It is important to clarify this statement to avoid confusion. Sunni populations is too broad a description to be useful, that is even broader than saying Americans think this or that. If you read the writings of various Sunni revolutionary writers I agree with you statement. This thread specifically is focused on al-Qaeda and al-Qaedaism, which narrows the focus to a small percentage of the Sunni population. I agree AQ targets this broader population, and ultimately needs to win it over through conviction or coercion to be successful.Originally Posted by Bob's World
Specifically al-Qaeda leaders, and the religious leaders they reference, align their thoughts to some degree with our American revolutionary leaders when they talk of freeing their people from tyrannical regimes who oppress their people. Several fundamental and radical Muslims were fond of U.S. Information Service during the Cold War, because they believed we were the only ones effectively telling the truth about the USSR and their oppression of Muslims. However, they (for lack of a better term, the radical leadership that embraces al-Qaedaism) see us as the oppressors due to our perceived desire to impose secular governments elected by the people, which in their view puts the people above God. They agree on removing regimes that oppress the Muslim people, but that is where al-Qaedaism linked groups stop being aligned with our founding fathers. They have no use for democracy, equal rights, etc. The form of governance they plan to implement is equally oppressive, but perhaps more just, than the ones they desire to expel.
They adjust their words over time based on local context and to respond to the adversary's actions, so their religious (same as political in their case) narrative continues to evolve, but the core of establishing a caliphate remains; and some extremists are on record as looking globally, not just re-establishing the caliphate.
The vast majority of Sunni Muslims who are not aligned with al-Qaedaism, still seem to find some aspects of AQ's arguments credible (Islam is under attack, Muslims are being oppressed, etc.), and any military action the West takes can unintentionally give additional legitimacy to AQ linked groups. Dictators in Muslim countries, especially where the majority of Muslims live in poverty also lend legitimacy to AQ's assertions. We agree on this, and it explains why AQ is able to spread its message and help mobilize the local population to act against their government, so yes that aspect is political. However, I think we would be remiss to discount the larger religious context that informs the political. Unlike our nation, religion is superior and informs the political in Islam, especially to al-Qaedism linked groups.
Steve is probably right that once the extremists establish governance they'll probably lose power when coercive power isn't enough to hold it altogether. That still doesn't reduce to the West from the AQ linked members who still desire to strike the West either out of revenge, or to convince the West not to interfere in their countries, or in some cases in a misguided attempt to spread Islam into the West (the global caliphate).
From a security standpoint we need to identify those terrorists (another word that isn't overly helpful) who intend to do "us" harm and find a way to eliminate them without giving AQ additional legitimacy. Ignoring the threat isn't an option, nor is a major ground campaign, nor is nation building in our image. It is absolutely critical we understand the narrative which is based on their interpretation of Islam. Trying to replace this narrative with a narrative based on democracy has failed and will probably continue to fail. Seems that most the appropriate approach to weaken their narrative is other Muslims promoting narratives that weaken AQ's. This is probably happening in some locations, but unfortunately leaders like Maliki further legitimize AQ's narrative.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks