More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Marwan Bishara

Marwan Bishara

Posted: January 19, 2010 05:14 PM

Is al-Qaeda Winning?

What's Your Reaction:

What does it say about Washington's ''War on Terror'' that a dozen and a half people with paper cutters forced hundreds of thousands of Western troops into the battlefields of the "greater Middle East" region?

That 100,000 foreign soldiers are bugged down in occupied Afghanistan and held hostage by the wrath of Taliban, wondering how many dozens of al-Qaeda operatives have remained, if any?

That the most liberal democracy enacted new controversial illiberal laws and unpatriotic practices under its "Patriot Act?"

That one shoe-bomber has forced millions of people to take off their shoes every time they take a flight?

That one underpants-bomber will expose every other traveler in most humiliating of ways?

That after the United States loss of deterrence and prestige as well as trillions of dollars of military and other expenditures, al-Qaeda's top leadership remains at large; its bases/cells proliferate globally; that volunteers continue to flock into its ranks and young supporters to its websites...!!! And above all that it continues to terrorize America and Americans...

So much that one gets the impression that America is fighting a world superpower despite the incredible disparities in capacity, numbers and support.

Is al-Qaeda winning? Has the United States lost?

Hitting the Jackpot
A dozen years ago, a demoralized group with nowhere to go but the hills of Afghanistan, al-Qaeda, began targeting America instead of the region's authoritarian regimes hoping to destabilize the region, bloody America's nose and gain popularity.

Its strategy was simple: Draw the US into direct confrontation against and within the Muslim world. Like sheep to the slaughter house, America walked right into its trap.

Al-Qaeda was lucky. With a 'cowboy' and so-called "chicken-hawks" (militarists who ever served in the military) dominating the White House and the Pentagon, military escalation was only a question of time and intensity.

The Bush administration decided to "take the war to the enemy so as not to fight it at home." This is exactly what al-Qaeda hoped for considering it wasn't applying for Green cards for its members.

It all went as smooth as a scripted movie. After the 9/11 attacks at the pillars of its world status, the Pentagon and Wall Street, the wounded superpower went on a rampage. Like a bull in a china shop, it responded with little or no thinking of the consequences of its military actions.

Warmongers took advantage of the threat to US national security to advance their military agenda in foreign policy and the radical American right exploited what they termed as the threat to "our way of life" to transform America's way of life towards the right.

Washington called for a "crusade", then changed it into a "war" on terror and under its guise, went on to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq and support Israel's bloody wars in Lebanon and Palestine. It also intervened in Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan and put direct pressure on its allies to confront their Islamist movements.

In no time, the US was preoccupied by its draining occupation and costly military operations. And as expected, the terrible human cost only added petrol to the flames of hatred.

Paradoxically, anti-Americanism has been more rampant under "friendly regimes" like in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey etc. than others.

America's unfortunate and disproportionate use of military force to defeat a segmented, mobile and polycentric movement of several hundred core groups of fighters didn't make it any more secure or dissuasive.

As the Obama administration asks for $33 bn extra budget above the already approved $660 bn for 2010, I remember what Richard Meyers, the former head of the US joint chiefs of staff, told me several weeks ago how a decade later, the US still doesn't have a strategy to deal with "the global insurgency" facing America.

Beyond military
Popular opposition and world denunciations of US military campaign has fallen on deaf ears in Washington. Instead of seriously reversing its military expansion, the Obama administration has accelerated it in the Afghan-Pakistan area and it seems adamant to repeat more of the same in Yemen.

Needless to say, no serious strategic analyst would advise abandoning military power all together. However, Washington's dependency on, even addiction to, firepower has neutralized or nullified all other efforts towards defusing support for al-Qaeda and truly winning hearts.

Good-will gestures provided by President Obama and his attempts to reconnect to the Arab and Islamic world on the basis of "mutual interest and mutual respect" can hardly be heard considering the echoes of drone fired missiles, speeding F-15 jets and rolling tanks.

The more Washington used its military force, the less it won the minds of those it needs most to defeat al-Qaeda: Americans, Arabs and Muslims.

Likewise, US military actions are harming its intelligence and law enforcement work that over the last decade have dealt the greatest blow to al-Qaeda's leadership and organisation.

Zero Sum strategy
As military adventures kill, maim and destroy lives, they create, nurture and build animosities and "alliances" among most unlikely allies, such as a young rich Nigerian that studies in London, a Jordanian doctor that studies in Turkey and an Arab-American soldier trained by the Pentagon, all whom were ready to die to hurt America.

And likewise, counter terror tactics and intelligence work has made it ever more difficult for public diplomacy to "win hearts and minds". Instead of listening to people of the region, it has been spying on them and instead of reading them their rights, it has tortured them in far-away prisons.

And instead of hearing out their concerns and fears, Washington has underlined its own above all others.

In that limited and limiting spirit, for example, mostly impoverished Yemenis that suffer from war in the north, intensive conflict in the south and three decade autocratic regime, must now worry about US fears, and cater to US interests above their own.

Which brings us back to our initial question: al- Qaeda is winning only as far as Washington is running a self-defeating war.

However, one needs to remember that in the self-defeating war on terror, winner and loser is one and the same.

As long as America puts its security preoccupations and political interests above those under its military and strategic domination, the Pentagon and al-Qaeda will feed into one another and the Americans, Arabs and Muslims will continue to be the ultimate losers.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 19
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:34 PM on 01/21/2010
Is al-Qaeda Winning?
It depends on how you define the word 'is'.
08:00 PM on 01/20/2010
-->Sadly, the American people remain ignorant to the changing nature of both our defense strategy and the strategic trajectory. We are not fighting the same way, we are not employing the same strategy, and we do not have the same leaders making important decisions. As we have begun to familiarize ourselves with the nature of this conflict, we have appropriately begun to change our strategic disposition.
-->We will not, nor should, leave the Middle East. It has been, and will continue to be a strategic priority for the United States. I can go into the details of this if prompted, but nonetheless propose that those who think the best strategy is one of avoidance are in the wrong.
-->It is wholly dangerous to in any way begin to think that Al-Qaeda and its affiliates do not present an ideology that directly contradicts the vital pillars of modernity in many ways. Their vision is wide in scope and ambitious. They are willing to go to lengths to achieve their agenda. The tactical advantage the may share over us is simply because they allow their humanity to be entirely discredited by using suicide bombings and airliners to kill american soldiers and citizens. To think that is preverted version of Islam should not be met with force illustrates a lack of manly fortitude and the ability to properly assess one's duty as people of a free country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FearlessFreep
I'm actually a radical leftist
12:27 PM on 01/21/2010
I'm prompting you.
photo
Norge
Rolf K. Artist, worker of metal, writer of poems
06:25 PM on 01/20/2010
Mr. Bishara,

Yours was an excellent summation of the overall situation. The isymetric warfare is of course unwinable for the empires.

I personally have the opinion so many officers and career military personel are so willing to partisipate in foreign American conflicts such as the present is due much to the speed of rank advancement which occurs in combat areas which otherwise would require years to achieve. They relish putting themselves into harms way as the light will shine on them when they return to America.
Of course they all would venomently deny such if confronted with such.

Militaries are for one purpose. Death and distruction and control.
And Empires come and go as they have during all of human history.
It is unfortunate the warriors have not learned the lessons of history more wisely.
Perhaps they lack the ability to learn more complicated problem solving than primitive solutions.
Their henious crimes cost modern civilization costs of unspeakable dementions.

Rolf Krogsæther
Norge
11:13 AM on 01/20/2010
Al Qaeda is a branch of the CIA. It was created so that the U.S. could have an "enemy" after the Soviet Union collapsed. The U.S. needed this fake "enemy" so that defense contractors, banks, oil companies and other corporations could have an excuse to go to war and make profits for those corporations. The title of this article is misleading. It should read: Is the corporatocracy winning?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Anthony Hohol
Revealing the Multiplicity of Perspevtive
09:39 AM on 01/20/2010
Whether or not al-Qeada is winning depends upon how one defines "winning" itself. Groups like al-Qaeda and the Taliban are first and foremost, about survival. As long as there are a few of them around, in that sense, they are winning. It then becomes less about winning and more about containment and control. There are 1.3 billion Muslims in the world and even if only 3% are radical fundamentalists, their numbers are in the millions and they have come to represent the other 97%. We will never be able to completely eradicate them all, this has to be accepted.

What no one seems to understand is that although al-Qaeda and the Taliban can easily be defeated, wiping them out altogether is like trying get rid of a bad case of herpes – it just ain’t gonna happen. The best you can hope for is to get it under control, so the occasional flare up can be properly handled.

http://www.relativityonline.com/home/taliban-herpes-syndrome/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:23 AM on 01/20/2010
I'd like to see an analysis of how much al Qaida spends to hurt us to every dollar we spend to 'fight' them. How much did the shoe bomber spend at his cobbler and for his ticket? How about the crotch rocketeer? What other brilliant low tech tactics can be used to incite additional knee jerk over the top reactions by the US government to enact ineffective impotent policies that serve only to reduce our liberties without ensuring security. Radicals lighting pharts on a plane anyone? If by winning you mean creating just enough chaos, disarray, fear and dissention among its citizenry to cause the US and the rest of the world to overreact, expend great sums of money, disrupt commerce and democracy, then yes, they are winning.
01:50 AM on 01/20/2010
al-Qaeda cannot be seen apart from Islamic extremism generally which seeks a new caliphate. To ignore the desire for a totalitarian Islamist outcome in Europe and the US, is to ignore the real nature of the war, and the real reason for the clash. This is not about small disagreements: It's about the lack of a shared vision of the role of women in the world, acceptance of diversity, honoring Christianity, Judiaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. It was not for nothing that the Taliban blew up the Buddahs in Afghanistan that had stood thousands of years. Islamic extremism, with al-Qaeda at its vanguard, flies in the face of all that the West stands for. That is what the real conflict is about.
photo
F4Phantom
Freelance Writer
10:59 PM on 01/19/2010
Oh god, I didn't need to read that. It was too true, and too painful. I'll come back and try and finish it later.

But it needs to be said --- over and over and over until we can finally disengage America from this quagmire ...or is it a national nightmare?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FearlessFreep
I'm actually a radical leftist
12:29 PM on 01/21/2010
It's an INTERNATIONAL nightmare.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Balzac
10:05 PM on 01/19/2010
I may come to the conclusion that Al Jazeera is just as partisan on behalf of Al Qaeda as New York Times is partisan in favor of the USA.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Balzac
10:01 PM on 01/19/2010
I'm the wrong guy for a self-styled "moderate" Muslim to agitate. I've done my share of being diplomatic, and if anything, I need to err on the side of aggressiveness against propagandists, plotters, and schemers.

I'm only getting more paranoid, day by day. I'm not going to be any less aggressive against propaganda from any direction, Islamic, Christian or otherwise.
09:21 PM on 01/19/2010
We should all be very afraid of terrorists--for at least as long as I'm getting these no-bid defense contracts. Stay the course!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SeaBlood
cynical about religion
07:32 PM on 01/19/2010
I think we should pack up our things and leave the middle east and say we won! That way there would be no loss of face, none of the false pride. By staying there we are playing into the hands of the relatively few folks that want to see harm come to us. We can't win that way. But, unfortunately, any leader who tries to do that will commit political suicide. We need someone who doesn't care about being reelected to sacrifice his career to do the wise thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
09:44 PM on 01/19/2010
No, I don't think Al Queda's winning, nor will they ever win. Saddam Hussein is gone, no more pushing his citizens into threshing machines, no more rape camps, thanks to the United States, and maybe someday, the people both in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere will realize that a lot of the Great Satan rhetoric is just agit-prop, hateful propaganda, that Americans really aren't that bad, though we might currently be unpopular, we aren't inherently evil, even us heathens. We aren't perfect, and in a perfect world, people wouldn't be running around shooting each other and blowing themselves up in the name of the Invisible Man. Alas, it is not so. One of Al Queda's enemies is progress, because progress brings with it education, and with education, people learn the 'ins' and 'outs' of dogmas, recruitment efforts, plays on people's emotions, basically all that good political science stuff, and then they start asking questions, and expect detailed answers, and recieiving none, will not affiliate themselves with the fiery-eyed zealots. It's been done. It has tragic consequences. It's nowhere. Most people want a place to live, a washer, dryer, that kind of thing. The 60's are over, man.
10:17 PM on 01/19/2010
The Al Qaeda picture of the United States before sep, 2001 was that of a hollow paper tiger that fled casualties, based on observations in Somalia and the 1998 Kosovo war, plus the usual anti-American myths about Vietnam. They were quite surprised by the arrival of land forces in Afghanistan. The most they expected were some innefectual cruise missile attacks and possibly a high altitude bombing campaign. Since then their strategy has changed to capitalize on our military engagement. So, its a little like the egg came before the chicken. They were resoundingly defeated in Iraq (which Al Zawahiri called the central front) when the Sunni tribes decided that AQ was a poor ally, while the Iraqi government had staying power, and potentially even a role for Sunni-Shiite-Kurd cooperation (however slight). Now they are putting their effort into Afghanistan where the dynamics are different. But you are correct, they are not winning, they are in retreat. If anti-Americanism is still high, AQ is losing ground in the Arab street. The sheen of success has worn off.
09:12 AM on 01/20/2010
If Al- queda is not winning , tell me who is ! are Americans more free now or are you living a more fear filled life ?
Do Americans enjoy more freedoms at home or less? Americans have given up a large portion of their constitutional rights AKA the Patriot Act etc, face more hassles while traveling spent over 1 trillion dollars to defeat a few thousand " terrorist " .
Are Americans financially better of after 9/11 ?
The only people who are winning is the people behind this so called war on terror the , the Global elite banksters and the military industrial complex.
The average American is too brainwashed to do anything but to experience fear followed by atavistic pleasure when their new gods the Military kill some more people labeled Taliban, Terrorist or insurgent !
All hail this " brave new world "
07:27 PM on 01/19/2010
"Good-will gestures provided by President Obama and his attempts to reconnect to the Arab and Islamic world on the basis of "mutual interest and mutual respect" can hardly be heard considering the echoes of drone fired missiles, speeding F-15 jets and rolling tanks."

Marwan Bishara,
Thank you for your commentary & the work you do at AJE. The Obama adm. needs to reassess its overall strategies in the region, but it won't be getting much in the way of public pressure to do so. The American journalistic establishment, which might be offering to the American public, a realistic picture of the range of pros & cons on the Obama war policies, is embedded in advocacy for war. I wish it were just FOX, but of course, it isn't.
03:17 AM on 01/20/2010
thanx mr. bishara........war on terrorism.....?.......all this time i just figured it was just about oil....opium.....and opportunity.........capitalism at it s best.......guess i misread the ruling class and their objectives........oh well....back to the books