A quick comment
I think that there is a bit of a semantics problem here. Al Qaeda is not, primarily, a military force in the "classic" sense of the term. In many ways, it is closer to the SF model - primarily a training network (and a loosely-coupled network at that). As such, they have been a "deadly organization" since the 1980's.Originally Posted by Tc2642
The fact that they were setting up cells in Iraq in 2002 shouldn't be surprising - anyone who watched CNN could pretty much figure out that the US was going to get involved in Iraq. As such, setting up cells is really just the first step in establishing a base for local operations including local recruitment. Furthermore, given the speed with which the Bush government rammed through the invasion, the lack of general international support, and the local socio-cultural conditions in Iraq, it was a tailor made opportunity for al Qaeda.
I just finished reading the article and I have to say that while the title is certainly correct - "Wrong 'ism', wrong history" - I suspect that the "corrected solution" offered in the article is totally wrong as well. For example,
While there are some overt similarities between al Qeada and the Commintern of the 20's and 30's, these are mainly organizational rather than symbolic or historical. Organizationally, this is quite understandable given the dominance of Lenin, Mao, Trotsky and Gueverra in the literature. At the symbolic level, it would be better to look at the early time of expansion for Islam - say the first 20 years. I think this was made pretty evident over the past little while with the criticism of bin Laden's breach of the Islamic rules of war and the recent calls for conversion.Al Qaeda today is a global politico-religious, ideological and spiritual movement that has far more in common with global communism than the European fascism of the 1930s and '40s. What Mr. Bush calls the global war on terror is an ideological struggle, punctuated by acts of terrorism, a fundamental clash of civilizations between democratic freedom and totalitarian religious regimentation, that is likely to endure at least as long as the almost half-century Cold War.
On the historical level, control of Iraq is central to control of one of the major seats of the Caliphate. Again, symbolically, the model that is being used by al Qaeda is closer to that of a re-establishment of the Caliphate than it is to Commintern. The movement is of the general form of what A.E. 'Pete' Hallowell called a "Revitalization Movement" - hearkening back to a Golden Age that may, or may not, have ever existed. Regardless of its actual historical existence, it exists symbolically within Islamic culture and, co-incidentally, is a major flashpoint between Sunni's and Shias.
The only similar example that I can think of where the American military has any experience with how to deal with the type of symbolic change necessary isn't the WWII European/German reconstruction but, rather, the occupation of Japan. I think we have all seen how effective the de-NAZIfication, oops, sorry, de-Baathification program was. Again, a tailor made recruitment opportunity for al Qeada based on Bremmers' complete misunderstanding of the situation.
Marc
Bookmarks