more complicated than that. The central front is actually in
Pakistan. Al-Qaeda basically wants a pan-Islamic caliphate. The neo-Taliban,
based in Pakistan, are not that ambitious. They already have their Islamic
Emirate - it is in the Waziristan tribal areas on the border with
Afghanistan. What they want most of all is to expand it. They also know they
would never stand a chance of taking over the whole of Pakistan. A Pakistani
expert on the tribal areas, currently in Washington, describes it as "a
class struggle - almost like an evolving peasant revolution. Baitullah
Mehsud [the neo-Pakistani Taliban leader] is but a peasant from a poor
family." 

What is startling is that the neo-Taliban are now practically in control of
North-West Frontier Province on the border with Afghanistan - whose capital
is fabled Peshawar. They already control several Peshawar suburbs. 

The Pakistani state has virtually no power in these areas. The Taliban
enforce strict sharia law. If local security people refuse to obey, they are
simply killed. No wonder the neo-Taliban now have subdued scores of middle-
and low-ranking Pakistani officials. They even issued a deadline to the new
secular and relatively progressive regional government to release all
Taliban prisoners - or else. As for the government, the only thing it can do
is to organize some sort of neighborhood watch to prevent total Taliban
supremacy. This state of affairs also reveals how the Pakistani army seems
to be powerless - or unwilling - to fight the Taliban. 

Across the border, in Kunar and Nuristan provinces in Afghanistan, the
Taliban now control almost all security checkpoints. No wonder Yazeed -
speaking for al-Qaeda, envisions a war without borders. He said, in his Geo
TV interview, "Yes, we cannot separate the tribal area people from
Afghanistan which are part of Pakistan and the Pakistani people. Yes, we are
getting support from tribal people in Pakistan, and in fact it is obligatory
for them to render this help and it is a responsibility that is imposed by
religion. It is not only obligatory for residents of the tribal regions but
all of Pakistan." 

In a recent high-profile al-Qaeda meeting in Miramshah in North Waziristan,
the al-Qaeda leadership made it clear it not only expects - it wants the new
Afghan war/jihad to spill over to the tribal areas in Pakistan. 

And this is what al-Qaeda will get - according to what Obama told CBS News'
Lara Logan, "... what I've said is that if we had actionable intelligence
against high-value al-Qaeda targets and the Pakistani government was
unwilling to go after those targets, then we should." 

The Pentagon for its part is preparing the battlefield - it has already sent
Predator drones, repeatedly, over the tribal areas. An air war is in the
works - not to mention scores of Pentagon covert special ops. 

Al-Qaeda's strategy is to suck in the US military - this is classic Osama
bin Laden ideology, according to which the US should be dragged to fight in
Muslim lands. Al-Qaeda is reasoning that an attack on the tribal areas, in
fact a real third front in the "war on terror" (so dreaded by chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen) will have Pakistani
public opinion so outraged that the Pakistani army would be powerless to
follow the US track. And al-Qaeda, in the end, would be left with an even
freer hand. 

Obama and Osama
How does that fabled phantom, bin Laden, fit into this strategy? Is he alive
or just ... a phantom? Hassan Ibrahim from al-Jazeera television recently
told independent journalist Kristina Borjesson "bin Laden is alive. The
kidney failure and dialysis machine stories are nonsense, CIA rumors. In
2002 one of his wives was interviewed for a Saudi magazine and she
categorically denied the dialysis story. After Tora Bora [in Afghanistan
when the US invaded in 2001], his fourth wife asked for a divorce. He took
on a new wife in April 2005, with whom he now has a son. Her father is a
powerful Saudi businessman from Hejaz who announced in his mosque that his
daughter had married bin Laden." 

There's also chatter in the jihadi underground related to an ongoing
theological debate with direct participation by bin Laden. 

Obama for his part still cannot have grasped the full, complex, picture of
what is going on the tribal areas - in his current world tour he's only been
to Jalalabad, in eastern Afghanistan, and only for a few hours. But he's on
a learning curve - although, for the moment, he seems to be playing to the
US military establishment galleries, pledging to add 10,000 US combat troops
to the Afghan theater of war. Al-Qaeda will be delighted. 

What Obama has certainly accomplished for now is a certified three-pointer -
turning George W Bush administration and neo-conservative rhetoric about the
"war on terror" in Iraq upside down and applying it to Afghanistan. Obama
has been emphasizing the "growing consensus at home that we need more
resources in Afghanistan". 

In his press conference in Jordan, Obama also emphasized his decision to
make Afghanistan the first stop on his world tour because it's the "central
front in the war on terror," the place "where 9/11 was planned" and where
"terrorists" are "plotting new attacks against the United States". 

And here's the clincher - straight out of the neo-con playbook, "We have to
succeed in taking the fight to the terrorists." But that's not all. Obama's
political jiu-jitsu has mixed this hardcore rhetoric with a global,
multilateral vision - not to mention forcing Republicans to accept his own
take on the "war on terror". As for the tribal areas, he projects the
impression he is allowing himself time to fully understand their complexity.


So what's left to self-described national security expert and Republican
presidential candidate Senator John McCain? Well, he did manage to tell
ABC's Diane Sawyer the new al-Qaeda and Taliban configuration is "a very
hard struggle, particularly giving the situation in the Iraq-Pakistan
border". 

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan:
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0978813820/simpleproduction/ref=nosi
m> How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books,
2007) and Red
<http://www.amazon.com/Red-Zone-Blues-snapshot-Baghdad/dp/0978813898> Zone
Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. He may be reached at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact us about sales,
<javascript:openWindow('http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/content-form.html','l
ist','resizable=yes,scrollbars,width=260,height=370');> syndication and
republishing
<javascript:openWindow('http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/repub-form.html','lis
t','resizable=yes,scrollbars,width=260,height=370');> .) 
 
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this
message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to
these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed
within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with
"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The
Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain
permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials
if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria
for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies
as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four
criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is
determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not
substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml>
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 

THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS
PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

 
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to