Loud and clear: No respite in the
'long war' By Ehsan Ahrari
The leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi, has issued a videotaped message of
himself only two days after his emir
(leader), Osama bin Laden, urged his followers to
be ready to wage a "long war" against the
Westerners who are getting ready to occupy the
Darfur region of Sudan.
Zarqawi's
videotape came only one day after a major
terrorist attack in Egypt. The bracketing of these
incidents and videotapes carries an intricate
message of it own - that the "long war" is being
waged on a number of fronts. These incidents
happened just a few weeks after the United States
issued its Quadrennial
Defense Review 2006, which
also contains a discussion of "long war".
These are trying times for President
George W Bush. The Iraq war is not getting better.
Nor are his approval ratings. A new poll showed
that only 32% of Americans approve of the way he
is conducting his job. Considering how closely the
Islamists study their "enemies", one can rest
assured that they are not going to let up.
Bin Laden widened the scope of the "long
war" this week by declaring, "I call on the
mujahideen and their supporters in Sudan ... and
the Arabian Peninsula to prepare all that is
necessary to wage a long-term war against the
Crusaders in western Sudan."
As if to
prove that they were paying attention to bin
Laden's call, there was a major terrorist incident
in Dahab, Egypt.
Zarqawi then made his own
contribution to this "long war" by signaling a
major shift in his strategy. The timing was not
coincidental. The tape was issued when hopes are
rising that Jawad al-Maliki, the premier-designate
of the Shi'ite bloc, the United Iraqi Alliance,
will be successful in putting together a
national-unity government.
Mindful of what
is developing in Iraq, Zarqawi declared, "Any
government which is formed in Iraq now, whether by
Shi'ites or Zionist Kurds or those who are dubbed
Sunnis, would only be a stooge. They are a
poisoned dagger in the heart of the Muslim
nation."
Two important red flags emerge
from these developments. First, the terrorist
contagion is widening in North Africa, from where
it will intensify its presence in sub-Saharan
Africa. The situation in the Darfur region is a
classic example of a failed state, Sudan. The
United States has been debating for a long time
about the intervention of the "international
community", once the Organization of African Unity
requests such a measure from the United Nations.
Even though no such request has yet been
issued, the government of Sudan would not be too
happy about such a development and would like to
remain in full control if any intervention under
the flag of the UN were to take place. Viewing it
purely from the perspective of sovereignty, the
position of the Sudanese government appears
reasonable. However, this is also a government
that is suspected of being an accomplice in the
massacre of the black Africans in Darfur. As such,
the government of Sudan has often been accused of
being a party to a shameful campaign of ethnic
cleansing.
However, conflicts of this
nature, especially when they involve a Muslim
country, bring with them enormous opportunities
for global jihadists to label them as a "war"
against Islam, and thereby make that country just
another place to fight the West, since a number of
Western countries would be in the lead in any
attempt to maintain peace in Darfur.
Bin
Laden is a master of such a strategy. He has been
at it since 1991, when he approached King Fahd bin
Abdulaziz to let his "Arab Afghan" and other
mujahideen from the fight against the Soviet Union
of the 1980s engage Saddam Hussein's forces that
were occupying Kuwait. He fine-tuned that strategy
during his stay in Afghanistan between 1997 and
2001, when the Taliban were at the helm.
Now that al-Qaeda has become a franchise
and a movement, it becomes considerably easier for
bin Laden than during the Taliban years to repeat
the type of statement he has been periodically
issuing to refresh the resolve of Islamists all
over the world.
It is hard to prove or
disprove whether the terrorist attack in Egypt was
a direct outcome of that; however, it bears
reminding that al-Qaeda has been known for the
coordination of its activities in one country or
in more than one country within the same region.
In the information age, its ability to broaden the
scope of such coordination holds considerable
promise.
The second red flag is coming
from Zarqawi. By preparing the video, he is
clearly using the global media to send a message
to his emir bin Laden that he is getting
ready to do even more bloodletting in Iraq, now
that the chances of the formation of a
national-unity government have increased.
Zarqawi's own contribution to this "long war" is
likely to be even more significant than it has
been in the past.
Zarqawi is also sending
a message to the entire insurgent community that
the "enemy" is definitely cornered: now is the
time that they should be more focused than ever
before in not allowing any breathing space to the
opposing side.
Zarqawi's video also
signals that he has decided to raise his profile
to encourage his side. The Ba'athist and the
pan-Arabist portion of the insurgency will have to
take note of this fact and adjust their tactics
accordingly. Al-Qaeda's "long war" in Iraq will
not be secondary to any "small time" visionaries
who are only promoting pan-Arabism, as opposed to
pan-Islamism. Considering that Zarqawi's al-Qaeda
has been generally regarded as the promoter of
pan-Islamism, its reputation within the insurgent
community never faced any serious challenge,
especially in view of a series of tactical
successes of its fighters in the streets of Iraq.
Zarqawi now is making sure that such a "fact" is
clearly understood within that community.
Finally, and most important, Zarqawi is
sending a clear message to the Sunnis about being
very careful in terms of their dealings with the
Shi'ites. He is cognizant of the US strategy in
the past several weeks of favoring the Sunnis. He
knows that once the hope for the Sunni payoffs
from the government is heightened, they are likely
to "betray" the Sunni-dominated insurgency. That
is the price the Shi'ites would demand from the
Sunnis. Thus he is clearly sending them a warning
to be aware of what his organization would do to
"collaborators".
What does it all mean for
the United States? This is a clear signal that
regional unity among the terrorist groups is on
the rise. At the same time, there is no effective
strategy on the US side to tackle such unity
effectively. Making a declaration like "global war
on terrorism" does not mean that there is really a
war - that is, a coordinated and well-thought-out
collective endeavor among many nations - being
fought at this time.
The regional and
global jihadists know this weakness. That is one
more reason that they have declared their own
"long war" against the United States. Their hopes
appear higher than ever before that they will win
this war. One wonders whether the Bush
administration is getting this message.
Ehsan Ahrari is the CEO of
Strategic Paradigms, an Alexandria, Virginia-based
defense consultancy. He can be reached at
eahrari@cox.net or
stratparadigms@yahoo.com. His columns appear
regularly in Asia Times Online. His website:
www.ehsanahrari.com.
(Copyright 2006
Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and republishing
.)
