RSS
Using PayPal
Yosri Fouda Important Asset in Re-Considering America's Response to Terrorism
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Monday, Oct 10, 05, 7:53PM
Today's session with Yosri Fouda was fascinating.
C-Span is re-playing the 2 hour segment tonight at 9:56 p.m. and then again at 1:52 a.m. (for those recently back from Asia).
Fouda outlined, despite his characteristic modesty, some startling and important new observations about al Qaeda's leadership. Specifically, he argued that the most recent tape from Ayman Al-Zawahiri showed some yearning to move out of the dominant shadow of Osama bin Laden. He also suggested that he didn't think that Al-Zawahiri knew where bin Laden was.
Al-Zawahiri's recent loquacious, 6000-word letter to Abu Masab al-Zarqawi in Iraq also indicates some subtle discomfort regarding the public relations impact of public executions by Zarqawi. Al-Zawahiri also decries the seeming lack of control or organization of attacks by al Qaeda led or inspired operations and also implies a need for money or more resources.
Fouda also indicated that he had knowledge from those who know the al Qaeda network that bin Laden himself may not be happy with how things are going and "feels a need to speak." Fouda mentioned that a colleague of his has been approached by those who have some knowledge of bin Laden that he would like to be interviewed by al Jazeera.
Yosri Fouda also made a long roster of compelling points. First and foremost, though he agreed with those who want to knock out the "careerists" in the Al Qaeda network, Fouda thinks that we need to do a better job of listening to what the terrorists are saying about their objectives and course of action. Fouda argues that they are more transparent than most Americans and other observers believe. He says that the challenge is to strip them of their "believers" by deconstructing what the believers think that they are getting from someone like bin Laden and directing their aspirations and hopes another direction.
Fouda implied that the kind of public diplomacy Karen Hughes was initiating at the State Department, though well intentioned, is not enough. America needs to rethink its "entire strategy with the Muslim world, particularly the Arab Muslim world, and initiate a new, serious, constructive approach." He suggested that even then, so much has gone wrong -- and there are such "deep roots" of ill will and problems -- that the situation will not improve for some time.
There is much more I could add -- and will -- at a later time. Suffice it to say that I think that Yosri Fouda is worth watching if you haven't seen it -- and re-watching if you have.
Although I am having trouble with the link, apparently one can find the Fouda event listed here and then click the link to watch over the web at one's convenience.
Yosri Fouda will also be appearing on C-Span's Washington Journal Tuesday morning from 9:30 - 10:00 a.m. (tomorrow).
Fouda's remarks at my recent terrorism conference can also be heard here (just scroll down page to the 11 a.m. panel on the "Grievance Challenge" and click link).
More later.
-- Steve Clemons
Steve, how does one catch an Al Jazeera broadcast here in the US? How can I persuade my cable provider to bring it in, even though I don't know of any other people who would like to see it?
Maybe C-SPAN would consider running a feed?
Re: The C-SPAN link, it didn't work in my browser either. The link does work if inserted directly into Real Player. The URL is rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/ter/ter101005_yosri.rm
That URL might work in some browsers that have the RTSP protocol registered to an application handler.
Well, if you can understand an al-Jazeera broadcast, you probably already have it in your home via satellite. For the rest of us, I think the only hope is the upcoming al-Jazeera international, which may or may not make it onto premium channels. But we can hope.
One especially interesting point made by Mr. Fouda was the revelation of the (possible) bin Laden contact with aJ and what this might mean for al-Qaeda -- if bin Laden is alive, why *do* we hear so much from al-Zawahiri and al-Zarqawi and basically nothing from him? It's entirely possible that aQ has fragmented and coalesced into three main branches, led by bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and al-Zarqawi. Perhaps bin Laden seeks to openly distance himself from Zarqawi and return to his old "ecumenical Takfiri" position, while Zawahiri wants to mitigate the scope of Zarqawi's violence while maintaining him for the kind of parochial ends EIJ seems to be known for. And Zarqawi ... well, he really hasn't come far from his street-rat youth, has he?
9/11 Commission Chairman Lee Hamilton cuts off speaker who conveys the primary motivation for tragic 9/11 attacks (as also conveyed by esteemed US intelligence author James Bamford on pages 96-101 and on pages 137-145 of his 'A Pretext for War' book which was recently released in paperback and is a must read):
www.IRmep.org/jm.wmv
Additional info related to such can be found via the following URL (to include in the 'Comments' section via the link near the bottom):
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2005/08/gorilla-in-room-is-us-support-for.html
Christopher Hitchens disingenously denies that US support of Israel was motivation for tragic 9/11 attacks in his most recent C-SPAN appearance from this past weekend which is linked at the following URL (be sure to watch/listen for the comment about the Likudnik neocon war for Israel agenda in the Pat Buchanan segment which is also linked at the following URL - be sure to also listen to the excellent calls which initiate the Jessica Stern and Tony Blankley segments as well as the calls which come in the open phones segment at the end):
http://www.c-span.org/c-span25/viewercalls.asp
Here is a URL for the Robert Pape book which was mentioned him to Christopher before Peter Slen (the host for C-SPAN during Christopher's segment) abruptly cut the caller off as Slen is pro-Israel and is biased for the Republican/neocon agenda as well:
New Pape Book: Suicide Bombers Driven by Policy:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=37722
One might want to read what James Bamford conveys about the 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda on pages 261-269 of his 'A Pretext for War' book (the recently released paperback version includes mention of the AIPAC/Israel espionage via the Pentagon on page 403 which the pro-Israel biased US press/media is not covering either for the most part). 'A Clean Break' agenda discussed by Syrian Ambassador to the USA recently at UCLA (as the following URL conveys):
Syrian Ambassador to the USA discusses the 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda at UCLA:
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=36041
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewforum.php?f=24
http://nomorewarforisrael.blogspot.com
Watchful
There isn't a "split" between the leaders of Al Qaeda (ala the Real IRA and IRA), although central control really doesn't exist as it would in a traditional terrorist organizations. It hasn't really existed since December 2001 with the overthrow of the Taleban. They may have some weak central control, but they operate more as figureheads, rather than leaders. The direct threat of terrorism today doesn't really come from Al Zawahiri or Bin Laden but from mid level leaders like Zarqawi.
I think the difference in visibility between Al Zawahiri and Bin Laden is in part attributable to the nature of these two men. Al Zawahiri has never shied away from the camera, he shot into prominence in the aftermath of the Assassination of Anwar Saddat, and is more of a public personality. Bin Laden has really always been less visible but more of an hands on leader. He fought along side the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan as the representative of the Saudis. It might also be likely that Bin Laden is seen as the figurehead, and therefore it is more prudent to risk Al Zawahiri's life by giving him operational aspects leadership.I seriously doubt however that a split has occurred.
As I stated above Zarqawi really symbolizes the real threat posed by Al Qaeda. An ideologically driven mid level leader who has been so heavily indoctrinated that he can't develop a grand strategy needed to create a fundamentalist state. Him and his cohort of students from the camps in afghanistan are the real practitioners of terrorism, as they set up cells around the world, from Indonesia to London and carry out attacks. There may be several hundred of them around the world today.
Of the recent Zawahiri-Zarqawi letter and Mr. Fouda's revelations, I think they may portent a very dangerous change of strategy in Al Qaeda. Many terrorist groups undergo burnout, where the group's sociology radicalizes to such an extent that it alienates its base for support. An example of this could be seen in the history of the Red Brigades in Italy. I personally thought that Al Qaeda was going to go down this route, and slowly marginalize itself to the greater muslim world. However these recent revelations give me the impression that Al Qaeda, far from disconnecting itself from its basis of support, is actively working to cultivate a popular public image. If this is the case, then al Qaeda will be able to maintain the operational tempo it is conducting now, because it will have a deep resevoir of public support for its cause.
Although eliminating Bin Laden and al Zawahiri will not end terrorism, it will sound the deathknell for the greater dream of the fundamentalist movements. Without them, these groups will have no idea on how to achieve their greater wish for a Islamic state. They will continue to carry out terrorist attacks, and slowly alienate themselves from their target audiences.
I watched the replay on CSPAN last night and was riveted. Why oh why is no one in the administration listening? Your audience was asking far more incisive and intelligent questions than Condi Rice can even fathom.
This guy is just a carpetbagger.
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's faction has claimed responsibility for attacks that have left hundreds of Iraqis dead, and the United States has called him the most dangerous terrorist in Iraq.
Still, even as al-Zarqawi threatens more chaos - in recordings and internet messages - many Iraqis believe the Jordanian militant does not even exist and is merely a phantom created by the Americans to sow unrest in the country.
Similar disbelief greeted Britain's explanation that its soldiers, arrested in southern Iraq disguised as Arabs, were on an undercover hunt for terrorists. Instead, some Iraqis argue the soldiers were out to kill Shi'ite Muslims and blame the murders on Sunnis in hopes of sparking civil war.
Such conspiracy theories are common among Arabs and may seem laughable to outsiders. But in Iraq, where rulers from British colonists to Saddam Hussein regularly played one ethnic group against the other, imagined plots can seem reasonable - a fact that may have dire consequences for US efforts to build a stable Iraqi government.
Opposition to constitution
Indeed, ethnic and religious groups typically at odds are now standing united against the US-backed push for Iraqis to adopt a new constitution in a referendum om Friday and elect a permanent government in December. These steps, they say, are really intended to tighten the grip of America and Britain - the old master in Iraq - on the counry's oil wealth.
"Zarqawi is ... a myth that America has created to put a face to the terrorism it wants to stoke in this country to justify its continued presence," Sheik Amer al-Husseini, a top aide to radical Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, told The Associated Press in a recent interview.
"If there was no more terrorism in Iraq, there would be no reason for the United States to remain ... making it harder for them to ... force this constitution on Iraqis," said al-Husseini.
Such arguments only add to confusion among many Iraqis who already are faced with different views from religious leaders. The radical al-Sadr has hinted he opposes the new constitution, while Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the Iranian-born cleric who holds the greatest sway over Iraqi Shi'ites, has urged its passage.
US officials had hoped that such rifts, more common between the Shi'ites and Sunnis, would have been overcome with the June 2004 handover of sovereignty and the January elections that brought the current government to power.
But each time, the same hardline Shi'ite and Sunni groups who had ridiculed the war to topple Saddam as a US effort to seize control over Iraqi oil, remained unconvinced.
As a result, little has changed in Iraq, once the seat of proud Islamic empires upon which Iraqis now look back in wonder as they survey a landscape pockmarked by bombs and sown with civilian corpses.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_1814710,00.html
Echoes some of the points Alexis Debat, one of The National Interest's contributing editors, has made in two presentations over the summer. Hopefully Alexis and Anatol Lieven, Steve's new colleauge at New America, will set up a follow-up discussion of their own to this important event, based on their great level of expertise and knowledge about what's happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The DNI posted the letter from al-Zawahiri to al-Zarqawi. At http://www.dni.gov/release_letter_101105.html
you can click to either the Arabic or English
Does anyone know where to find a translation other than the one from the DNI?
Steve,
I loved being able to see Yosri Fouda. Thank you so much for making this possible. Beyond Fouda's well informed disocurse, there was an indomitable kindheartedness that emanted from him. I mention this because he is so softspoken and without anger or malice. I'm used to seeing Arabs demonized in the MSM, so it was very moving to watch him comment. It makes the possibility for peace seem more hopeful.
Inshallah.
Reader Comments (12) - post a comment