Obama and Al Qaeda: New Moves Show Success May Not Depend On Afghanistan
While things are going quite ruggedly for America in Afghanistan, they may be going worse for Al Qaeda everywhere. Osama bin Laden's taunting 9/11 anniversary message was days late and very lame. And President Barack Obama's lethal approach to dealing with the organization that attacked America on 9/11 took a startling, and still more lethal, turn this week in Somalia.
Which raises a central question: Are we not in fact much closer to achieving our central goal in Afghanistan than most imagine?
Many more people know now that Afghanistan is going badly because it's going better than it was last year. Think about it. Until a few months ago, it would have been absolutely impossible to even conduct a presidential election there. The Taliban influence in southern Afghanistan was too great to allow any widespread voting. The election is what concentrated media and public attention on Afghanistan.
An apparently under-the-gun Osama bin Laden released this late and lame message taunting America about his organization's attacks on 9/11.
Following Obama's Marine offensive there in southern Afghanistan, the election was able to be held on August 20th. And held it was. And held. And it's still going on, at least the counting. With charges of massive fraud, Afghanistan is preparing for a massive recount, as a third of President Hamid Karzai's votes are in question. He's claiming victory with 54% of the vote, but preparations are beginning for a run-off with his principal challenger, Dr. Abdullah Abdulla, the former Northern Alliance spokesman and Afghan foreign minister who fought next to the Taliban-assassinated Ahmad Shah Massoud in the war against the Soviets while Karzai raised money outside the country.
With allegations of massive fraud in the August 20th presidential election in Afghanistan, George W. Bush's man in Kabul, Hamid Karzai, holds a lead over a hero of the war against the Soviets, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, pictured here, whose Northern Alliance was the key US ally in taking down the Taliban regime after 9/11.
America's mission in Afghanistan is quite confused. The goal is to deny it as a base for Al Qaeda. But President George W. Bush, who buddied up with his pick for president, Karzai, turned it into a nation-building exercise even as he cast his gaze fatefully on the endless distraction that was Iraq. Obama, who promises to do better, and is, says the mission is to disrupt and deny Al Qaeda. Even as the mission slides, once again, into nation-building.
There's much more to be said, but for purposes of this piece, let's condense it into one word: Whatever.
The Pakistani Army, moving at the request of Obama, has done a good job of reversing major gains made by the Pakistani Taliban. Many sources say that Al Qaeda cadre -- increasingly decimated by drone aircraft attacks -- are beginning to flee Pakistan for Yemen and Somalia.
It seems that with this kind of pressure, the ability of Al Qaeda to mount a strategic strike against America continues to decline.
Which brings us to other major developments this week.
On Sunday, Osama bin Laden issued a taunting statement marking the eighth anniversary of Al Qaeda's attacks on New York and Washington of 9/11. He called Obama "powerless" and said he can never stop the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.
A few weeks after the November election of Barack Obama, Al Qaeda operational chief Ayman Al-Zawahiri denounced him as a "house Negro." In a release with notably higher production values than Osama bin Laden's taunting 9/11 message this week.
While the Al Qaeda icon intended this statement as a show of strength, it was actually a show of weakness. When Osama calls Obama powerless, he may actually be engaging in the psychological phenomenon of projection.
Consider:
* His statement was released two days AFTER the 9/11 anniversary.
* It was an audiotape, not a videotape.
* It had none of the chanting jihadist production values of the best Al Qaeda videos.
* It was released on a secondary jihadist site because the major ones were recently knocked down by, ahem, unknown parties.
If Osama bin Laden is unable to release even an audiotape to celebrate his 9/11 attacks in a timely manner, he seems to be under a great deal of pressure. He may even be on the run, as Yasir Arafat -- who for several years never spent the night in the same place twice in a row -- once was. Arafat solved his problem by turning to the peace process. I don't think that Osama bin Laden has that option.
Indeed, the US drone attacks against Al Qaeda safe havens inside Pakistan appear to be better targeted than they used to be. The Pakistani government, which demanded their end last year and early this year on account of civilian casualties, hasn't been complaining lately. Sources say that it is providing US forces with better real-time intelligence against jihadist cadre.
Which brings us to the other big development of the week with regard to Al Qaeda.
On Monday, a flight of US helicopter gunships carrying special forces troopers struck deep inside Somalia -- the failed state which once again is becoming a jihadist haven -- against the convoy of a top Al Qaeda leader.
Here's the way the Global Post report put it:
The American gunships attacked a convoy of vehicles carrying Al Qaeda militants and killed Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, an Al Qaeda leader wanted for the bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa in 1998 and an Israeli-owned Kenyan hotel in 2002. The raid shows U.S. President Barack Obama's administration does not intend to allow Somalia to remain a safe haven for Al Qaeda and it is determined to thwart the drive by Islamic militant group Al Shabaab to control Somalia. Al Shabaab has direct links to Al Qaeda and uses foreign troops in its battles to control Somalia.
This top Al Qaeda leader was successfully targeted deep inside Somalia this week by the Obama Administration.
In recent years the U.S. has limited its actions in Somalia to attacks by long range missiles and drones. But this action was direct and put American troops, however briefly, on Somali soil. By successfully targeting Nabhan, the U.S. shows that it has precise strategic information. A further intelligence boon for the U.S. should come from the seizure of Nabhan's body, the two injured men traveling with him and whatever equipment or computers they might have.In Monday's raid, six U.S. helicopters swooped on a convoy of vehicles and strafed them with heavy gunfire. A Land Cruiser carrying Nabhan and at least four other senior militants was badly hit as were a number of "technicals," improvised battle wagons made from pick-up trucks loaded with heavy machine guns, according to eyewitnesses quoted by wire services.
Then two U.S. helicopters landed and there was a brief firefight. Nabhan and other militants were killed. The U.S. troops jumped from the helicopters, went up to the vehicles and seized Nabhan's body and two other injured militants. They quickly flew off by helicopter to a U.S. Navy warship waiting nearby.
Could it be that we are much closer to achieving our central goal in Afghanistan than most imagine?
You can check things during the day on my site, New West Notes ... www.newwestnotes.com.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The U.S. and its allies now are doing just fine in Afghanistan and Pakistan in the battle against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Let's not mess with success.
See William Bradley's Profile
Pakistan yes, Afghanistan ... You may be a tad optimistic.
Where are the remastered Beatles?
:)
See William Bradley's Profile
I believe they will be making an appearance in a "Mad Men" review. But not one of these columns ...
What is our central goal in Afghanistan? President Obama says it is to fight Al Qaeda but General Petraeus says Al Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan. Regardless of what Obama says, what he is doing in Afghanistan is nation building. That means reforming their culture of corruption, establishing a viable and sustainable economic system not based on poppy cultivation and building an infrastructure at a cost of trillions of dollars. It could take 25 years and the sacrifice of thousands of American lives. There is no guarantee of success. Obama should know better. He learned nothing from Viet Nam.
***" Could it be that we are much closer to achieving our central goal in Afghanistan than most imagine?"***
That's a point that "The Young Turks" are making too. He says Obama isn't taking credit for what going on in the Afghanistan. He said Bush would be chest thumping about what he's done had that been him taking out all the terrorist king pins. Take a listen where he's naming the people that have been taken down. I think we're much getting closer too.
http://www
Tarantino would be proudof this tactic. Maybe someone in the military saw Inglourious Basterds.
Great movie!
It sure looks like these thugs think that they can taunt Obama into a fight with their moronic statements.
I really dig having a cool-headed president.
My sense during the election was that Obama would speak softly while wielding a big stick. And that is what he's doing. In contrast, the previous administrated shouted shrilly while wildly waving a big stick.
I look forward to seeing speechless neocons dropped jaws when we do get Osama.
Exactly.
See William Bradley's Profile
Obama uses a portrait of Teddy Roosevelt as his backdrop in all five of his Sunday show appearances tomorrow.
I dont know how we are soo sure that Osama is even in the pakistan/a
See William Bradley's Profile
And what makes you think he is hooked up to a dialysis machine in a cave? You seem to have your own assumptions that don't necessarily make sense.
This war is slowly becoming Iraq part II. It seems like there is no feasible way to walk out of that country declaring victory without it being some cheap and transparent political move- I dont even think Americans would agree or even know what victory would mean, Nothing we gain from this war will bring this country back to pre-9/11. None of the soldiers who sacrificed for their country would be honored any more or any less. None of this will ever seem worth it to the average person no matter what we accomplish in the next year or decade or century in afghanistan.
Oh oh oh, woe is is. Right?
We walked right into a civil war in Afghanistan that was partially our fault for leaving the country in ruins 30 years ago and we are searching for a terrorist group that we not only armed but we actually trained. It seems like the taliban has little interest in helping al queda anymore (as they have brought a sunami to their front door) and it seems like we are doing more fighting against an afghanistan insurgency than we actually are against the group that bombed the world trade center. And we certainly are doing a great job in promoting all the reasons why that part of the world hates America. Al queda couldn't buy the recruitment publicity that we have given them this decade. There are more terrorists now than there would have been if we never invaded. And at first, I wanted to invade afghanistan but enough is enough. We have to learn when to say that this is no longer working and no longer worth it- haven't we learned at all from the tragedy that was vietnam? More troops and more money will not help us wrestle away a country from its own people.
See William Bradley's Profile
TOTALLY, TOTALLY, TOTALLY ... FALSE!
>we are searching for a terrorist group that we not only armed but we actually trained.
Im sorry, my mistake. I just read up on it and it just says allegedly and according to Russian sources. I have heard so many times that Osama took his moves right out of the CIA playbook that I assumed it was fact. My apologies. I dont usually post anything that doesn't have a decent source behind it. But the rest of the comment still stands and that comment really did not have much to do with the overall point I was making but I should have been accurate. That was poor form.
Have you watched any of the videos on brave new films? They are interesting to watch from various different perspectives on why this war should end. I just saw them yesterday but they are pretty compelling statements:
http://ret
Ditto!
Because it isn't like there are photos of Bin Laden in the company of CIA operatives from the era when we were funding various groups against the Russian presence in Afghanista
This is ridiculous.
So here is a little piece of advice for Obama - I like you a lot but you are being ridiculously Bush-like in your afghanistan and economic policies which is slowly eroding all the tremendous hope for change of your base. Pull out of afghanistan NOW - this will never end and if it does, it won't end well. Announce a plan tomorrow to initiate the re-building of the world trade center. NO ONE CARES anymore about anything this war can bring but everyone in this nation will be sooo grateful to have a president step up and tell Bloomberg that it is time to stop fighting and start healing - even glen beck would praise you for this (or at least agree) as would every other American in this country. I know you want to do this Mr. President so do what's right, make America the good guys again! We are not admitting defeat, so much as we are realizing that this war is no longer justified - it takes a stronger man to admit when he is wrong than it would to keep this war going through your next 3 plus years.
Somebody is alway stating what **everybody** want's when they can only speak for themselves.
You dont think everybody in the country would get a little psyched about seeing them initiate construction of the towers. I mean it is still a patch of dirt. I would think over 90 percent of the country would be happy about it. At least it would be a good way to score points with the wide majority of the public and not lose any to look at it from the political end. I just think its a disgrace that its 2009 and we havent done a thing it seems. That is just a slap in the face right there.
No one cares about Al Qaeda but everyone cares about sticking it to Mike Bloomberg?!
Don't think so...
>>>> NO ONE CARES anymore about anything this war can bring but everyone in this nation will be sooo grateful to have a president step up and tell Bloomberg that it is time to stop fighting and start healing - even glen beck would praise you for this (or at least agree) as would every other American in this country.
Read more at: http://www
See William Bradley's Profile
Considering that Obama has reversed the Bush polices on the economy and Afghanistan, your comment is way off-base.
6 Italian soldiers were killed in a bomb blast, 4 wounded this week. 3 U.S., 1 Canadian, were also killed. On the other hand, the only threat to the pro war Internet Typing Brigade seems to be Repetitive Stress Injury from all that bloviating.
Huh?
Huh? x 2
Political operatives writing about a war that has alraedy been lost for the masters they serve without actually knowing anything abpout the country they're writing about, while all about them the coalition of the unwilling is unravelling?
Huh? back to you two!
See William Bradley's Profile
Thanks for sharing.
How does one President make up for all the past mistakes that other Presidents have done in the world one man can't be expected to make things right for other mistakes if only any one could understand what makes men do things in the world. War's are not always the solutions talk and understanding could result in more peace in the world i guess when some men get into power they are truly egocentric! Although i believe what the terrorist are doing is wrong and should be dealt with there is the risk of bombing innocent people on both sides how do you fight a mind set violence won't do it alone.
MAYBE IF ...OBAMA ...would..
........Be
where ... did the Taliban...
over &over to hate....th
..... the...3- Religion's should stand up against...
kill's ...innocen
BZ!
It's refreshing to see someone who gets it. This mission in A'stan is about counter terrorism and pursuit of our real enemies. Not counter-insurgency (COIN) and the "nation building" that ensues. Daily, I sit here in A'stan wondering what national interests are being served.
Our mission is supposedly to advocate the "legitimacy" of the central government, "build capacity" for the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), and “protect” the people. However, government we “support” is corrupt, on that there is wide agreement. Now with a fraudulent election on the verge of validation, how do we continue to say we are here to support the legitimacy of the government? The people we are here to protect will come to see us as the guarantor of an injustice. Are those who object to this fraud by violent means now our enemy? Am we to pursue them in the same manner as the Taliban? Do we continue to grow an illiterate and corrupt ANSF to support a corrupt central government? How far down this rabbit hole must we go? A’stan is what it is. Power here resides with the warlords and the tribes. It never pays to take sides in a 5 sided dispute.
Meanwhile, the mission of rooting out AQ and other terrorist organizations elsewhere remains neglected. We’ve made A’stan an inhospitable for AQ. AQ is essentially impotent on a strategic and operational level. However, they will able to find more welcoming locales should we continue to get bogged down here.
Very interesting. What do you do in Afghanistan?
ANSF Planning and Support - to be intentionally vague.
See William Bradley's Profile
Very interesting post.
Thanks for writing it and please keep on contributing!
Great idea! Declare victory and scoot!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
