|

Dr. Walid Phares
How to Measure al Qaeda's Defeat
June 7, 2008
In an
article published in the Washington Post on Friday May
30, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden is quoted as portraying al
Qaeda movement as "essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on
the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its
presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."
The article said Hayden asserts that:
"Osama bin Laden is losing the battle
for hearts and minds in the Islamic world and has largely forfeited his
ability to exploit the Iraq war to recruit adherents." More importantly,
the article quotes the chief intelligence declaring a "near strategic
defeat of al-Qaeda in Iraq; near strategic defeat for al-Qaeda in Saudi
Arabia; significant setbacks for al-Qaeda globally -- and here I'm going
to use the word 'ideologically' -- as a lot of the Islamic world pushes
back on their form of Islam."
These powerful declarations prompted a
series of reactions and debates both in political and counter terrorism
circles, causing loud media discussions. The main but simple question of
interest to the public, and subsequently to voters in the US and other
Democracies, is this:
Is al Qaeda being defeated?
However more complex questions arise from
the CIA Director's statements, which if answered accurately would leave
the main assertion still unclear. Following are few of these strategic
questions:
If al Qaeda is being defeated, who is
defeating it? Is it the US and the West, the Arab and Muslim moderates,
or other Jihadists? If Osama Bin Laden is being challenged by his own
members, ex members or non al Qaeda Jihadists, how can that be
determined as a defeat and to whom?
Would a coup inside al Qaeda be of
interest to Washington if the new team is as Jihadist but not as "Bin
Ladenist"? Or is it the US-centered interests that are at play? Meaning
the inability of al Qaeda under Bin laden and Zawahiri to strike at
America or target American troops and presence overseas, including in
Iraq?
Is it Bin laden's discredit, al-Qaeda's
weakening or Jihadism's defeat that is the broadest strategic goal to
attain? Even farther in questioning, is it al Qaeda'
Takfiri method or it the global Jihadist ideology that is
receding? The matter is not that simple, as one can conclude. So how can
we measure an al Qaeda defeat in the middle of a War still raging around
the world? I propose the following parameters.
Is Al Qaeda Being Defeated
Strategically Worldwide as Stated by the CIA Director?
First the confrontation is still ongoing.
Hence we need to situate the conflict first. Are we comparable with WWII
before Normandy or after? In this War on Terror terms, what are our
intentions? Is the US-led campaign designed to go after the membership
of al Qaeda, go after its ideology or to support democracy movements to
finish the job? Everything depends on the answers.
Geopolitically and at this stage, al Qaeda
has been contained in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Somalia. But al Qaeda
has potential, through allies, to thrust through Pakistan and the entire
sub Sahara plateau. It was contained in Saudi Arabia but its cells (and
off shoots) are omnipresent in Western Europe, Latin America, Indonesia,
the Balkans, Russia and India, let alone North America. Objectively one
would admit that the organization is being pushed back in some spots but
is still gaining ground in other locations. Although geopolitical
results are crucial, a final blow against al Qaeda has to be mainly
ideological.
How Can We Measure al Qaeda's Defeat in
Iraq, If that is True?
There are three ways to measure defeat or
victory: Operational, Control and Recruitment. First, is al Qaeda waging
the same number of operations? Second, does it control enclaves? Third,
is it recruiting high numbers? By these parameters al Qaeda was
certainly "contained" in Iraq, particularly in the Sunni triangle. This
was a combined result of the US surge operations and of a rise by local
tribes, backed by American military and funding. But this scoring
against al Qaeda would diminish and probably collapse if the US quit
Iraq abruptly, or without leaving a strong ally behind. So, technically
it is a conditioned containment of al Qaeda in Iraq.
How About Saudi Arabia?
The Saudis have contained many of al
Qaeda's active cells in the Kingdom. But authorities haven't shrunk the
ideological pool from which al Qaeda recruits, i.e. the hard core
Wahhabi circles. The regime has been using its own clerics to isolate
the more radical indoctrination chains. It has been successful in
creating a new status quo, but just that. If Iraq crumbles, that is if
an abrupt withdrawal takes place in the absence of a strong and
democratic Iraqi Government, al Qaeda will surge in the Triangle and
thus will begin to impact Saudi Arabia. Therefore the current
containment in the Kingdom is hinging on the success of the US led
efforts in Iraq, not on inherent ideological efforts in Saudi Arabia.
How About Pakistan-Afghanistan?
In Afghanistan, both the Taliban and al
Qaeda weren't able to create exclusive zones of control despite their
frequent Terror attacks for the last seven years. But there again, the
support to operations inside Afghanistan is coming mainly from the
Jihadi enclaves inside Pakistan: Which conditions the victory over al
Qaeda by the Kabul Government to the defeat of the combat Jihadi forces
within the borders of Pakistan by Islamabad's authorities. Do we expect
President Musharref and his cabinet to wage a massive campaign soon into
Waziristan and beyond? Unlikely for the moment believe most experts.
Hence, the containment of al Qaeda in Afghanistan is hinging on the
Pakistan's politics. While it is true that the Bin Laden initial
leadership network has been depleted, the movement continues to survive,
fed by an unchallenged ideology, so far.
The War of ideas: Is al Qaeda Losing
It?
Geopolitically, al Qaeda is contained on
the main battlefields in Iraq, Afghanistan and somewhat in Somalia. It
is suppressed in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. But it is
roaming freely in many other spots. It is not winning in face of the
Western world's premier military machine, but it is still breathing, and
more importantly it is making babies. All what it would take to see it
leaping back in all battlefields and more is a powerful change of
direction in Washington D.C:
As simple as that: if the United States
decides to end the War on Terror. or as its bureaucracy has been
inclined to do lately, end the War of Ideas against Jihadism, the hydra
will rise again and change the course of the conflict in Iraq,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Arabia and the African Sahara. All depends on how
Americans and other democracies are going to wage their campaign against
al Qaeda's ideology. If they choose to ignore it and embark on a fantasy
trip to nowhere, as the "Lexicon" business shows, al Qaeda -- or its
successors -- will win eventually.
But if the next Administration would focus
on a real ideological defeat of Bin Laden's movement, then, the advances
made on the battlefields will hold firmly and expand.
Lately, some in the counter terrorism
community are postulating that Bin Laden is being criticized by his own
supporters, or more precisely by ideologues and Jihadists who backed him
in the past, then turned against him lately. These analysts offer
striking writings by Salafist cadres against the leadership of Bin laden
and his associates as evidence of an al Qaeda going into decline. Would
these facts mean that the once unchallenged Bin Laden is now losing
altitude? Technically yes, Osama is being criticized by Jihadists. But
does that mean that we in liberal democracies are winning that war of
ideas? Less likely.
A thorough review of the substance of what
the Jihadi critics are complaining about (a subject I intend to address
in a future article), is not exactly what the free world would be
looking forward to. But in short, al Qaeda is now contained in the very
battlefield it chose to fend off the Infidels in: Iraq. But this is just
one moment in space and time, during which we will have to fight hard to
keep the situation as is. Our favorable situation is a product of the US
military surge and of a massive investment in dollars. It is up to this
Congress, and probably to the next President to maintain that moment,
weaken it or expand it.
Al Qaeda and the
Iranian regime know exactly the essence of this strategic equation. I am
not sure, though, that a majority of Americans are aware of the gravity
of the situation. In other words, the public is told that we have won
this round against al Qaeda but it should be informed of what it would
take to reach final victory in this global conflict. |